Apparently, recent tests of milk samples in Arizona have detected higher concentrations of radioactive Iodine 131. As usual, residents of Arizona are told not to worry, that these levels are far below the FDA's threshold of action. This test did not include information about any other radioactive isotopes.
The FDA's allowable level of all (total dose in a sample) radioactive isotopes in drinking water is higher than the EPA's; it allows for 1 theoretical cancer death in 4,400 people. Who will it be? Someone's 10 year old daughter? A beloved elder? A breastfeeding mother of 2 children? A man who grows food for his neighbors?
Officially, radioactive iodine is regularly dismissed as a threat because of its relatively short half-life outside of the body; it takes about 40 days to decay to almost nothing. But this is not necessarily how it acts inside the body. It takes much longer to be completely excreted, and it does its damage effectively before it can be excreted. Take the time to read all the answers on that link - it's very informative.
Milk is tested by the EPA in samples from grocery stores. This milk is not necessarily milk from cows who live in the state tested - where do the cows that produced that milk in Arizona live and eat? Because those cows may not be eating grass, what is the source of their radioactive contamination? Their feed? Their water?
The assumption that our food is safe because we don't know or because the EPA and FDA say so is not enough for me. Do not assume you will be informed if there is actual risk and danger, especially if you have small growing children whose bodies rapidly grow bones and muscle. Actual risk from radiation, as determined by the EPA and FDA, is very tolerant. As members of a world saturated with radiation from accidents, disasters, medical waste, nuclear power waste, and other sources, it is horrible to me that any dose is considered acceptable when the evidence shows any exposure at any level is not safe. As I've said before, radiation accumulates in the body with every dose. We are all, at this point, exposed to everything at levels we'll never be informed about accurately.
Do the research, don't take my word for it.
Since I can't escape what's in the air, I continue to grow my food, forage locally, and buy my dairy and produce as locally as I can; avoid the worst and hope for the best. I will continue my deep love affair with the wild things and offer myself to the impartial love that is survival and community; I will continue to recklessly believe that the risks of being alive are as powerful as the risks of making life.
2011/04/28
2011/04/22
Arnie Gunderson interviews epidemiologist Dr. Steven Wing
Arnie Gunderson and Steven Wing discuss cancer rates and suggest responses to the spreading dose of radiation from Fukushima in this video (11:29).
"But as the radiation clouds move away from Fukushima and move far away to other continents and around the world the doses are spread out. But it's important for people to know that spreading out a given amount of radiation dose among more people, although it reduces each person's individual risk, it doesn't reduce the number of cancers that result from that amount of radiation. So having millions and millions of people exposed to a very small dose could produce just as much cancer as a thousand or a few thousand people exposed to that same dose." - Dr. Steven Wing
He also warns that there is nothing we can do, really, in North America (or elsewhere) to avoid exposure to the radiation that has traveled from Fukushima at this point; whatever is out there is out there, and there is, in his opinion, nothing we can do to avoid our own risk. I believe that certain foods and plants help our bodies stay resilient in the face of toxic exposure - to radiation and other toxins - and agree that we still have to eat, just like the raccoons and bears and fish that live near me. I do not agree with Dr. Wing that there is nothing we can do, and I do not agree that public pressure will stop the the Obama administration's beloved nuclear power machine.
Dr. Wing also reminds us that focusing too much on the radiation coming from Fukushima can blind us to all the other sources of radiation exposure and exposure to other toxins that cause cancer, all of which we must work to eliminate and protect ourselves from as well. He argues that collective action is our best action at this time. I am less hopeful.
2011/04/17
Radioactive Isotopes and the Power of Food
In light of the world level of radiation increasing through Fukushima and my own interests in researching food and plant allies of our bodies' resilience, I thought it was time to present some sources on what I've read about how to mitigate radioactive isotope exposure through food.
