UCLA: “California Thyroid Cancer Incidence Well Above National Average”. — FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT the most obvious cause!

Colorado Rocky Mountains – Jan. 18, 2016

[NOTE: This post was edited later in the day after posting. -mvb]

!!!–> Shortlink for sharing on social media:  https://goo.gl/cgWu6N

 The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who,

in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.” 

Dante Alighieri

RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT is starting to cause statistically significant cancer increases in the USA.  Chernobyl data suggests much worse is yet to come.  This blogpost offers documentation to back up that assertion.

For the long-term quality of life, it is of utmost importance that the misguided nuclear industry is shut down and an all-hands-on deck is declared to face the massive challenge of decommissioning all of the worlds large nuclear fission reactors and find long-term fool-proof solutions for the increasing piles of nuclear waste.

  – DISCLAIMER

 [h/t Kevin Blanch]  — The news came out months ago, Dec. 9, 2015, see UCLA newsroom @ http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ucla-study-finds-advanced-thyroid-cancer-rate-in-some-california-counties-is-well-above-national-average. The study was published online by the Journal of Surgical Research.

Screenshot excerpt [Click image for full article]:

UCLAstudy

It was picked up by ABC Los Angeles, which aired the gist of it in their Jan. 14, 2016 report, @ http://abc7.com/1159674/  : thyroid cancer cases have recently risen significantly above the national average, and that there’s likely “an environmental factor”.

In what looks like an irrational apparent negative bias towards the most obvious, the researchers are mainly looking at ‘pesticides’ as a possible cause, might look at ‘radon’, and recommend quitting smoking tobacco products…  [Click image to watch video at ABC):

ABC_LosAngeles.gif

ABC: “While radiation is a known risk factor, Dr. Harari is now looking into whether pesticides might be behind California’s higher numbers.  [Harari:] “I believe, based on the geographic difference that there’s something environmental.

Um… What about Fukushima?  Seems like the most likely culprit.  Why?

Straight from the UCLA news report, a detail not quoted by ABC, highlighted by me in this excerpt:

THE ONLY KNOWN ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR

FOR THYROID CANCER

IS RADIATION EXPOSURE. 

OnlyKnownFactor

Get that:  The only known environmental factor for thyroid cancer is radiation exposure.   Okay?  Got it?  Why they would consider this factor “unlikely to fully explain the phenomenon” is rather baffling.

{IMPORTANT NUANCE added after original posting:

Because the ABC Report that caught my attention first only mentioned, “Harari studied 10 years of information.”, and not the more detailed fact that these UCLA scientists examined county-by-county data “from the California Cancer Registry for 27,000 people who had been diagnosed with thyroid cancer from 1999 to 2008,” I admit I jumped the gun.  To a point.  The correlation with Fukushima modeled (and some measured) fallout deposition, however, is so outright weird that -“sorry”- I lean towards this being part of a long term cover-up strategy.  You may roll your eyes all you want.  It’s darn weird that 10 years of data would find a correlation with fallout that hadn’t happened yet.

IF… –(This is not certain.  Few things are certain)– IF there is a strong statistical correlation with Fukushima fallout deposition (Indications shared further in this post suggest this is the case), then there’s a few possibilities. 

1) Pure coincidence. 

2) Not impossible: There’s some correlation with fallout from OTHER nuclear accidents, which due to roughly similar precipitation patterns and topological features settled in roughly the same areas.  The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (“SONGS”) is a likely culprit for pre-Fukushima radioIodine releases. 

(See http://sanonofresafety.org/radiation-monitoring/ and http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/07/13/san-onofre/, etc. See also my hindsight afterthoughts at the end of this post and in the comment section)

Conspiracy3) Also not impossible, and in combination with (2), I’d say this may be the most likely case, especially given this is a UCLA study (the very university that kept Iodine-131 kelp data secret for an entire year following the Fukushima accident (see below), and then waited until most radioisotopes had decayed away or dispersed through the ecosystem to be part of launching “Kelp Watch” in 2013, to come to the conclusion, a conclusion which had already been announced (talk about biased!) before any data was in: that Fukushima had “no measurable effect” on the California coast’s ecosystems.  (They accomplished this by focusing on radioCesium, for which they mysteriously forgot to test in 2011… Or so we’re supposed to believe…). And for some untold mystery, -now, in the post-Fukushima era-, they chose to study data from 1999 to 2008, (what about a 2011-2016 trend?), which, to boot “almost hokus-spokus” becomes ‘news’ almost a decade after those data were already known…   A little strange, I’d say.  

