Just wondering if anyone has heard of scientists doing any studies on the fish and wildlife in AK. We have been hearing that the radioactive fallout from Japan is far worse than originally thought. There has been a 35% increase in infant mortality on the west coast,and Australia is finding radioactive fish. With the big salmon/ crab fishery up there I would think they would be looking into it. Im sure a lot of you saw the film about Chernobyls wolves..... kind of spooky.

Japan continues to pump millions of gallons of seawater trying to cool those reactors so of course that water is contaminated and going right back into the ocean, plus the steam is putting a lot aloft, that ends up all over the north.

I think I recall reading somewhere that our salmon don't get anywhere near Japan. If that's correct, I wouldn't worry about it.

I also remember reading that the isotope that is flushing back into the ocean is iodine 131 which has a half life of 8 days. Again, if that's correct, then in 80 days there would be 1/10 of 1% radiation remaining when those waters reach the west coast of the US.

Cooling water was dumped into the Columbia River from the 40s to the early 70s after a 6 day hold. Nobody gave it a second thought?

Hope all is well, I dont know enough about it, but there sure are some conflicting and concerning reports out there.

Iodine 131 decays by emitting beta particles, out of the types of radioactive decay, beta decay is the worst because alpha particles are to large to penetrate human tissue and gamma rays usually pass straight through us. beta particles attack cells and cause mutations, and can cause thyroid cancer. (one of the few things I actually remember from chemistry class lol)

If a Beta particle is emitted and there is no one around to recieve it, does it still cause harm?

Doesn't the sun emitt radiation?

Has anyone ever checked the sun dried tomatoes or dried fish for radiation?

I don't believe so, especially since the half-life is 8 days. I imagine you would have to be right there when it happened to be harmed. After 8 days half of the iodine 131 is stable xenon.There have been alot of half-lives since that happened. So, there shouldn't be anything to worry about. It's probably some grad students on a research grant.

I didnt take chemistry, so really have no understanding of what all this means. The wolves of Chernobyl film explained that the animals were quite healthy in the uninhabited highly toxic zone around the site of the disaster. They also went on to say that the animals were so toxic humans should not touch them with bare hands.

Most experts now seem to agree that this incident in Japan is the worst in human history, and Chernobyl doesnt even compare anymore. It also seems that some pretty bad stuff is still spewing into the atmosphere. I just wonder how much we are getting and how/if it will effect out wildlife. At least one scientist believes that the northern latitudes are at the greatest risk.....

So, you intial post and then this one make assertions, yet you have not provided a link or evidence to back the claims.

Can you provide some evidence that says, "most" experts agree.
Along with the evidence in mortality rates and the austrailan radioactive fish.

Otherwise it sounds like a nice conspiracy theory.

I googled it, and unless you rely on Al Jazeera for your news, no source makes or backs such claims.

Yukon where are you getting this information? I'm interested in reading about it.

Thanks Hup, I didn't read your post before I made mine.

I got this info from a news program on TV (CBC) they interviewed some nuclear scientists. They all agreed that Fukoshima was the worst nuclear disater in history, but it could certainly be a conspiracy.

They also went on to say Alaskan seals were having problems in some areas, and that Dutch Harbour had high readings.

Hup I cant back up any claims, Im not a scientist... just said what I had heard.

I put as much faith in Al Jazeera as I do Fox or CNN..... thats not much.

Wonder what Al Gore has to say about it? He should know. Knows everything else about the enviroment.

that is odd that the west coast mortality rate is off the charts
that alaska seals are having problems,
that fish are contaminated, but there isn't a single new article that says so.

I also note that the "news" that is bad and claims millions of deaths are from "anti- nuclear" scientists and activists.

I found where three cows from near "ground zero" had tested for higher than acceptable levels of radiation. but no american fish, no austrailian fish, nothing but conjecture.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45800485/ns/...eals-radiation/

http://enenews.com/scientists-fukushima-...enetic-material

http://enenews.com/fox-affiliate-seattle-northwest-sees-35-infant-mortality-spike-post-fukushima I wouldnt say there wasnt a single article that talks about the radiation levels and the supposed problems. I have read enough of them. Just dont know how true they are one way or the other.

Thought maybe some Alaskans might have some "boots on the ground" experience.

Conspiracy or not, only a fool would believe our government, or the mainstream media.

I'll agree one hundred percent that only a fool would believe the government and media. It's all liberal. They're all about shutting down nuclear power plants I'm sure, and I'm willing to bet that any research being done on this subject is funded by their campaign dollars.

Polar bears, seals and now people?? Is this is all BS??? I know how some organizations get carried away with the truth, but if there is a shred of truth to any of this I will be a little concerned.

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Hundreds of Alaska Airlines flight attendants have filed a formal complaint about uniforms they suspect might be causing their skin to rash and develop lesions, and their hair to fall out. But based on the timing of the symptoms and their relation to similar symptoms in local marine life and polar bear populations, it appears as though radiation from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster may also be a potential culprit.


KING 5 Newsin Seattle, Wash., first broke the news about the “mystery illness” that has reportedly affected at least 280 flight attendants thus far. According to accounts, those afflicted by the condition say they have developed persistently itchy skin, skin lesions, and hair loss, all of which they suspect may have to do with newer flight uniforms that allegedly contain tributyl phosphate, a toxic organophosphorus compound linked to skin problems (http://www.rightdiagnosis.com).

