tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post431594763647112210..comments2024-03-19T02:32:56.523-07:00Comments on CFN - CALIFORNIA FIRE NEWS - CAL FIRE NEWS : Current California Radiation Levels - EPA RadNetBob Bloggerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02618149603428753410noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-21046120240809876182012-04-20T03:45:40.320-07:002012-04-20T03:45:40.320-07:00Ok, I think I have just entered the Twilight Zone....Ok, I think I have just entered the Twilight Zone. It is currently April 20th, 2012. It's been a year since the Meltdowns of multiple reactors at Fukushima and I must say that they were right, there is no IMMEDIATE danger. Whew, what a relief. I was sure that when the media stopped talking about the radiation levels and the EPA stopped taking measurements of the rain-water, milk, air and surface water, I was sure that everything was just fine. After all, our leaders would not just hang us out to dry if there were really any danger now would they. Look at a Geiger counter if you want confirmation of things being back to "normal". Radiation levels are low again, no worries then, Right?<br /><br />Well I guess that depends on whether or not you agree with the statement "ignorance is bliss", or not. If you do, then it's right as rain. It's a beautiful day. The sun is shining and the birds are singing. Oh, and there is no IMMEDIATE danger to human health from ionizing radiation. <br /><br />On the other hand, if you don't happen to be a believer in that whole ignorance thing then you best just love your family and do some digging for the truth. Excuse me, I meant the WHOLE TRUTH. The information required to make intelligent decisions and plans for the future is available, if you look hard enough. A good place to start is NAP (National Academies Press) <br /><br />Visit the National Academies Press online, the authoritative source for all books from the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine, and the National Research Council:<br />• Download hundreds of free books in PDF<br />• Read thousands of books online for free. <br />Here is a title and download link to get you started:<br />"Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of<br />Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2"<br />Download the PDF here: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11340.html <br /><br />If the research is too much for you then I suggest you take your family on a picnic and enjoy the beautiful weather, don't worry, be happy. <br /><br />And above all, remember;<br />There is NO IMMEDIATE danger.<br /><br />PS look up iodine-129<br />Good luck to all, Rod(inator)Rodinatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03946536789808724984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-61188715274125263272011-08-02T13:13:04.739-07:002011-08-02T13:13:04.739-07:00OK this is really insane. Now it's August 5th...OK this is really insane. Now it's August 5th, 2011 and still no updates. Still the now ominous March 18th date on all your posted data relating to radiation. I was under the impression that these measurements were taken quarterly in the past. So that means that there should have been an update somewhere back in june, that's two months ago people, WTF. I have since aquired two geiger counters and have watched the background levels go from an average of 10 to 20 CPM back in March, to an average of around 35 to 45 CPM at present, with two occasions where it spiked for several hours at 100 to 200 CPM. It's real people! Yes it may be true that there "is no immediate danger", as all the news keeps saying, but tell that to the parents that are in Philly, with a 48% increase in infant mortality. That increase in varying amounts is nationwide. Do some research, While you still can...Rodinatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03946536789808724984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-89391550081687424082011-05-06T22:32:11.239-07:002011-05-06T22:32:11.239-07:00OK it's been a month (now May 6th) and the dat...OK it's been a month (now May 6th) and the data on this page is still from March 18th. Why has Cal Fire News stopped updating their web page? I for one would sure like to get some factual information from this official site that we can trust.Rodinatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03946536789808724984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-47921400024958038332011-05-06T22:20:00.202-07:002011-05-06T22:20:00.202-07:00Here it is May 6th, a Month since my last post (ab...Here it is May 6th, a Month since my last post (above) and still the latest info is from MARCH 18th. What is up with that! Japan is still spewing radioactive material 24/7 from not only the FD NPP but from another nuclear power plant as well. You can't buy a geiger counter anywhere. HELLO! is there anybody there at Cal Fire News? How about some real, official news from the people we trust.Rodinatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03946536789808724984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-65471660852769729412011-04-06T12:43:04.044-07:002011-04-06T12:43:04.044-07:00What I'd like to know is why you people at CAL...What I'd like to know is why you people at CAL FIRE NEWS have stopped updating the radiation levels on March 18th. I'm guessing that you are all running for shelter and there's nobody there to do the updates!Rodinatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03946536789808724984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-67689161907057302842011-03-31T15:03:00.439-07:002011-03-31T15:03:00.439-07:00I'm no expert, but I think a good analogy woul...I'm no expert, but I think a good analogy would besomethingh like this; If you drink a gallon of water a day, that is 5.33 oz./hour. That's fine, but that also translates to 365.25 gallons per year, which is way, way too much for one sitting. It all has to do with how fast your body can eliminate what you take in. Or if your body retains it, as in the case of Iodine. It's the acute exposure that is the most dangerous.Rodinatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03946536789808724984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-83476390665308079722011-03-22T21:20:36.169-07:002011-03-22T21:20:36.169-07:00This is confusing, as usual with technical news re...This is confusing, as usual with technical news reporting.<br /><br />This "100 millisieverts received over the course of a year is the lowest level at which any increased cancer risk is evident."<br />and this<br />"After exposure to 150 millisieverts per day, "you're definitely in the range where you have significantly increased risk of radiation-induced cancers." " "<br />are not consistent statements.<br /><br />150 millisieverts per day is 54,750 millisieverts per year. Quite a bit larger than 100 millisieverts per year. In fact it's 54.75 sieverts. If it's 5 millisieverts per hour that's 120 millisieverts per day, and 43.8 sieverts per year. 5 sieverts is lethal.<br />So what does it all mean?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-38003600390879449092011-03-18T21:37:31.877-07:002011-03-18T21:37:31.877-07:00The following three paragraphs are excerpted from ...The following three paragraphs are excerpted from CNN, but it is still unclear how this correlates to the EPA RadNet data units.<br /><br />"G. Donald Frey, a medical physicist and professor of radiology at the Medical University of South Carolina. "The limit for radiation workers in the United States is 50 millisieverts per year, but we try to keep them to less than 5 millisieverts per year."<br /><br />After a single acute exposure of 1,000 millisieverts, people tend to start feeling nauseated and vomiting, Frey said. At 5,000 millisieverts over the course of a few hours, "people start dying."<br /><br />After exposure to 150 millisieverts per day, "you're definitely in the range where you have significantly increased risk of radiation-induced cancers." "Rancher Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08577743926269416341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-34923918287941959952011-03-18T21:12:42.900-07:002011-03-18T21:12:42.900-07:00That's a great question. It would be very hel...That's a great question. It would be very helpful for your readers to understand the conversion between millisiverts (being quoted in Japan) and the units that are quoted by the EPA RadNet. <br /><br />Also, it would be useful to know the what values of the EPA RadNet units are considered dangerous (first for children, and then for adults).Rancher Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08577743926269416341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5674630519179690239.post-9197369312894401532011-03-18T13:15:18.060-07:002011-03-18T13:15:18.060-07:00How does one convert Radnet CPM to millisieverts?How does one convert Radnet CPM to millisieverts?Yunizen™https://www.blogger.com/profile/16430453484247896537noreply@blogger.com