With so many people concerned about Fukushima, that does actually leave some “pondering space”, to say the least, for this being part of an actual conspiracy.   Also, the fact that ABC LA spoke of “recent research”, yet did not point out the period they were talking about, is suspect.  

The Plume Gate documents PROVE an elaborate conspiracy IS actually being carried out (links included below).  You have to be asleep at the wheel to not have caught on to that yet.  

So, in that vein of possibility, this UCLA report very well might fit into a conspiracy.  Although this may not even be necessary, data used by scientists can be altered before they reach the scientists..  Statistical tricks can further bend results in favor of preferred outcomes, etc.  The National Cancer Registry is unlikely immune to manipulations.  It is not necessary for the scientists involved to be consciously aware of a long-term cover-up plan. 

One thing that adds to my suspicion that this official academic report, which is given attention by an (in general) extremely pro-nuclear-biased media (most of it owned by corporations heavily invested in nuclear technology…), is that it makes a significant effort to off-hand dismiss radiation, and stresses tobacco smoking as the #1 cancer cause.  Further research will focus on pesticides and radon…

Thát right there is a smoking gun (to me, and I admit to my bias.  But don’t let my bias get in the way of giving this a serious consideration) that this fits into a larger scheme.  This added commentary continues at the end of this post.  I may add additional thoughts in the comment section.

I’ll leave the rest of this post as-posted-originally, because I suspect there’s more to this than made the report or the news…}

Let me highlight some information pertinent to this situation, including fallout maps and other absolutely relevant clues.

For starters: WE KNOW from the Plume Gate documents that the west coast was heavily hit with radiation and we know that the US government went all-out to cover up the severity of this disaster.  For some basic documentation of the cover-up, see:

Also, WE KNOW that Southern California specifically was blasted with massive amounts of Iodine-131.  Instead of immediately alerting the public, the data was concealed until well after the hot iodine-laden radioactive clouds had long passed over.  Barely any extra testing.  And very limited testing.  Hush hush…  Example:

ScientificAmerican_Excerpt_March30_2012

Where precisely the fallout hotspots were on land was either never determined, or kept secret, possibly to prevent massive financial damage to California’s gigantic agricultural industries.

Screenshot of Fukushima Diary article (screenshot taken on Jan. 18, 2016; Also notice the recent headlines to the right):

FukushimaDiary_CaliforniaPistachio

  • And then there’s the modeled (not measured) fallout, which may at least give a hint of areas that might have received more fallout than others.

What did the fallout deposition models show right after the March 11, 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Catastrophe began? 

Well… In short: they make it overly clear that if an uptick in cancer incidence were to show up in the US,  the West Coast,  and parts of Central and Southern California in particular, is the most likely place where this may be observed.

(Other areas where upticks are more likely, based on the extremely limited data we do have, might very well include pockets throughout the Rocky Mountain region, from Calgary, Alberta, to places in Idaho, Utah, Colorado and Kansas); See (Jan. 23, 2012) Fukushima Fallout in Calgary (Alberta, Canada) was among highest in North America, too. and (April 16, 2011)  Highest I-131 Radiation Fallout in US from Fukushima: in Utah, Idaho, California and Kansas.)

To borrow from my blog post, (May 1, 2012), Fallout Maps for the United States:

  1. The extremely limited precipitation sample testing from the USGS showed that for both I-131 and Cs-137, California showed peak measurements.  When you keep in mind that fallout settled very erratically, it is near-certain that the hottest hotspots were missed, due to lack of sampling spots in both time and space:

usgs_i131only_bqpersqmetermap_usa

What’s striking is that the second-highest I-131 measurement is right around the area listed as having the highest aggressive thyroid cancer uptick.  Look further below for the locations of Alpine, Amador, Calvaderas, Sutter Counties marked on map.

That’s Iodine-131 data above, and Cesium-137 data, below:

cs137_usgs_mappage241

In this case, the highest Cs-137 measurement was found roughly between Santa Barbara and Imperial Counties.  Most areas were left untested.

Deposition can vary greatly over very short distances.  In Japan, it was found that there were incredible differences sometimes even between two sides of the same street.  (see the archives of Fukushima Diary.)  It’s thát erratic.  So, as a consequence, these USGS detections just show very general clues to where far worse deposition might have occurred.