First, though, know that I don't actually believe we here in the middle-west are at as much risk as those from Hawaii or Japan, obviously. But we do eat food grown in parts of the country that were exposed to Iodine 131, Cesium 137 and other isotopes, especially through precipitation. This precipitation carries radiation down to us from the atmosphere, blown over the US by the ever-moving jet stream. The half life of Iodine is 8 days; Cesium lasts years. Do you water your garden with rainwater? Do your cows drink from a pond that has rain or snow in it from mid-March and early April? Do you buy fresh, organic produce grown in California, Washington or Mexico? Or fish from the Pacific Ocean and Alaska? Then you would do well to know about how to improve your your own body's ability to prevent radiation damage to your bones and cells, however small.
Don't believe the hype about bananas and radioactivity, or comparisons of Fukushima radiation exposure to flying in a jet. Do a little research and see who disagrees with these claims, and why. Efforts to minimize the perceived risk are enormous by governments and corporate apologists whose job it is to maintain business as usual - at the risk of the vulnerable, especially children, pregnant and lactating women, and the elderly.
The U.S. EPA is monitoring some levels of radiation. Rainwater is not universally monitored; if you live under the jet stream, as I do, the precipitation we received approximately 7-10 days after each day of explosion and venting at Fukushima was contaminated. If you do not feel alarm and action are appropriate for you after the continuing Fukushima tragedy, then feel free to walk away from the blog. If you have your own information to share, please do.
Wild Mushrooms Concentrate Radioactive Isotopes
Yes, it's true: wild mushrooms help decontaminate the soil by absorbing radiation, especially Cesium 137. Unfortunately, this means that eating them makes you more contaminated, too. Fortunately some mushrooms absorb lower amounts than others. Morels make the "low" list, thankfully. Here is the full article.
Additionally, the type of soil the mushroom grown in appears to reduce or increase the amount of cesium found in the mushroom. From the link: "In addition to the structure of the mushroom determined by the species it belongs to, the type of soil in which the mushroom has grown affects how much cesium-137 it contains. Sandy pine needle covered soils appear to promote the uptake of cesium-137 and other radionuclides in mushrooms, while fungi grown in deciduous woods and meadows typically show lower levels of nuclear contamination."
After the Chernobyl disaster, other European wild foods were found to be contaminated as well, including berries, fish, and deer.
Foods and Supplements for Radiation Exposure
It is a good idea to maintain a nutrient-dense diet, of course. However making sure to include certain things on a regular basis may improve your body's ability to prevent uptake of radioactive isotopes. Many, many ideas on this page. Warning: this page is written by someone who is more worried about Iran and Osama bin Laden than I am. There is a little bit of the lunatic/patriot fringe in the style, but the information is generally sound. As the author says: they make no attempt to verify the information presented, and encourage you to research it yourself and come to your own conclusions. I agree.
Foods that you can probably find easily include mineral-rich vegetables, kelp (Atlantic), sea salt, vitamin C, fermented miso and other naturally-cultured foods, garlic and onions, and potassium-rich foods.
Strontium, Cesium, Plutonium and How They Affect the Body - and some treatments
Apple pectin for cesium
Seaweed for strontium
Note: the author promises a part III, but it is not to be found at this URL.
Sea Life Contamination and Fukushima
An Interview with Arnie Gunderson
Recommended, as is just about everything from this nuclear engineer and independent analyst. He warns that the big fish will be contaminated in about 2-3 months. These swim, right? They swim far from Japan, get caught, and then are sold to consumers. The small fish are already contaminated near Japan.
Now What?
There is a LOT out there about food and radioactive nuclides. Most of it is best used as a starting point, a good idea at the beginning of practical research. If you have a source or link you think I should see, share it.
I am sick and tired of the religion of science proving the safety of toxins, proving the benevolence of colonization, proving the superiority of a dying and horrifying culture, proving over and over how we just have to make a different choice and our lives will be right as rain again. Better reactors, not no reactors. Better power plants, not the end of centralized power grids. Better GMOs, not the end of GM crops. Better technology, not the end of toxic mining at the expense of the relatively powerless from whom it is stolen and sold at a profit. Better regulation, better voting, better judges, better schools, better cars, better bodies, better brains, better houses, etc. etc. It's not really about choices, is it? Was it ever?
