Friday, April 22, 2011

Radiation Exposure From Fukushima Is Much Higher Than Mainstream Media Exposure

Brandon Turbeville

While Americans are busy focusing on the most ridiculous forms of entertainment such as Dancing With The Stars, American Idol, and whatever mindless reality show currently keeps them glued to their couches, the entire country is in the process of being covered with a cloud of toxic radiation seeping into their food, water, skin, and lungs. Sadly, even if one were to turn the channel in an effort to keep up with the latest in current affairs, there is virtually no chance of one being made aware of the level of contamination the country now faces.

Regardless, since the beginning of the disaster, government regulatory agencies such as the EPA, USDA, CDC, and the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) have all claimed that there is no danger in the radiation coming from the damaged Fukushima nuclear plants. The mainstream media has obediently repeated these claims as fact.  Some media pundits such as Ann Coulter even have promoted the Orwellian and absurd notion that radiation is actually good for you, and that it prevents cancer. (Coulter has yet to explain why she has not purchased an airline ticket for Japan so she can have the opportunity to bathe in it.)

Yet, while numerous states (South Carolina, North Carolina, Florida, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington) have reported through their state agencies that radiation has been detected in drinking water, soil, and milk (among other things), the Federal regulatory agencies and their media subsidiaries refuse to admit that there is any reason for concern. Virtually every media report given about the Fukushima fallout contains the suggestion that the radiation now blanketing the United States is “harmless,” “minute,” or “miniscule,” and that there is no need for alarm.

Yet, these claims now stand in direct contradiction to the conclusions reached by the National Academies of Science released in 2005.

The BEIR VII -- meaning the seventh Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation report on “Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation” -- came to a much different conclusion than the EPA, CDC, and the NRC. NAS actually concluded that there is NO SAFE LEVEL or threshold ionizing radiation exposure.

So even if the exposure to the Fukushima radiation was “miniscule,” there would still be a cause for concern because “miniscule” exposure can still cause cancer. Indeed, in a press release dealing with the release of the BEIR VII issued from the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, the NIRS states that it is well known that “even very low doses [of ionizing radiation] can cause cancer” [emphasis added].  It goes on to say that, “Risks from low dose radiation are equal or greater than previously thought” [emphasis added].

Indeed, the constant reassurance given to the general public by our regulatory agencies and media that the levels of increased radiation are “miniscule” and not much different that “normal background radiation” also fly in the face of the BEIR VII report. This is because the report also concluded that “Even exposure to background radiation causes some cancers. Additional exposures can cause additional risks” [emphasis added].

In addition, as we know from our escapades in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as many other instances, that exposure to radiation, even if it causes no visible adverse health effects in those who are directly exposed, can have serious side effects on their offspring. The BEIR VII reaffirms this previous knowledge as well.

The NIRS Energy and Health Project Director at the time of the report, Cindy Folkers, stated in regards to the BEIR VII report, “These findings confirm that all levels of radiation are harmful. Since nuclear power routinely releases long-lasting radiation into the air, water and soil, we must avoid a new generation of nuclear power to prevent unnecessary exposures” [emphasis added].

If nuclear power plants “routinely release long-lasting radiation into the air, water and soil,” what happens to a nuclear power plant when it is hit by several earthquakes, tsunamis, and explosions? How much radiation is released when the nuclear reactors meltdown? Are we really to believe that the levels of radiation are “miniscule” and “harmless” even if we are across the ocean from the reactor?

Apparently, your government thinks you will believe it. In fact, they have already begun taking measures to make sure you will.

As I have written in previous articles, the EPA has proposed changes to the PAG’s (Protective Action Guides) that would raise the acceptable levels of radiation in food, the environment, and even humans in the event of a “nuclear emergency.”  Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) released a leaked email  in which Charles Openchowski of the EPA’s Office of General Counsel, writing to the Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, wrote:
[T]his guidance would allow cleanup levels that exceed MCL’s [Maximum Contamination Limits under the Safe Drinking Water Act] by a factor of 100, 1000, and in two instances 7 million and there is nothing to prevent those levels from being the final cleanup achieved (i.e., it’s not confined to immediate response of emergency phase).
At the same time (coincidentally of course) the EU has implemented EU Ordinance 297/2011, which raises the Maximum Levels of radiation and radioactive isotopes for food and feed.