As I pointed out in my Fallout Maps of the United States blogpost, a comparison between detailed maps of initial Iodine-131 deposition in Northern Japan and the few USGS data points show that some parts of the North-American West coast were hit harder than areas just hundred of kilometers from the spewing Fukushima molten-down & exploded-out reactor complex in Japan:

This is a map of early I-131 deposition in Japan:

wa98sample_inperspectivewith_iodine131_speedi_march25_map

Marked in red on the map legend above is the record level found on the US West Coast.

japan_usa_map_i131related

 For more, see that blogpost.

!–> In that light, the fallout deposition simulation (not measurement!) by the French CEREA remains interesting:

Click to see the animated version at http://cerea.enpc.fr/en/fukushima.htm

The California counties mentioned inthe UCLA study with elevated aggressive thyroid incidence:

california-county-map.jpg

Combined:

WestCoastZoom_colorAccen_withThyroidCancerUptickCountiest__Accumulated_total_deposition_ground_fukushima-2.gif

The actual deposition may match the thyroid cancer upticks far more accurately.  In fact, the cancer increases are probably our best clue to where the hotspots actually are/were.  (!-> Remember: this is MODELLED, not measured.  The US government went out of their way to not monitor the situation publicly.)

Obviously, to off-hand declare radioactive fallout “unlikely” to fully explain this is clearly an irrational bias against what is actually quite evident:

Fallout is causing cancers far outside Japan!

Except for Imperial County near the US Mexican border, 5 of the 7 counties with aggressive thyroid cancer upticks happen to fall smack in the thick of, or véry close to, the modeled fallout deposition areas.  The worst affected areas are in a part of the Sierra Nevada foothills and mountain range, which according to that French model is exactly where the worst fallout would be expected.  Also striking is that the south on the coast, Santa Barbara is close to where the kelp was found with extremely high I-131 content.

FukuBeach.jpg

People in San Francisco trying to get the government to stop putting its head in the sand re. Fukushima fallout, in 2013.  The consequences are beginning to become undeniable.

San Francisco is a bit of a borderline case as far as matching the modeled fallout map.  But in the case of San Francisco, it also not impossible that it may be affected by migration to the city from worse-hit regions.  (It is also not uncommon for people with medical needs to move to an area with better care.)

In that train of thought, I’d like to draw attention to the curious case of New York having seen upticks in thyroid cancer DECADES after the Chernobyl nuclear accident in the Ukraine in 1986:

NY Times (April 20, 2006) reported that Ukraine immigrants caused leap in New York  Thyroid cancer cases.  (And it’s not that New York is full of Ukrainians…)  So for those who will doubt anything that doesn’t get the stamp of approval from the industry-embedded “regulatory” agencies (IAEA, NRC, JAIF, etc.), try explaining all this with the dominant ICRP model (see @ Radiation Exposure Effects) …

!–> And this graph, below, from Belarus (Sourced from http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2015/11/graph-of-day-thyroid-cancer-incidence.html) shows that right around now is indeed when we would expect to begin seeing the first statistically significant consequences of radioactive fallout.  I’ve inserted the years since 2011 to give an extra clue, just in case your’re one of those baffled scientists on which the obvious is somehow lost:
Thyroid_cancer-incidence-belarus_image%255B5%255D_annot1MVB

 

Now, why would they then want to focus on ‘pesticides and radon’?

Radon can be both natural and what they call “enhanced natural”, meaning it was added artificially, as part of the decay chains of various kinds of Uranium and Plutonium, both which were (and likely still are being) released in massive quantities by the ongoing Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear catastrophe.  So upticks in radioIodine are likely going to be accompanied by upticks in “enhanced natural” Radon and Radon progeny (which includes the highly carcinogenic Polonium-210 in its decay chain).

!->  Very pertinent to this issue are the links embedded in this illuminating article by Dr. Mercola, @ http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/02/10/radioactive-fertilizer.aspx  Connect the dots if you dare:

!-> Feb. 10, 2014,  Radioactive Fertilizer—The Surprising Primary Cause of Lung Cancer in Smokers.  Screenshot excerpt:

Mercola_Po210

So, consider the following:   Areas around Santa Barbara, as well as parts of the California Sierra Nevadas have ALWAYS had elevated Radon levels.  They did not cause elevated thyroid cancers.  They don’t just start causing thyroid cancers all of a sudden.  The thyroid concentrates Iodine (radioactive or not), NOT Radon.

