Skip to main content

Well, can't say I did not expect to see this but now we know it is here: radiostrontium.

I am NOT assured. The fact that strontium 89 has a relatively short half life is a good indicator that it is from Fukushima (55 days). And if strontium 89 is here in the United States you can bet Strontium 90 is too (EPA says they expect it when they see radiocesium, which has been blanketing the nation for a month in rain and dry deposits).

WHERE is Obama on this disaster? Where is Congress? Where are the protests as we are seeing around the world against nuclear power and its insane means of boiling water for electricity (as per Einstein who said "It's a HELL of a way to boil water?

Radioactive Strontium found in Hilo Hawaii milk (EPA - Reported Today in Forbes)
Your Forum topic has been created.
http://blogs.forbes.com/...

Radioactive Strontium Found in Hilo, Hawaii Milk
Apr. 27 2011 - 8:45 am
By JEFF MCMAHON

A radioactive isotope of strontium has been detected in American milk for the first time since Japan’s nuclear disaster—in a sample from Hilo, Hawaii—the Environmental Protection Agency revealed yesterday.

“We have completed our first strontium milk sample analysis and found trace amounts of strontium-89 in a milk sample from Hilo, Hawaii. The level was approximately 27,000 times below the Derived Intervention Level set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,” EPA said in a statement emailed to me yesterday afternoon. EPA posted the test result at epa.gov in a pdf.

EPA found 1.4 picoCuries per liter of strontium-89 in a milk sample collected in Hilo on April 4.

More at url

What troubles me is that they say they have no other results, but if you follow Jeff McMahon's Frobes Blog you will see that there ARE more EPA reports for detection of radio-Strontium.

They (EPA) also say that if they see radio-Cesium they suspect they will find radiostrontium.

This sucks but was not unexpected.

PLEASE send this link along wherever you can (to the Forbes blog) and DEMAND more testing for Strontium radionuclides as this is one of the MOST insidious of the radionuclides we are exposed to.

This si also being dicussed here at the UC Berkeley forum where they are testing for radionuclides, doing a GREAT job, but they do not have the resources to test for radio-Strontium:

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/...  (a valuable resoruce_

Originally posted to Liberation Angel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:05 AM PDT.

Also republished by Nuclear Free DK.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (8+ / 0-)

    Come See What Liberation Angels Are ALL About at www.youtube.com/user/LiberationAngels

    by Liberation Angel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:05:12 AM PDT

  •  I'm having a few problems (8+ / 0-)

    with this diary:

    1.  The strontium detected is far below the minimum level of concern;
    2.  Strontium 89 is in pharmaceuticals.

    Not sure what the point is here.  EPA has had rad stations throughout the U.S. for years.  All the info is online.  Nothing indicates that there is serious (much less, moderate) concern.

    " My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

    by gchaucer2 on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:16:54 AM PDT

    •  did you even READ the article? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Russgirl, Picot verde

      all the info is not online.

      If you read Jeff McMahon's blog you will see it is difficult to get this data and as for SR-89 its half life is VERY short (and how would it get from pharmaceuticals to milk anyway?) Jeez.

      The EPA has posted almost NO info on radio-Strontium online and what there is is uninformative and obfuscated.

      BECAUSE the nuke industry has been polluting us with Sr radionuclides for many many years the government PERMITS such exposures and looks the other way when it comes to the health effects.

      Dig deeper. Read some of the other posts on Jeff McMahon's blog and LEARN something. He has been spot on that the intervention levels are way too high to be safe.

      Come See What Liberation Angels Are ALL About at www.youtube.com/user/LiberationAngels

      by Liberation Angel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:31:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, EPA took DOWN 18 monitors (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Picot verde

      on the W. Coast and Canada is not reporting anything.

      Gee - if the EPA DID report the TRUTH to the general public - would nuke apologists have a leg to stand on?  

      No worries - Repukes and their Dem enablers will just get rid of what is left of the shell of the EPA.  "Trust us" - as the smoking industry and climate denial industry has done soooo wellllll......