This isn't going away any time soon. I am more inclined to believe that with all the old reactors in the US and Europe, and the propensity of the Earth to do things people in positions of authority won't believe, we could face future disasters of a scope unimaginable - again. As far as I'm concerned, it is way past time for a joyful disruption. Of Everything. And by any means at your disposal. Be careful, be joyful, support disruption. Grow food, share it with your neighbors. Stop supporting politicians and their death-policies. Support your neighbors, your community, buy and use local. Use less electricity. Buy less plastic. Do whatever you can, but start it now.
Me, I'm going to go eat some popcorn and think about dinner. May our lives always be so benign.
First, though, know that I don't actually believe we here in the middle-west are at as much risk as those from Hawaii or Japan, obviously. But we do eat food grown in parts of the country that were exposed to Iodine 131, Cesium 137 and other isotopes, especially through precipitation. This precipitation carries radiation down to us from the atmosphere, blown over the US by the ever-moving jet stream. The half life of Iodine is 8 days; Cesium lasts years. Do you water your garden with rainwater? Do your cows drink from a pond that has rain or snow in it from mid-March and early April? Do you buy fresh, organic produce grown in California, Washington or Mexico? Or fish from the Pacific Ocean and Alaska? Then you would do well to know about how to improve your your own body's ability to prevent radiation damage to your bones and cells, however small.
Don't believe the hype about bananas and radioactivity, or comparisons of Fukushima radiation exposure to flying in a jet. Do a little research and see who disagrees with these claims, and why. Efforts to minimize the perceived risk are enormous by governments and corporate apologists whose job it is to maintain business as usual - at the risk of the vulnerable, especially children, pregnant and lactating women, and the elderly.
The U.S. EPA is monitoring some levels of radiation. Rainwater is not universally monitored; if you live under the jet stream, as I do, the precipitation we received approximately 7-10 days after each day of explosion and venting at Fukushima was contaminated. If you do not feel alarm and action are appropriate for you after the continuing Fukushima tragedy, then feel free to walk away from the blog. If you have your own information to share, please do.
Wild Mushrooms Concentrate Radioactive Isotopes
Yes, it's true: wild mushrooms help decontaminate the soil by absorbing radiation, especially Cesium 137. Unfortunately, this means that eating them makes you more contaminated, too. Fortunately some mushrooms absorb lower amounts than others. Morels make the "low" list, thankfully. Here is the full article.
Additionally, the type of soil the mushroom grown in appears to reduce or increase the amount of cesium found in the mushroom. From the link: "In addition to the structure of the mushroom determined by the species it belongs to, the type of soil in which the mushroom has grown affects how much cesium-137 it contains. Sandy pine needle covered soils appear to promote the uptake of cesium-137 and other radionuclides in mushrooms, while fungi grown in deciduous woods and meadows typically show lower levels of nuclear contamination."
After the Chernobyl disaster, other European wild foods were found to be contaminated as well, including berries, fish, and deer.
Foods and Supplements for Radiation Exposure
 |
| Kelp |
Foods that you can probably find easily include mineral-rich vegetables, kelp (Atlantic), sea salt, vitamin C, fermented miso and other naturally-cultured foods, garlic and onions, and potassium-rich foods.
Strontium, Cesium, Plutonium and How They Affect the Body - and some treatments
Apple pectin for cesium
Seaweed for strontium
Note: the author promises a part III, but it is not to be found at this URL.
Sea Life Contamination and Fukushima
An Interview with Arnie Gunderson
Recommended, as is just about everything from this nuclear engineer and independent analyst. He warns that the big fish will be contaminated in about 2-3 months. These swim, right? They swim far from Japan, get caught, and then are sold to consumers. The small fish are already contaminated near Japan.
Now What?
There is a LOT out there about food and radioactive nuclides. Most of it is best used as a starting point, a good idea at the beginning of practical research. If you have a source or link you think I should see, share it.
I am sick and tired of the religion of science proving the safety of toxins, proving the benevolence of colonization, proving the superiority of a dying and horrifying culture, proving over and over how we just have to make a different choice and our lives will be right as rain again. Better reactors, not no reactors. Better power plants, not the end of centralized power grids. Better GMOs, not the end of GM crops. Better technology, not the end of toxic mining at the expense of the relatively powerless from whom it is stolen and sold at a profit. Better regulation, better voting, better judges, better schools, better cars, better bodies, better brains, better houses, etc. etc. It's not really about choices, is it? Was it ever?