SO check this out, for a little additional background:

us-radon-map

Do you see how PERFECTLY this matches with Uranium concentrations found on geology maps [sarc.]:

uranium_concentrations

Now…, if consider the Iodine-131 fallout, you can “fill in the non-correlation”…  The below maps shows the Iodine-131 fallout  (by now that i131 has all  long decayed away) directly caused by the Nevada Test Site, where in the period 1945-1992, just north of Las Vegas in Southern Nevada some 1,000 nuclear bombs were exploded:

oe_map

Get it?    Yes, they’re thát sick:  you can use Radon as a scapegoat to blame cancer clusters on, because Radon is also going to increase in areas with increased fallout deposition.

There are no such detailed maps of Radon predating the nuclear bomb testing era.

To boot, as I pointed out in my April 14, 2014 shredding-nuclear-propanda blogpost, “Reality Check: Debunking The Wall Street Journal’s “Radiation Reality Check””:

“In 1997, the National Cancer Institute reported that the Cold War detonations at the Nevada Test Site had polluted nearly the whole of the country with drifting airborne radioactive iodine, creating somewhere between 10,000 and 75,000 cases of childhood thyroid cancer. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that of the nearly 600,000 Americans dying of cancer every year, 11,000 will be because of those tests.”

“Ha ha…” Yeah…  Nuclear fallout is harmless alright [sarc.], IF you ignore the tens of thousands of childhood thyroid cancers, that is…  Not to mention all the rest.

According to the US EPA themselves, http://www.epa.gov/radon/health-risk-radon, “Radon is responsible for about 21,000 lung cancer deaths every year.  About 2,900 of these deaths occur among people who have never smoked.

By the way… (Sept. 13, 2013) – Slow-motion Nuclear War: 2.5 years of Fukushima released 1 Hiroshima Cesium Fallout Equivalent EVERY 7 HOURS.

[Sigh…] 

  • EXTRAS:

To get a better idea of how far the deception goes, also consider some of these posts I put together over the years:

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

ADDED AFTER POSTING:

SO… If you’ve read all of the above, and explored the links… Allow me to continue my added commentary in the vein of a possible, if not likely (given the players (both academic and media-wise), conspiracy.  I’m not claiming this is “The Truth”.  It’s just a thought:

  If your aim were to solidify, “backed by scientific data”, the official assertion that Fukushima fallout had zero harmful effects on North America (as the Obama administration announced while initial findings already indicated that the opposite was more likely – See Plume Gate), then it makes sense to somehow “mysteriously” find increases in thyroid cancer PREDATING Fukushima in exactly those areas hardest hit with Fukushima fallout. 

If you can then find a statistical correlation with pesticides (and where pesticide use is heavy, fertilizer use is most likely more prevalent too… thus more Po-210, etc…), and along with that you focus on Radon (which you can make sound to be “all-natural” (a la the way Ken Buesseler makes Polonium-210 sound all-natural), then you’ve set the stage to dismiss further evidence of the effects of Fukushima fallout.  Would be pretty clever.  

I don’t think that the fact that they stress tobacco smoking as the #1 cancer cause, in the same breath as they’re announcing they going to look at “pesticides and radon”, if a coincidence, when the issue presented is THYROID CANCER.

Some more on Po-210:   Polonium-210 and lung cancer: http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jo/2011/860103/

“The alpha-radioactive polonium 210 (Po-210) is one of the most powerful carcinogenic agents of tobacco smoke and is responsible for the histotype shift of lung cancer from squamous cell type to adenocarcinoma. According to several studies, the principal source of Po-210 is the fertilizers used in tobacco plants, which are rich in polyphosphates containing radium (Ra-226) and its decay products, lead 210 (Pb-210) and Po-210.  Tobacco leaves accumulate Pb-210 and Po-210 through their trichomes, and Pb-210 decays into Po-210 over time. With the combustion of the cigarette smoke becomes radioactive and Pb-210 and Po-210 reach the bronchopulmonary apparatus, especially in bifurcations of segmental bronchi. In this place, combined with other agents, it will manifest its carcinogenic activity, especially in patients with compromised mucousciliary clearance. …”

I bet they’ll find a “until now unknown” correlation between Radon and thyroid cancer.  Given how they’ve played this game of deception so far, something that far-fetched wouldn’t surprise me anymore.   

So, for now, I’ll nuance my stance:  The link between these aggressive thyroid cancers and fallout isn’t ‘obvious’, as I stated above.  It’s a mystery.   Very weird mystery indeed.   But I can already tell from the direction they’re taking this research, that they will come to a véry predictable outcome, one that will be helpful to dismiss “nutters like myself”.

