17 in U.S. Navy Treated for Contamination

[jpak]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/14military.html?src=mv

WASHINGTON — American Navy officials in Japan said early Monday that 17 military personnel who had been aboard three helicopters assisting in the earthquake relief effort had been exposed to low levels of contamination.
Related

Cmdr. Jeff A. Davis, a spokesman for the American Seventh Fleet in Japan, said the Navy personnel — who apparently had flown through a radioactive plume from a damaged nuclear power plant — had been ordered to dispose of their uniforms and to undergo a decontamination scrub that had successfully removed radioactive particles.

“They received very, very low levels of contamination,” Commander Davis said in a telephone interview from Japan early Monday.

“It certainly is not cause for alarm,” he said. “It is something we have to watch very carefully and make sure we are able to monitor, and to mitigate against this environmental hazard.”

<more>

[DCofVA]

1. “It certainly is not cause for alarm,”

Probably the most common last words ever spoken.

[eShirl]

2. along with "What could possibly go wrong?"

[FBaggins]

3. Yes... there are thousands dead and missing

and over a million without power, clean water, or (in many cases) shelter...

...but hey, some Navy guys had to take a shower and lost a uniform.

By all means... let's focus on that.

[madokie]

5. Some of us have no problem with keeping tabs on many things in all directions

I'm not one dimensional and neither are many here. In fact I'd say about 80 percent of the people who post on here are against nuclear energy. There's about a dozen or so of loud ones who try to drown out the rest of us with bull but their number is small in comparison when you take a count.
Which group are you in?

[FBaggins]

6. The small group that's right?

I wasn't aware that reality was subject to democratic referendum. :)

Some of us have no problem with keeping tabs on many things in all directions

It's not an issue of keeping tabs on many things. It's an issue of proper perspective and priorities. If there's a series of horrendus events that combine for massive devestation, it's just a little strange to hear calls for big policy changes on one of the areas that hasn't done much damage (perhaps "yet").

Why not propose that we implement a disasster recovery policy that places 1,000-gal containers of fresh water all around the countryside (including one per home)? We can also mandate backup generators be a mandatory fixture in home building codes. That would have saved some lives this week (and probably many more in weeks to come), but wouldn't be nearly as substantial an expense as shifting away from nuclear power.

[SpoonFed]

7. No. I disagree.

I think we should ignore the fact that there may or may not be some sort of nuclear industry related radiological disaster going on right now that may take decades or much longer to recover from and only focus on the effects of the quake and tsunami where such effects are clearly reported and easy to wave a convenient Internet hand over.

For instance, I assume everybody's hungry and thirsty, I hope they get emergency supplies brought in soon.
Done!

[FBaggins]

8. May?

Why not concentrate on what is?

[One_Life_To_Give]

4. 5000+ People with a Reactor onboard.

I am thinking this announcement has more to do with informing the ship that if a ships radiation detector should alert. It's not a sign the onboard reactor has a problem.