HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » Radiation? In The Wester...

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 10:40 AM

 

Radiation? In The Western Part of North America All Suffering Mysterious Diseases At the Same Time

This discussion thread was locked by XemaSab (a host of the Environment & Energy group).

Radiation? Seals, Sea Lions, Polar Bears, Bald Eagles, Sea Stars, Turtles, King & Sockeye Salmon, Herring, Anchovies and Sardines In The Western Part of North America All Suffering Mysterious Diseases At the Same Time

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/radiation-seals-sea-lions-polar-bears-bald-eagles-sea-stars-turtles-king-salmon-sockeye-salmon-herring-anchovies-sardines-west-coast-north-americaseals-sea-lions-polar-bears.html


Is Fukushima Decimating Wildlife in the Western Portion of North America?

We’ve previous documented that seals, sea lions, polar bears, sea stars, turtles, sockeye salmon, herring, anchovies and sardines on the West Coast of North America are all suffering mysterious diseases … which are killing many.

We’ve asked whether this is related to massive releases of radiation from Fukushima. Update at link.

Sadly, we can now add other wildlife to the list.

EneNews reports:

Los Angeles Times, Dec. 29, 2013: Bald eagles are dying in Utah — 20 in the past few weeks alone — and nobody can figure out why. [...] Many suffered from seizures, head tremors and paralysis [...] Many of the eagles were brought to the mammoth Wildlife Rehabilitation Center of Northern Utah [...] Within 48 hours, most were dead. [...] State wildlife specialists are baffled. For weeks, officials have sent birds for necropsies [...] At first, the agency’s disease scientists guessed the illness could be encephalitis, which is caused by the West Nile virus, but later ruled out that possibility. [...] Officials suggest the die-off is possibly connected to the deaths of thousands of eared grebes that began in Utah in November. [...] Officials still don’t know why the shore birds became sick. [...] Officials at the Wildlife Rehabilitation Center have their own theories. Some point to radiation from Japan after the 2011 meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. [...] A call from Idaho shed new light: A wildlife official said bald eagles there were also getting sick, suggesting the birds were arriving in Utah already in bad health.

Buz Marthaler, Wildlife Rehabilitation Center of Northern Utah co-founder: “It’s just hard to have your national bird in your arms, going through seizures in a way it can’t control — when you can see it’s pain but don’t know what’s happening to it. As a human being, you just have problems with that. And when you lose one, it just grabs your heart. [...] In an average year, we might get one or two, but we’ve received nine so far, and five of those have died. The other four are still in our care. [...] We aren’t ruling out anything.”

***

Washington Post, Dec. 30, 2013: [...] “This is really concerning to us,” says [Leslie McFarlane, the wildlife disease program coordinator for the state’s Division of Wildlife Resources]. She has been program coordinator for 10 years and describes the recent deaths as “very unusual.” [...] The symptoms noted in the recent spate of deaths—and the broad geographical area in which they have cropped up—are what has officials concerned.

Listen to the public news service report here: LINK AT OP

In a second article, EneNews notes:

Juneau Empire, Dec. 29, 2013: [...] the king [chinook] salmon — has fallen from its throne. [...] Alaska has seen unprecedented declines in recent years [...] scientists like Joe Orsi and Jim Murphy, both fisheries research biologists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, are digging deeper into [...] the cause of the startling downward trend. [...] When asked about the potential impact Fukushima may be having on king salmon stocks in the Gulf of Alaska and elsewhere in the state, Orsi would not comment. “I’ve been told to refer you to the (Environmental Protection Agency),” he said, “Because I’m not an expert on the topic.” Calls and emails to the EPA were not returned in time and digging on the federal agency’s site revealed no current information on radiation from the Fukushima disaster. The last posted monitoring results occurred in June of 2011.

Unfortunately, the American and Japanese governments are doing everything they can to cover up the severity of the Fukushima disaster. Indeed, anytime government or big corporations screw up, the government works to cover it up … instead of actually fixing the problem. And see this AT LINK.