      Perhaps the REAL TRUTH would force our own politicians to DE-commission ALL nuke plants + force GE and other nuke plants to PAY FOR THEIR OWN MESS - for a change.

      My guess is NOT!  Industry and politicians want to kick the can down the road for 20 more years - well past many of the original de-commissioning schedules - then leave with their profits intact - leaving what is left... the crumbs of civilization... to the rest of us chumps still left.

  •  I agree with gchaucer2 (7+ / 0-)

    What part of 1/27,000 of the intervention level makes you think that this is an important enough issue to diary.

    Numbers are like people . . . Torture them enough and they'll tell you anything.

    by Actuary4Change on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:21:54 AM PDT

    •  for this part.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Russgirl, Picot verde
      WHERE is Obama on this disaster? Where is Congress? Where are the protests as we are seeing around the world against nuclear power and its insane means of boiling water for electricity (as per Einstein who said "It's a HELL of a way to boil water?

      It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. Ansel Adams -6.5 -6.75

      by Statusquomustgo on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:23:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ditto - appears Obama missing - for people (0+ / 0-)

        and our concerns...

        He appears only interested in corporations money for re-election purposes.

        Thanks for your diary efforts!

        •  ??? (4+ / 0-)

          Considering everything that is happening in the world I cannot get worked up over contamination at levels this low.  We are exposed to radioactive material at very low levels all the time.  

          Is this something to keep an eye on...yeah, of course.  Is this something that requires congressional action...right now probably not.  Should we have a national discussion on energy production and where we want to be in 20 years... HELL YEAH.  

          Why does this in particular require the President to lead the charge?  

        •  that is NOT what I meant... but thanks for trying. (0+ / 0-)

          It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment. Ansel Adams -6.5 -6.75

          by Statusquomustgo on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:35:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  What is your alternative? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Statusquomustgo, OIL GUY

        I am far from an expert on energy policy, but I know that:
         I don't want more oil drilling because of spills,

        or natural gas drilling because of fracking polution,

        or coal (let me count the ways).

        Wind and Solar are both marginal in terms of cost and feasibility right now.

        Yes, we should conserve.  Yes, we should invest more in getting better and better sources of energy.

        I trust the president's advisers on this one.  We need an all of the above strategy, balancing environmental risks.  

        Nuclear Energy has severe problems, but hyping radiation fears will not contribute to making good policy.

        Numbers are like people . . . Torture them enough and they'll tell you anything.

        by Actuary4Change on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 10:02:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Where there is smoke (Sr-89) there is fire (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Russgirl, Picot verde

      The "assurances" are NOT assuring. Sr is an insidious carcinogenic and mutagenic and IF there is Sr. 89 and radiocesium there is probably Sr 90. It coillects in the bones.

      IF there was massive transparent sampling of milk across the country for Sr-90 I would not be so concerned about this. But supposedly "minute" doses can cause birth defects and miscarriages of developing fetuses. The Sr-90 would cllect in their teeth.

      see

      www.radiation.org  for the baby tooth studies on Sr-90 from our ongoing nuclear nightmare.

      Come See What Liberation Angels Are ALL About at www.youtube.com/user/LiberationAngels

      by Liberation Angel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:36:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There was a great comment (4+ / 0-)

      in Willie Brown's column in the SF Chronicle several weeks ago:

      What a town. I was at Walgreens the other afternoon and was stunned by the number of people lined up to buy potassium iodide to ward off the possible effects of radiation wafting over from Japan.

      Even more stunning was watching those same people, clutching their iodide protection, proceed to jaywalk across New Montgomery Street and dodge cars in their rush to get back to work.

      Pretty much sums it up.

      •  pretty much sums what up? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        OIL GUY
      •  Pretty clear to me, but "some folks" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        OIL GUY

        might now see the irony in going out of their collective way to garner some countermeasure against the distant unlikely threat, and then immediately go out and risk immediate death-by-front-bumper.

        You cannot make this stuff up....

