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.
No comments:
Post a Comment