EneNews continues:

Bellingham Herald, Dec. 5, 2013: “[...] we see from test fisheries that the Chinook numbers returning to the Fraser River system were at a record low,” explained Ken Balcomb, executive director and principal investigator for The Center for Research and a science advisor to the whale watch association. [...] [An] alarming decrease of an important identified food resource [...]

Islander Sound, Dec. 25, 2013: [A] dismal return of Chinook salmon to the Fraser River.

Salmon Fishing in British Columbia, Canada: There are two major salmon runs of Chinook that are targeted by anglers; the Fraser river [and] Harrison River.

December 2013: Previously unpublished map from gov’t scientists shows Fukushima plume already at Alaska coast (PHOTO)

November 2013: CBC Headline: Radiation from Fukushima arrives on Alaska coast — University scientists concerned — “Is the food supply safe?… I don’t think anyone can really answer that”

September 2013: US Gov’t: Alaska island “appears to show impacts from Fukushima” — “Significant cesium isotope signature” detected — Scientists anticipate more marine life to be impacted as ocean plume arrives (VIDEO)


CORROBORATING LINKS AT OP

18 replies, 2982 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Radiation? In The Western Part of North America All Suffering Mysterious Diseases At the Same Time (Original post)
Demeter Dec 2013 OP
kristopher Dec 2013 #1
fredamae Dec 2013 #2
kristopher Dec 2013 #5
fredamae Dec 2013 #8
kristopher Dec 2013 #9
fredamae Dec 2013 #11
NYC_SKP Dec 2013 #4
NYC_SKP Dec 2013 #3
kristopher Dec 2013 #7
longship Dec 2013 #14
Demeter Dec 2013 #6
FBaggins Dec 2013 #17
darkangel218 Dec 2013 #10
NYC_SKP Dec 2013 #15
FBaggins Dec 2013 #16
Common Sense Party Dec 2013 #12
pscot Dec 2013 #13
XemaSab Dec 2013 #18

Response to Demeter (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 10:51 AM

1. EneNews operates at the level of conspiracy theory and shouldn't be posted here

They sensationalize, distort and misrepresent information in a way that makes a mockery of a legitimate and serious problem. Is that your objective?

If you can't find solid documentation of their claims elsewhere in more legitimate media, then you shouldn't post their crap anywhere but the conspiracy theory forum.

Your cooperation in the effort to deal rationally with a serious issue would be appreciated.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kristopher (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 10:58 AM

2. Which part of the above

story is outside the realm of possibilities considering the enormity of the Fukushima disaster?

It's not beyond reasonable to assume if the word got out of how bad it is--it would cause the collapse of many Major Fishing Industries----not to mention the Panic-cuz this isn't just going to affect one part of the country--it's NA...
These "signals" from Mother Nature are just the Tip of whats coming. They said "back-then" it would take 3-5 years for the Plume/affects from radiation to arrive on the Eastern Pacific.

Follow the money...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fredamae (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:06 AM

5. "Which part of the above View profile story is outside the realm of possibilities..."

That is 100% conspiracy theory thinking. Put another way it is the same type of 'logic' that Fox News presents its viewers with. We aren't concerned with a "range of possibilities"; we are concerned with what the evidence is and what it tells us when analyzed properly.

Please stop posting this crap unless it's in the conspiracy theory forum.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kristopher (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:38 AM

8. I'm sorry, but can you

prove this is all nothing more than a "conspiracy"? What do the "conspirators" gain from spreading mis-information re: Fukushima Radiation?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fredamae (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:46 AM

9. The burden of proof is on those making the outrageous claims with no evidence...

One of the favorite tactics of Hannity and Limbaugh is to put two unrelated events out there and imply a causal connection with no evidence of such a connection. And, just like the OP, they claim that all they are doing is 'asking questions'.