This isn't going away any time soon. I am more inclined to believe that with all the old reactors in the US and Europe, and the propensity of the Earth to do things people in positions of authority won't believe, we could face future disasters of a scope unimaginable - again. As far as I'm concerned, it is way past time for a joyful disruption. Of Everything. And by any means at your disposal. Be careful, be joyful, support disruption. Grow food, share it with your neighbors. Stop supporting politicians and their death-policies. Support your neighbors, your community, buy and use local. Use less electricity. Buy less plastic. Do whatever you can, but start it now.
Me, I'm going to go eat some popcorn and think about dinner. May our lives always be so benign.
2011/04/15
Subrealism - the blog
Today I discovered and have spent the last hour reading Subrealism, a terrifically informative blog about "liminal perspectives on consensus reality.;" not only pertinent political analysis, but also information about consciousness, health, Fukushima, nuclear power, myth, and history. Very good reading, dense and satisfying. Go check it out.
2011/04/14
RadNet - A Good First Source for EPA-monitored Radioactive Isotopes
I found some exciting, geeky numbers to get your fill of information about radiation exposure. The US EPA is monitoring milk, rainwater, and air for certain radioactive isotopes and the data collected are posted on the RadNet site.
You will notice that on the RadNet page you only get numbers; deciding what those numbers mean to you is a burden you have to take upon yourself. I will note that in my opinion, and the opinion of many who know more about radiation poisoning than I, no dose of radiation is safe. That is, the effects of radioactive isotopes are cumulative in the body. Children and pregnant and lactating women carry a higher burden of disease from radiation exposure. The EPA and FDA have different levels of "safe" doses for things like Cesium and Iodine 131; this adds another little layer of complexity to understanding the data.
Also, the data are a little old - in some cases a sample was taken two weeks before it is published on their web site. And remember, Iodine 131 has a half-life of 8 days, which according to the EPA, means it will decay away completely in months. How many weeks of rainfall is that?
I found a pretty good page that helps analyze the EPA's data on RadNet. They explain the differences in the FDA and EPA's exposure limits, and why the EPA's efforts are only a start when trying to understand exposure risk. From the link: "The other problem with the EPA’s empty reassurances that radiation levels are too low to have a negative impact on humans is the fact that the agency does not even have an accurate grasp on the actual aggregate exposure to radiation from all sources (water, food, air, rain, etc.). When you combine perpetual exposure from multiple sources with just the figures that have already been released, there is a very real threat of serious harm as a result of exposure."
What's in Your Milk?
Something to keep in mind about the milk data: the EPA does not measure (or report it, anyway) the actual levels of radioactive isotopes found in cows. Their process is to take a sample of milk from a grocery store in a city and test that. A store selling milk in Illinois may be from a dairy processing plant that gets its milk from several states, not just Illinois. The dairy processing plant is not required to share the source of their milk on their packaging, so you can't know where your milk comes from unless a)you buy it directly from the farmer, or b)buy milk at the store that clearly states it is from one dairy. This testing practice creates confusion about how much is really contaminated, and where.
Limit Your Exposure
For us, we continue to keep the kids inside during rain and snow. They aren't allowed to drink rainwater or eat snow and ice; I am hopeful my local weeds will be safe to eat in the next few weeks. And maybe Wisconsin will test something other than Madison's drinking water and I'll be able to make better-informed decisions about food and dairy. Right now, we're only drinking milk and eating cheese from local dairies; eating greens grown in local greenhouses; and avoiding all fresh produce from the west coast. We don't buy food from China, or Japan, or Hawaii. We are also avoiding all new ocean-caught fish, which is hard for me since I started eating seafood again last year and I do love it.
The world ahead is potentially much more contaminated than Chernobyl - and it's closer to home this time. As I munch on my Atlantic kelp and drink my homemade wine, I share every hope that you will be able to use this information to act in a way that mitigates future exposure and contamination. I sincerely hope that this is the worst of what's to come.
