TOMapleLaughs Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 Quote Fukushima children diagnosed malignant or possible malignant thyroid tumor rose up to 152 On 11/30/2015, Fukushima prefectural government announced the number of children who were diagnosed of malignant or possible malignant thyroid tumor rose up to 152 in total. From April of 2014 to September of 2015, 39 children were diagnosed of malignant or possible malignant thyroid tumor additionally. 19 of them were diagnosed of nothing before April of 2014, which strongly suggests that the tumor was formed after the first test. Also, 37 of those 39 children were diagnosed of only A1 or A2 in the first test. 120 of 152 children had thyroid papillary carcinoma. Hoshi, the chairman of Fukushima health investigative committee comments it is unlikely that it’s related to Fukushima accident because the radiation level was lower than Chernobyl accident and under 6 years old children (at the moment of 3/11/2011) are not diagnosed of the thyroid tumor. http://fukushima-diary.com/2015/12/fukushima-children-diagnosed-malignant-or-possible-malignant-thyroid-tumor-rose-up-to-152/ Amazingly all these thyroid cases have nothing to do with the nuclear disaster. According to those who'd like the concern to be quieted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish⑦Canuck Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 18 minutes ago, TOMapleLaughs said: http://fukushima-diary.com/2015/12/fukushima-children-diagnosed-malignant-or-possible-malignant-thyroid-tumor-rose-up-to-152/ Amazingly all these thyroid cases have nothing to do with the nuclear disaster. According to those who'd like the concern to be quieted. I think the point was that he's not from Fukushima. Or living there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 1 minute ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said: I think the point was that he's not from Fukushima. Or living there. On that note, we're in the fallout path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 2 hours ago, TOMapleLaughs said: Quote DP. Please delete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 2 hours ago, TOMapleLaughs said: On that note, we're in the fallout path. It's only very trace elements of radiation that have been found on the West Coast. The amount of radiation we are experiencing is far less than background radiation in many parts of the world. Ken Buessler, the researcher who leads the Woods Hole monitoring program, said he expects more of the monitoring sites to show detectable levels of cesium-134 in coming months. However, the amounts of cesium-134 and cesium-137 in the B.C. sample were extremely low — just 1.4 and 5.8 becquerels per cubic metre of water respectively. Canada allows up to 10,000 becquerels of cesium-137 per cubic metre in drinking water. http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/fukushima-radiation-measured-on-b-c-shore-for-1st-time-1.3022565 I don't think people realize what radiation is. We are constantly being exposed to some level of radiation. Even in Japan, which was obviously much closer to Fukushima than here, exposure would be at about 20 mSv per year, while many places inhabited by humans year round have naturally occurring background levels in excess of 250 mSv: https://www.worldnomads.com/travel-safety/japan/how-dangerous-is-the-radiation-in-japan In other words, I'm not a physicist or a doctor, but I think proving any kind of link between Fukushima and health problems in BC would be pretty difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 Why is the same people are taking the same side on all sorts of different issues? Anyway, there's this guy I know who collected/scrubbed atmospheric samples during the tragedy and over some time he took a geiger counter to his scrubber, and the readings were through the roof. He turned this information in to environment canada, they came in to take the samples and he never heard anything of it again. I believe typical government action is to merely raise acceptable radiation limits and be done with it. Canada even turned off their fallout detectors. http://www.naturalnews.com/031963_radiation_exposure.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish⑦Canuck Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 Good grief. Natural News as a source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RRypien37 Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 On 12/5/2015, 4:48:23, WHL rocks said: Wow, Japan tsunami eh? Wonder if most Japanese people have thyroid disease now? And maybe most people living close to Japan like people in the Koreas, China, Philipines all have thyroid disease. Nah, I think you're just paranoid about the tsunami thing. One of my relatives had it years ago, he's never tried sushi in his life and he had it way before the tsunami. Took a pill for a while and never heard him talk about it again. Do some research before posting like a sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish⑦Canuck Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 34 minutes ago, RRypien37 said: Do some research before posting like a sheep. How about you post evidence from a reputable source (and no, Nature News doesn't count) that indicates that radiation from Fukushima is contributing in any way towards thyroid problems in Canada, or even outside of Fukushima prefecture? Until then you're in no position to be telling anyone else to 'do some research', never mind accuse them of being a sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 55 minutes ago, RRypien37 said: Do some research before posting like a sheep. Pass me your tin foil hat and I'll start the research right away, need to smoke some weed first, I retain more that way as it improves my memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RRypien37 Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 11 minutes ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said: How about you post evidence from a reputable source (and no, Nature News doesn't count) that indicates that radiation from Fukushima is contributing in any way towards thyroid problems in Canada, or even outside of Fukushima prefecture? Until then you're in no position to be telling anyone else to 'do some research', never mind accuse them of being a sheep. Source? It's common sense. Millions of tons of radiation being leaked into the ocean. Ocean currents from Japan direct towards the west coast. C'mon man, use your head. Do you not know what happened in Chernobyl? Do you honestly believe the Mass Media outlets would be reporting just how bad the situation is? I mean, look what people do when we lose a hockey game, just imagine what they would do if they received the news of just how bad the radiation damage will be. Also I never specified contributing to thyroid problems. The