That is CT101.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kristopher (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:59 AM

11. So basically-

Confusion has been inserted into the conversation - "Absolutes" are the rule of the day? Absolutely Will be devastating Or Absolutely No Harm?


http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/us-sailors-sue-radiation-poisoning-21307774

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/radioactivity_in_the_ocean_diluted_but_far_from_harmless/2391/

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kristopher (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:06 AM

4. Thank you, kristopher. We were both responding at the same time.

 

Propaganda, even against dangerous energy sources, is still propaganda.

Happy New Year to you!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:04 AM

3. "ENEnews" is not a reliable source. They misrepresent themselves and the facts.

 

The "corroborating links" aren't even right.

For example, the first excerpt claims to be from the LA Times, but it's not; it's from the Seattle Times.

In the second article form the Washington Post there isn't any mention of Fukushima, it just says it's a mystery.

ENEnews represents itself to be a new source dedicated to energy, energy sources, generation, news about energy.

ENENews is an online service dedicated to covering the latest energy-related developments.


But anyone who spends any time there quickly finds that it's only purpose is to spread fear and misinformation about nuclear power.

Do a search on the site for "solar" or "wind" and it will loop you back to stories about nuclear.

Go ahead. Try it.

Nuclear power has enough factual bad news-- we don't need to mislead people to make the right energy decisions.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:18 AM

7. The site smacks of a false flag operation to me.

Last edited Tue Dec 31, 2013, 12:09 PM - Edit history (1)

It is so far over the top that it's hard to believe it's well intentioned by a rational person. I know that if I were a nuclear industry PR firm the creation and operation of a site like that would be the first thing I'd do to discredit legitimate opposition. We know the Nuclear Energy Institute hired Hill & Knowlton (tobacco industry fame) to manage a campaign that included creation of the greenwashing group Clean and Safe Energy Coalition (CASEnergy); and I see no reason to think they've limited their efforts to that single endeavor.

For the Clean and Safe Energy Coalition (CASEnergy), Whitman has played a lower-profile role than her co-chair, Greenpeace activist turned PR consultant Patrick Moore. Both Whitman and Moore promote nuclear power as environmentally friendly. Both are being paid to do so, by the Nuclear Energy Institute. And overwhelmingly, media accounts fail to identify either as consultants for the nuclear industry.

A Nexis news database search revealed that nearly two-thirds of news items that mentioned Christine Todd Whitman and nuclear power, from April 2006 to August 2007, failed to disclose her financial relationship with the industry. Granted, Whitman's 35.5 percent disclosure rate is better than Moore's dismal rate of 12 percent (measured from April 2006 to March 2007). That difference is at least partially due to the smaller number of articles mentioning Whitman, and the greater relative percentage of industry trade press pieces. (In both pools of stories, the trade press articles were most likely to mention the Nuclear Energy Institute's funding of CASEnergy and its co-chairs.)

In some cases, journalists may have been informed about Whitman's industry consulting but chose not to mention it in their reports. But there are several instances where Whitman herself presumably could have disclosed her Nuclear Energy Institute work, but failed to do so. These include a September 2006 television interview with Whitman, an April 2007 letter to the editor from Whitman to Iowa's Des Moines Register, and op/eds penned by Whitman that ran in the Boston Globe (May 2006), Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (September 2006), and North Carolina's Charlotte Observer (June 2007). CASEnergy press releases that named Whitman also failed to include disclosure.


Coaster distributed by NEI at an international climate change meeting

Judging by CASEnergy's website, Whitman may be increasing her pro-nuclear public outreach. Her recent radio hits include WSMN and WGIR in New Hampshire, and WJR and WDET in Detroit. All four interviews were conducted on July 11, 2007, which -- along with a WSMN host's remark that "she's spending the day talking to talk shows all over the country" and the fact that the WSMN audio file is hosted on Hill & Knowlton's website (the URL contains hillandknowlton.com) -- suggests a radio media tour organized by the Nuclear Energy Institute's PR firm. In May 2007, Whitman appeared at CASEnergy events in Florida and Washington DC. The latter was a Capitol Hill Symposium also featuring Patrick Moore, Rep. James Clyburn, the American Enterprise Institute's Ben Wattenberg, the National Association of Manufacturers' Keith McCoy, and Environmental Defense's Mark Brownstein.