You will notice that on the RadNet page you only get numbers; deciding what those numbers mean to you is a burden you have to take upon yourself. I will note that in my opinion, and the opinion of many who know more about radiation poisoning than I, no dose of radiation is safe. That is, the effects of radioactive isotopes are cumulative in the body. Children and pregnant and lactating women carry a higher burden of disease from radiation exposure. The EPA and FDA have different levels of "safe" doses for things like Cesium and Iodine 131; this adds another little layer of complexity to understanding the data.
Also, the data are a little old - in some cases a sample was taken two weeks before it is published on their web site. And remember, Iodine 131 has a half-life of 8 days, which according to the EPA, means it will decay away completely in months. How many weeks of rainfall is that?
I found a pretty good page that helps analyze the EPA's data on RadNet. They explain the differences in the FDA and EPA's exposure limits, and why the EPA's efforts are only a start when trying to understand exposure risk. From the link: "The other problem with the EPA’s empty reassurances that radiation levels are too low to have a negative impact on humans is the fact that the agency does not even have an accurate grasp on the actual aggregate exposure to radiation from all sources (water, food, air, rain, etc.). When you combine perpetual exposure from multiple sources with just the figures that have already been released, there is a very real threat of serious harm as a result of exposure."
What's in Your Milk?
Something to keep in mind about the milk data: the EPA does not measure (or report it, anyway) the actual levels of radioactive isotopes found in cows. Their process is to take a sample of milk from a grocery store in a city and test that. A store selling milk in Illinois may be from a dairy processing plant that gets its milk from several states, not just Illinois. The dairy processing plant is not required to share the source of their milk on their packaging, so you can't know where your milk comes from unless a)you buy it directly from the farmer, or b)buy milk at the store that clearly states it is from one dairy. This testing practice creates confusion about how much is really contaminated, and where.
Limit Your Exposure
For us, we continue to keep the kids inside during rain and snow. They aren't allowed to drink rainwater or eat snow and ice; I am hopeful my local weeds will be safe to eat in the next few weeks. And maybe Wisconsin will test something other than Madison's drinking water and I'll be able to make better-informed decisions about food and dairy. Right now, we're only drinking milk and eating cheese from local dairies; eating greens grown in local greenhouses; and avoiding all fresh produce from the west coast. We don't buy food from China, or Japan, or Hawaii. We are also avoiding all new ocean-caught fish, which is hard for me since I started eating seafood again last year and I do love it.
The world ahead is potentially much more contaminated than Chernobyl - and it's closer to home this time. As I munch on my Atlantic kelp and drink my homemade wine, I share every hope that you will be able to use this information to act in a way that mitigates future exposure and contamination. I sincerely hope that this is the worst of what's to come.
When does it end?
Here is latest video update from Arnie Gunderson of Fairewinds Associates (April 13). Information about radiation contamination is being withheld and modified by official sources - here and in Japan - to downplay the seriousness and threat of the nuclear disaster in Fukushima. Not that you're probably surprised by that, but it's great to have someone else say it as well.
"Everybody knows the moment that Three Mile Island and the moment that Cherobyl happened. But who knows when they end?" - Arnie Gunderson
"Everybody knows the moment that Three Mile Island and the moment that Cherobyl happened. But who knows when they end?" - Arnie Gunderson
2011/04/11
Right to Life
It seems the indigenous Andean population in Bolivia has helped craft a new law (which is about to pass, apparently) that gives Mother Earth equal rights with humans. As reported by the Guardian UK, there are 11 rights explicitly given in this draft, including:
the right to life and exist
the right to continue vital cycles and processes free from human alteration;
the right to pure water and clean air;
the right to balance;
the right not to be polluted;
the right to not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered
and the right "to not be affected by mega-infrastructure and development projects that affect the balance of ecosystems and the local inhabitant communities"
It also gives local municipalities more control over regulating industry. What is there not to love about this? I am not actually a law-loving kind of person, but in a world where corporations can and do have personhood, where the owners of industry take what they want no matter the cost, this kind of movement is one way to start real change for people's health, both spiritual and physical. It in some ways seems limiting to declare the personhood of Mother Earth; but without it, legal systems don't and perhaps can't act against destruction.