issues can be far spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RRypien37 Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 3 minutes ago, WHL rocks said: Pass me your tin foil hat and I'll start the research right away, need to smoke some weed first, I retain more that way as it improves my memory. My god....I'm not even going to bother. Believe what you want. CNN and Fox dinner time news is starting, hurry up and tune in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 I don't know why anyone would think that a nuclear disaster that blew radiation all over the atmosphere and into the ocean would have any negative impacts on the environment that we all live in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyLuciano Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 Just had a blood test today to dbl check my thyroid levels. Was low last test for some reason. Better not kill my &^@#ing gainz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish⑦Canuck Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 16 hours ago, RRypien37 said: Source? It's common sense. Millions of tons of radiation being leaked into the ocean. Ocean currents from Japan direct towards the west coast. C'mon man, use your head. Do you not know what happened in Chernobyl? Do you honestly believe the Mass Media outlets would be reporting just how bad the situation is? I mean, look what people do when we lose a hockey game, just imagine what they would do if they received the news of just how bad the radiation damage will be. Also I never specified contributing to thyroid problems. The issues can be far spread. In other words you have no evidence then. Much like the other Japan thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RRypien37 Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 2 hours ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said: In other words you have no evidence then. Much like the other Japan thread. You're unreal... Is David Suzuki a good enough source? https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-buzz/david-suzuki-regrets-dire-fukushima-warning-183004766.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxi Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 8 minutes ago, RRypien37 said: You're unreal... Is David Suzuki a good enough source? https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-buzz/david-suzuki-regrets-dire-fukushima-warning-183004766.html This is an article about how David Suzuki regrets taking an alarmist view about the Fukushima disaster. It's pretty much the exact opposite of what you are arguing for. From your artilce: Rothschild added that most nuclear scientists agree that the "fear mongering" trend post-Fukushima disaster "has little or no basis in reality." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish⑦Canuck Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 43 minutes ago, RRypien37 said: You're unreal... Is David Suzuki a good enough source? https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-buzz/david-suzuki-regrets-dire-fukushima-warning-183004766.html Congratulations. You just defeated your own argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RRypien37 Posted December 8, 2015 Share Posted December 8, 2015 3 hours ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said: Congratulations. You just defeated your own argument. Sure did LOL. Fail on my part. I was looking for his original interview. But this actually does kind of support my point of main stream media wanting to keep it hush hush and looks like Suzuki got silenced here. Doesn't really matter though, even with countless links doesn't sound like you would be convinced. To me it seems logical that a damaged nuclear reactor pouring millions of liters of toxic radiation into the ocean should pose a big health concern......but apparently not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Oops. http://news.discovery.com/earth/oceans/fukishima-radiation-off-west-coast-increases-151209.htm Quote Fukishima Radiation Off West Coast Increases When the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant suffered a catastrophic breakdown in 2011 after being battered by a tsunami, a lot of Americans worried about radiation leaking from the plant and making its way across the Pacific into the waters off the North American coast. Fukushima radiation did eventually show up off British Columbia the following year, according to a study published in 2014 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and it’s been continuing to drift this way ever since. Now, according to new research, an increased number of sites off the U.S. West Coast are showing signs of contamination from the crippled nuke plant. That sampling includes the highest detected level to date, from waters about 1,600 miles west of San Francisco. NEWS: Fukushima Survivors File Suit Against Japanese Government But before you stop eating fish caught in the Pacific, it’s important to keep things in perspective. Even that sample with relatively high radiation is about 500 times lower than the U.S. government’s safety standard for radioactivity in drinking water. The research was conducted by Ken Buesseler, a marine radiochemist with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and director of its Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity, who plans to present his findings at the American Geophysical Union conference in San Francisco next week. “These new data are important for two reasons,” Buesseler, one of the first scientists to track Fukushima radiation, said in a press release. “First, despite the fact that the levels of contamination off our shores remain well below government-established safety limits for human health or to marine life, the changing values underscore the need to more closely monitor contamination levels across the Pacific.” PHOTOS: The Lost Pets of Fukushima “Second, these long-lived radioisotopes will serve as markers for years to come for scientists studying ocean currents and mixing in coastal and offshore waters.” Buesseler, working with Japanese scientists, also continues to monitor the continuing leakage from the Fukushima plant, which includes collecting water samples from as close as a half mile away and sampling marine organisms, sediment and groundwater along the coast. The radiation levels there, while decreased, remain 10 to 100 times higher than those off the U.S. coast. Tokyo Electric Power Co. is putting in place a frozen soil barrier in an effort to keep groundwater from flowing through the wrecked plant. The company also is building a seawall and drainage system to keep more contaminated water from reaching the ocean, Bloomberg News recently reported. Eventually, the entire facility must be dismantled and hauled away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.