But not everyone is convinced that the uniforms are to blame, including Alexander Higgins who recently connected the dots to discover a potential link to the Fukushima Daiichi disaster. After comparing the flight attendants’ symptoms to those reported on polar bears and marine life from the northwest U.S. throughout the past year, the timing and correlation of the two is highly suspect.

Are Alaska Airlines flight attendants suffering the effects of nuclear radiation fallout?

Back in April,AlaskaPublic.orgreported that an alarming number of polar bears living in the Beaufort Sea, which is located just north of Alaska and Canada’s Yukon and Northwest Territories, were turning up with skin lesions and Alopecia, which is another name for hair loss. And before the polar bears, it was apparently ice seals and walruses living in the arctic that were suffering similar symptoms (http://www.alaskapublic.org).

Upon these discoveries, it seemed as though scientists and biologists tried every which way to avoid tagging nuclear radiation as the cause, blaming viruses, bacteria, and other factors as potential causes. But all of these hypotheses have failed, under further scrutiny, to prove true, which leaves one major elephant in the room that is not being discussed: nuclear fallout from the Fukushima Daiichi disaster.

Based on the timing of when these creatures began to suffer their horrible symptoms, as well as the nature of their symptoms, it appears as though radiation from Fukushima may at least beoneof the causes of this mystery disease. And the striking similarity of the animals’ symptoms to those of the Alaska Airlines flight attendants points even more heavily towards a nuclear radiation link in the latter case as well.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t


In any case, there is little or no chance that the mainstream media, theAssociation of Flight Attendants, or any other prominent group will dare question radiation of Fukushima as a cause. After all, the public has been deliberately left in the dark the whole time about the true severity of Fukushima radiation, which we recently reported has been far worse than what we have all been told in the official story (http://www.naturalnews.com/035847_plume-gate_Fukushima_radiation.html).

OK I have to ask. If it's radiation then why is it restricted to flight attendants on Alaska airlines ? Why not other airlines? Why not passengers ? (I know, duration of exposure) Why not pilots ?

There is always, IMO, some website willing to believe or manufacture some conspiracy to cast blame on all things related to capitalism or any form of energy except horses. And again IMO, Natural News is one of the worst of that bunch.

Washington state has been checking the salmon. Oregon and Colorado have seen a rise in radiation per testings. AK is suppose to see a bunch of trash showing up from Japan in the next year I wounder if all that will be safe.

If radiation was a concern for flight attendants, wouldn't they all over the world be experiencing effects?

the dose of radiation everytime one flies is posted in that other thread. Add all that up. yet, there doesn't seem to be a bunch of stewardesses dying from increased radiation from flying...

the polar bear leasions have been noted since 1999... that article says. Does radiation from something in 2011 time travel?

It has already shown-up. Scary to think of motorcycles showing up on our beaches not to mention the literal tons upon ton of other items. If it is in the japanese water. It will be here as well in some form or another. The fact is that nothing good is going to come of it...

Hope you guys are right. Radiation of any kind scares the dickens out of me. W17 I agree with you on the news..... hard to trust any anymore.

Martenpine, the US Govt, is telling everyone that the airport scanners are safe too...... meanwhile other countries are banning them, because they pose a health risk. You should have seen the look on two TSA agents when I explained why I wouldnt go through one. They had no idea the machines they stand by all day are now banned in Europe.

I wonder how many people that lived before our modern, technological age died of cancer. I believe we are our own worst enemy.

AndyPribonic You got that right.

Not many probably because the life expectancy was very short back then. Hard to die of cancer when you are dying of the common flu, war, starvation, and every other disease we have cures for now days.

-TJ

TJ no question that our life expectancy has gone up to some degree. But most of us have relatives we can point to who lived a very long time. The problem is the cancer rates are through the roof. Sats show one person in four will get it, and we are getting it at much younger ages. I personally know 5 people right now that have it, two are under 30 and one is just two years old. The question we need to ask ourselves is why......

Look back at some old catalogs from say the 1970s or older and see how many BOYS size 13 shoes you see listed. They were rare then, but very common now. 300 plus pound heavyweights were unheard of..... hormones in our food, maybe.

My bet would be earlier and better diagnosis.

For adults maybe, but young adults and kids?

Yukon, the mortality rate from the past was ALL OVER the charts, and people had no clue what they died of. Flu, disease, war, cancer...just dead. While you can point to people in the past that lived a long time...I can point to them now. I'd bet the percentages are close to the same...its just now we can look at the dead and figure out why. I'd bet a LOT of young people died from cancer back in the day too. Shoot, the life expectancy in 1900 was 46 years old, now it's 76...that's 30 years of time to "find" something wrong (cancer)... We just make the assumption cancer is more prevalant now because we know what to look for and what it is.

I'm sure even then they cut people open out of curiousity. I would think a mass of malignant tumor would be hard to miss. Then there's the chance that it was just as prevalent, but they called it something else and didn't really understand what it was.

I agree with you alaskan, I just happen to think we are exposed to far more carcinogens, such as radiation, than people used to be.