This nicely backs what other writers and environmental activists have long asserted: that there can be no human rights without protection of the earth and other non-human species. If humans destroy our land base, the very stuff of life itself for us, how can we have clean water to drink? Uncontaminated and adequate food? Adequate shelter? What then supports our connection with others?
And for those of us who are disturbed by the principle of religious or spiritual views controlling the government and justice systems, I ask you this: what part of this law actually harms any person who is not harming the earth, a "resource" shared by everyone? Really, as things go now, industry and globalization harm many. If you live by the belief of living freely and responsibly, harming none, enforcing protections on our environment that give nature actual legal rights gives people harmed by industry and corporations power to help themselves. No one is enforcing religious beliefs on non-believers, but rather environmental protections of the most fundamental kind.
I would support a move in the US that gave the environment equal rights with people. Not rights which exclude people - since people are part of ecosystems, too. There would be lots of legal wrangling about what "nature" really means, of course. And no industry would ever support it, but isn't that the point? There could be no nuclear power, no fracking, no strip mining, no uranium mining, no clear cuts, no genetically altered seeds, no Monsanto thugs. Toxic dumps could no longer be placed in poor communities, and indigenous populations and rural communities would have recourse to stop activities that pollute their lands and water. In fact, it's possible that companies may actually have to prove their practices cause no harm. Not a bad start.
the right to life and exist
the right to continue vital cycles and processes free from human alteration;
the right to pure water and clean air;
the right to balance;
the right not to be polluted;
the right to not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered
and the right "to not be affected by mega-infrastructure and development projects that affect the balance of ecosystems and the local inhabitant communities"
It also gives local municipalities more control over regulating industry. What is there not to love about this? I am not actually a law-loving kind of person, but in a world where corporations can and do have personhood, where the owners of industry take what they want no matter the cost, this kind of movement is one way to start real change for people's health, both spiritual and physical. It in some ways seems limiting to declare the personhood of Mother Earth; but without it, legal systems don't and perhaps can't act against destruction.
This nicely backs what other writers and environmental activists have long asserted: that there can be no human rights without protection of the earth and other non-human species. If humans destroy our land base, the very stuff of life itself for us, how can we have clean water to drink? Uncontaminated and adequate food? Adequate shelter? What then supports our connection with others?
And for those of us who are disturbed by the principle of religious or spiritual views controlling the government and justice systems, I ask you this: what part of this law actually harms any person who is not harming the earth, a "resource" shared by everyone? Really, as things go now, industry and globalization harm many. If you live by the belief of living freely and responsibly, harming none, enforcing protections on our environment that give nature actual legal rights gives people harmed by industry and corporations power to help themselves. No one is enforcing religious beliefs on non-believers, but rather environmental protections of the most fundamental kind.
I would support a move in the US that gave the environment equal rights with people. Not rights which exclude people - since people are part of ecosystems, too. There would be lots of legal wrangling about what "nature" really means, of course. And no industry would ever support it, but isn't that the point? There could be no nuclear power, no fracking, no strip mining, no uranium mining, no clear cuts, no genetically altered seeds, no Monsanto thugs. Toxic dumps could no longer be placed in poor communities, and indigenous populations and rural communities would have recourse to stop activities that pollute their lands and water. In fact, it's possible that companies may actually have to prove their practices cause no harm. Not a bad start.
2011/04/04
mercury is retrograde
I'm exhausted today after much staying up late but I have to say that this Mercury retrograde thing is really wearing me out. Classic examples of this today - funny and annoying. Luckily no harm done, just another layer of chaos on the pile.
Back to my regularly scheduled blog.
Back to my regularly scheduled blog.
2011/04/03
Still fission
I've been busy hosting a friend from out of town this weekend, but wanted to be sure to take a minute to share Arnie Gunerson's recent posts about the kind of radiation being released from Fukushima. He provides evidence that there is still fission occurring in reactor #1, and it is not being measured or detected.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)