Clearly, all levels of radiation -- even what is considered “background” levels -- are carcinogenic and create the potential for a host of adverse health effects. There appears to be a concerted effort by governments across the world to (at best) conceal the realities of the danger in regards to the Fukushima fallout; especially since their present claims stand at odds with the previous science conducted by their own agencies. 

At worst, there may be a much more sinister side to this entire issue. Unfortunately, the more coincidences there are, the more the odds tilt in favor of the latter.
Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University where he earned the Pee Dee Electric Scholar’s Award as an undergraduate. He has had numerous articles published dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, and civil liberties. He also the author of Codex Alimentarius - The End of Health Freedom  and 7 Real Conspiracies.

This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Howard T. Lewis III said...

Along with the NWO=OWO themselves, I think the NWO=OWO's science advisors and saboteurs are as inbred-stupid and plastic-satanic as any back room trash ever to do the unthinkable.

Anonymous said...

Wait until they talk about "natural" Plutonium backgroud radiation, thats a lie.
Plutonium is 70 years old, and dont exist in Nature.

toxic agenda said...

Thanks for telling the truth, Brandon. Although we have come to expect lies and deceit from our governments, it's just heart breaking that so many people in the world still live in a trance and believe every word fed to them by dishonest people, also known as the global elite. Here we have extremely dangerous radiation spreading across the globe, but so many have no interest in what happens in the real world. They only want to be entertained by TV and movies, listen to the mindless mainstream reporters or go shopping for useless things when they should prepare for the bad times, which will come. All people on earth will be faced with hunger, sickness and death and everything will be so much worse when the global economic collapse comes. Many will still go on singing and dancing as if nothing is wrong.

Toxic Agenda is also on Facebook.

Anonymous said...

I guess we need to stop using microwaves then. Apparenty they cause cancer. To make this a better article, some numbers are needed, and how those numbers compare to other sources of radiation.

SadButMadLad said...

Have a read of some of the articles in The Register about Fukushima and then make an informed decision about whether or not this story is correct or the ones written by Lewis Page.

Anonymous said...

Q: Why no MSM coverage?

A: Georgia Guidestones.

Anon above asking for numbers? for graphs and

for 'back-channel' hard data - if you can decipher it. First get up to speed on the constellation of measurement techniques. Hint: Reduce everything to Becquerels & Sieverts

Anonymous said...

@SadButMadLad: The Register? Hey, why not go the hole hog into Newspeak and read the Evening Standard or that was! ;-)

Even sadder...reality...

James Alberton said...

Hell it's even in the milk. It's everywhere!

nelle maxey said...

Read Richard Bramhill's article from the Wednesday's Guardian titled "... far too simple a measure of radiation risk" here

Then go to Dr. Chris Busby's website which Bramhill administers and start reading.

Then go to the European Committee on Radiation Risk website and read their two advice notes on Fukushima and ingested iodine. Then download their 2011 report on low-dose radiation risk.

Then you will begin to understand why we are where are, being bombarded by radiation from the "safe" and "green" nuclear energy and being told "no worries".

Ralle said...

So, they are going to reach the wishes of the new world order written on the Georgia guidestones.

Thank god we have America! Because without America we had nothing to fear in the world!

Sorry, but I wish some fat nukes for the whole US this would definatly give the world peace.

nader paul kucinich gravel mckinney said...

river STYX in front of Dr Caldicott MD
Thank you very much, Mr. Roboto
dōmo arigatō misutā Robotto

toxic agenda said...

To Ralle

You have obviously not understood a word of what's happening in the world. The ones at fault here are the global elite, so you need to throw your bombs on the globalists. You have to do your own research on who they are. A tip: they're not the average American.

Gary said...

Remove radiation from any water source

Our University of Alabama patented solar desalination product uses no electricity, has no filters to replace, can be taken anywhere and extracts pure water from any contaminated water source. It removes radiation, fluoride, salt, pesticides, bacteria, dirt and other contaminants from any water. It aids people to be prepared for disasters, saves hundreds on bottled water and utility bills. Made tough in the U.S.A.

Please visit us:

These units can also be placed together in arrays of literally any size, as needed, to accommodate a desert vegetable farm or remote area water needs, etc.

Gary said...

Eco friendly product reviews featuring clean water, energy savings, prepper sites and sustainable energy products.

This is also our new website for our earlier comment about the University of Alabama solar desalination products.

Post a Comment