Jim DiPeso of Republicans for Environmental Protection doesn't think that Whitman's speaking...

http://www.prwatch.org/node/6370
Center for Media and Democracy

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 12:29 PM

14. Thank you, NYC_SKP and kristopher!

I've been thinking the same thing about Energy News myself. It's good to get the actual lowdown on them. The stuff on their site is loonie toons. Their sources are questionable, to say the least.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:09 AM

6. Further commentary on above comments

 




SHOW ME THE LIE, PLEASE

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 01:28 PM

17. Thus proving Kristopher's point.

Thanks!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 11:47 AM

10. I believe the OP.

 

It only makes sense the wild life is affected by the irradiated ocean waters. How can it not be affected?

Thank you for posting this, Demeter.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 12:51 PM

15. The mathmatics of dissipation of any toxin over distance nearly proves this to be false.

 

Dissipation occurs quickly as you move away from the source, in an exponential fashion.

If it's that toxic 4,600 miles away, then it should be 4 times as concentrated 2,300 miles, 16 times as deadly at 1,150 miles, 64 times as concentrated at 575 miles out...

256 times as bad at 288 miles, 1,024 times as powerful or more anywhere within 144 miles of Fukushima.

But I'm not reading about any horrific effects within 144 miles of Fukushima, nothing that wasn't happening before.

Below is from a National Geographic article, "Fukushima's Radioactive Water Leak: What You Should Know":

Q: What are the potential risks to humans, and who might be affected by the contamination?

This is a murky question, because it’s not that easy to determine whether health problems that may not show up for decades are caused by exposure to radioactive contamination. A report released in February by the World Health Organization, which was based upon estimates of radiation exposure in the immediate wake of the accident, concluded that it probably would cause "somewhat elevated" lifetime cancer rates among the local population. But figuring out the effect of years of exposure to lower levels of radioactive contamination leaking into the ocean is an even more complicated matter.

Minoru Takata, director of the Radiation Biology Center at Kyoto University, told the Wall Street Journal that the radioactive water doesn’t pose an immediate health threat unless a person goes near the damaged reactors. But over the longer term, he’s concerned that the leakage could cause higher rates of cancer in Japan.

Marine scientist Buesseler believes that the leaks pose little threat to Americans, however. Radioactive contamination, he says, quickly is reduced "by many orders of magnitude" after it moves just a few miles from the original source, so that by the time it would reach the U.S. coast, the levels would be extremely low.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/08/130807-fukushima-radioactive-water-leak/

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to darkangel218 (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 01:27 PM

16. How can it not be affected?

You do realize that we used to set off nuclear weapons in that ocean, right? No containment... no almost total limitation to iodine (long since gone) and cesium (TONS of plutonium for instance)... and we did it hundreds of times.

The amount of radiation from Fukushima reaching those parts of the Pacific is MUCH lower than the radiation that's left over from that testing and MUCH lower than the natural radiation of the ocean itself. The real questions much start with "how could it possibly be affected?"... not "how could it not?".

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 12:24 PM

12. So that I don't have to go to the woo woo site,

can you give me a reputable link that shows the higher radiation levels in our Pacific coastal waters and in our air that is a direct result of Fukushima?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 12:29 PM

13. "Hey. The Dark Ages called.

They want us back. (from the comment thread)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Original post)

Tue Dec 31, 2013, 02:41 PM

18. MARK YOUR CALENDAR

I agree with Kris; ENENEWS is not a valid news source.

Locking.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink