News Stories

Death Plume From Fukushima Hit US Hard

The radioactive plume from the meltdown of Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant on March 11, 2011, due to a 9.0 earthquake which led to a massive tsunami, was initially reported as harmless by the time it reached the US. But new statistics show that this was NOT the case: An estimated 14,000 deaths in the United States have now been linked to the radioactive fallout from the disaster, and the impact is seen as being roughly comparable to 16,500 radiation-related deaths that took place in the 17 weeks after the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986. EPA measurements found levels of radiation in air, water, and milk hundreds of times above normal across the US.

Infants were the hardest hit, and continuing research will probably reveal an even higher death count. The cities that had the most excess infants deaths were Boise, Idaho (with 390 deaths), Kansas City (with 200 deaths), Salt Lake City (with 190 deaths), Jacksonville, Florida (with 150 deaths), Olympia, Washington (with 125 deaths, and Boston (with 92 deaths).

On the Market Watch website, Joseph Mangano and Janette Sherman quote epidemiologist Joseph Mangano as saying, "This study of Fukushima health hazards is the first to be published in a scientific journal. It raises concerns, and strongly suggests that health studies continue, to understand the true impact of Fukushima in Japan and around the world. Findings are important to the current debate of whether to build new reactors, and how long to keep aging ones in operation."

Wow! Where else are you going to hear this kind of news? If you like what you read on unknowncountry.com, please make sure we're still here in 2012 to keep on reporting the truth--and the only way to do that is to subscribe today!



Here is audio from Alex Smith, a long time environmental reporter in Vancouver. The last part is an interview with Janette Sherman, a coauthor of the report.

FUKUSHIMA: TRUTH AND CONSEQUENCES

http://www.ecoshock.net/eshock11/ES_111227_Show_LoFi.mp3

Unbelievable, literally unbelievable. Have a look at the following link and decide for yourself.

http://nuclearpoweryesplease.org/blog/2011/06/17/shame-on-you-janette-sh...

The publication, " International Journal of Health Services" is not a medical journal. Have a look for yourself and come to your own conclusion.

Oh dear Dreamland - not up to your usual high editorial standards. This story is so false - as evidenced above. The real story is how few deaths from Fukushima (literally none) there have been.

Oh dear Wulfrunian and Phil55, must thou be utter douches? It seems now all the CIA spies are coming out of the woodwork...

You are right to fear coverups and disinformation in general but I am sorry - this story is physically impossible from both basic biology and physics.

Maybe you (BearingTheDark) should spend more time researching some of the questionable things that appear in print and refrain from name calling.

This seems to be one of many "news" items on here that are reported as fact, or where the facts have been misconstrued. I expected more and I like this site, but I don't think I need to pay for it anymore.

Look, I understand you're all disturbed by this news story, however it doesn't mean you have to treat it with derision and fear...

...and as for you, "leanbarton"...why ARE you here?

I have learned silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind; yet strange, I am ungrateful to these teachers.

KAHLIL GIBRAN, Sand and Foam

Leanbarton -please keep supporting this site. The important thing here (apart from the wonderful people (e.g. Carollee), community, archives etc) is the way that new knowledge or perspectives can be debated, tested or explored without the usual assumptions or restrictions we often have. I take the news stories not as offering implicit fact but as bringing important areas for investigation or consideration as part of the unfolding of the hidden worlds (and I sense that is often what Whitley is striving for). On this occasion my own view was that the starting supposition was based on a false premise of actual science to match the implied gravity of the headline or have a worthy debate.

Thanks Carollee, we needed that.

I'll continue to support the site as I can, but would like to see a little more information vetting though. And of course (as I had to re-learn recently via embarrassment from an Unknown Country share on Facebook), we should vet info for ourselves too, including stuff from here.

BearingTheDark, The great thing about this community is that I can be a member AND disagree with something. Please calm down.

Thanks for the response link Phil55. Without analysing the raw data myself, it appears that this report of increased mortality is a case of cherry picking data. If so, then it may be more harmful than helpful to understanding any negative or positive consequences of this ongoing tragedy on human and ecosystem health. I expect the negative to far outweigh the positive, but would be happy to be wrong about that. Sorry about posting the ecoshock link without doing more research. I hope that accurate analysis of the effects of Fukushima occurs, and that all parties involved are open and honest.

As with just about everything anymore, careful examination of facts is absolutely necessary. I don't doubt for a second that release of radiation or other toxins can be harmful. What I object to more than anything is the apparent readiness of certain radio/print personalities to accept almost anything said as if it were a fact, and then push it on to the gullible masses as fact. Time and again I have heard this on C2C, Dreamland, etc. I have heard everything from how evil pharma companies are to NASA knowing a priori that the space shuttle was going to explode. I have heard RH spew forth unsubstantiated claim after unsubstantiated claim with no challenge. It is truly sickening, yet it goes on and on. The only reason that I continue with this and other similar venues that do explore the edge, is for the few and far between gems that are polished every so often. My ardent wish is that far more care be taken with what is put into print and on the air. Sometimes not having a show or an article says far more than the crapola du jour that is far too often the rule, rather than the exception.

[I expected more and I like this site, but I don't think I need to pay for it anymore.]
[Posted by leanbarton on 10 Jan 2012 at 03:59]

[BearingTheDark, The great thing about this community is that I can be a member AND disagree with something. Please calm down.]
[Posted by leanbarton on 10 Jan 2012 at 15:05]

Leanbarton, I was actually quite calm when I had saved my posting in response to yours. It is you who, I believe, needs to "please calm down", especially with all the bitching and moaning coming from your part, as well as from a few others. Telling us that you're not going to support this site, because of a few news stories, reeks of ego-centric indignation, as if most of us we're going to give a care in the world about your departure. If you decide to leave, that's your choice, not mine, and there will BE others to replace you. Trust in the fact that I won't miss you.

Their will always be fuzzy math and cherry picking input. Radiation is a sick puppy and now is the time for the visitors to step in and help, but will they? When we exploded all our (U.S.) atomic devices in the Pacific atoll tests in the 40's and 50's did they step in to (clean up contamination)? Well maybe, but to what extent? Hopefully they are involved on levels more than we know. They probably are.

I'm not saying whether it's true or not but if you simply read the Market Watch source, you'll see that they didn't report, as cited in the Unknown Country summary, deaths in different cities but rather concentration of iodine-131 in precipitation per liter of water.

Subscribe to Unknowncountry sign up now