        I count even the single grain of sand to be a higher life-form than the likes of Sarah Palin and her odious ilk.

        by Liberal Panzer on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 11:01:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, it has to do (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          OIL GUY, Actuary4Change, Catte Nappe

          with the whole issue of Perceived Risk vs. Actual Risk, a subject that has always fascinated me.  The risks associated with familiar activities (such as the jaywalking in quote) are typically drastically underestimated while those novel threats tend to be drastically overestimated -- often to the point of hysteria.

          What percentage of those people in California getting upset about the radiation threat from Japan feel no qualms about careening down the freeway with a cell phone plastered to their ear?  Which constitutes the greater risk?

          •  False analogy. Brown's comment was ignorant (0+ / 0-)

            Of course we have self-produced risks every day. Radiation in our food and air and water is NOT a self-produced risk.

            Experts differ widely on the health consequences of even VERY small amounts of radiation.

            Do some research on the "Petkau effect"" a study which established that long term exposure to extended VERY low doses of radiation damages cells faster and more easily and more seriously than larger short term doses.

            This damage and assault on our bodies and children and fetuses is a crime against humanity - and I think false analogies are dangerous and foolish.

            Nuclear power is NOT a "novel threat" - it is an ongoing plague of toxicity, mutation, death, damage to children, cancer, hypothyroidism, birth defects, infant mortality, and much much more --- it lasts in our dna for generations and ALTERS the human species (and all others) for thousands of generations, literally forever.

            Nice diversion with the willy brown story and the denigrating comments but a FAIL, just like Fukushima is a major FAIL!

            Come See What Liberation Angels Are ALL About at www.youtube.com/user/LiberationAngels

            by Liberation Angel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 01:26:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Nope. (0+ / 0-)

              Brown's comment was spot on. The risks to Californians from  Fukushima is so low it's  probably not measurable.

              Nuclear power may not be a novel threat, but  Fukushima is, and that's what I was responding too.  The sort of panic response described does nothing to mitigate any risk and simply serves to give people a false sense of security. (If any significant amount of radioactive substances we're to make it over here, it wouldn't be Iodine, so KI would be useless. So, yes lining up at Walgreens for KI was a silly thing to do.)

              And this kind of hyperbole

              it is an ongoing plague of toxicity, mutation, death, damage to children, cancer, hypothyroidism, birth defects, infant mortality, and much much more --- it lasts in our dna for generations and ALTERS the human species (and all others) for thousands of generations, literally forever.
              Really adds nothing to the discussion. When it comes to birth defects, damage to children and what not, the mercury from coal plants is a MUCH larger problem.
        •  Tell it to our government (0+ / 0-)

          and its army of professional rights-violators known as the TSA. Their and everyone else's chances of dying from a terrorist bomb on a plane is less than getting struck by lightning or dying in a wreck on the way to or from the airport. But everybody's okay with sacrificing our basic constitutional rights because of overblown fear of cave-dwelling terrorists in Afghanistan.

          You're all worried about the public being told what radioisotopes are in their air, water and food. Where's your courageous stand against the usurpation of our rights for an even more irrational fear?

          Now, more than ever, we need the Jedi.

          by Joieau on Sun May 01, 2011 at 01:11:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  If you had to swallow 1/27,000th of (0+ / 0-)

      27,000 razor blades, would you say it was safe too?

      The intervention level is set WAY too high  snd if you had to, say, swallow 1/27000th of a MILLION razor blades would that make you underdstand my point.

      1 radionuclide in TINY amounts ingested can cause dna damage and potentially cancer (which is what science tells us: NO dose is too low to have risk as it ALL can do damage, )

      1/27000th of a BILLION dollars would be a LOT!

      The fancy FDA DIL numbers are just industry BS which permit millions to die if enough people are exposed to those doses. NOT buying the "minute" BS.

      dna is tiny too but when it gets hit with a radioactive particle it breaks (like a baloon stuck with a pin).

      Come See What Liberation Angels Are ALL About at www.youtube.com/user/LiberationAngels

      by Liberation Angel on Wed Apr 27, 2011 at 09:02:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site