  • Feb 12, 2016 KCRA 3 aired this television newscast, which also did not mention the study period (what is up with that?):

KCRA3_ThyroidCancerCalifornia_Feb12_2016.gif

!-> @ http://www.kcra.com/news/thyroid-cancer-cases-rising-in-northern-california-communities/37902808

But it did flash a map of California (at an angle and moving away quickly), showing the counties with higher thyroid cancer rates:

California_ThyroidCancerUpticksMap.gif

  • CONCLUSION (ADDED, Jan. 19, 2016):

The most likely case (see also my later comments) is that there was a major radiological release at least 4 years prior to 2008, possibly a covered-up accident in California itself (like a major leak from San Onofre’s NPPs, or another facility somewhere), that due to precipitation and geography was deposited in regions that overlap with where the cancer upticks will show (or already beginning to show as well) due to the Fukushima fallout. 

Take it however you will. 

Additional links:

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

I can only hope that somehow “wasting my time” putting this all together is helpful…

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

A list of other nuclear-related posts can be found in chronological order

in my Nuclear Blog Posts Archive.

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

Disclaimer

— — — — — — —   — — —  — — —   — — — — — — —

FlagMVB

If you are viewing this page on any website other than allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/ it IS plagiarized.  Please let me know.  All original content is copyright © Michaël Van Broekhoven, administrator of the Allegedly Apparent Blog.  Content cited, quoted etc. from other sources is under the respective rights of that content owner.  For more details, see my Disclaimer, Share Policy and Fair Use Notice.   If you wish to reproduce any of my content in full or in more than a paragraph or quote, please contact me first, to probably obtain no such permission.
[Last updated (meant to be final, except for typos I might spot later]: conclusion added:  Jan. 19, 2016, 12:00 noon (Colorado) Mountain Time.]
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to UCLA: “California Thyroid Cancer Incidence Well Above National Average”. — FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT the most obvious cause!

  1. c’on guys bad grammar throughout and “aired this below report, Jan. 14, 2017,” hasn’t occurred yet, makes people stop reading right there. FIX this!!!

  2. MVB says:

    What? Didn’t I fix that one yet?

    I often fix things in the days following a post, and I appreciate it when errors are pointed out. But fucking chill out, lady. Grammar pissing you off while the governmet [sic] is lying to you. Get your priorities straight… Jeez.

    Besides, I take liberty with commas. ;-)

    Point me out some more, will you, you English expert you,
    talking to someone for whom English is not even his first language…

    Much appreciated.

  3. MVB says:

    In hindsight… It does SUCK to spend all this time making a case for FUKUSHIMA fallout being the likely culprit, only to find out that the data the study is about is from BEFORE the Fukushima disaster began… Instead of just deleting my blogpost in an “Oops, I was wrong” admission, I STILL, after discovering the study period predates Fukushima… I still clung to my bias and went on finding “a conspiracy” in all of this. Part of me laughs at myself for doing so.

    But… it’s actually part of the process of searching for truth: one puzzle piece fits with another… and the emerging picture resembled a certain landscape, or so it seemed. But it’s only one part of a very complex puzzle and often it’s too early to declare what the whole puzzle actually might show. I made a case for what at first “resembled a certain landscape”. I scetched a map based upon impressions. Obviously the map is not the territory. But I may still have pointed at some things that actually ARE part of the territory…

    Half a day after posting this, now after midnight on Tuesday January 19, 2016, here’s what I think: The upticks are not ‘fabricated’ with somehow falsified data, they are what they are: interesting. But radiation IS and remains the near-certain cause of these upticks. Obviously not Fukushima fallout, that hadn’t happened yet, but fallout from perhaps the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (“SONGS”) near San Luis Obispo. And it may very well be that deposition occured in roughly similar patterns as seen after Fukushima, when Fukushima fallout made landfall entering from that part of the California coast, as you can see in the CEREA model, also included in the blogpost. “SONGS” has been shut down due to various serious safety issues, but it was operational during and before the 1999-2008 data period. It’s one of several possibilities. It seems a likely one. In any case, the thyroid cancer increases pre-Fukushima very strongly suggest a cover-up of a major radiological release in the up-to-a-decade period preceding the onset of the cancer increases.

    One aspect of the “conspiracy” I came up with, though, I do stand by. They are actively seeking a scientific-sounding way to dismiss the surge in cancers that can be expected due to Fukushima fallout over the next several decades and beyond. It seems quite likely that they’ll go out of their way to find a “statistically relevant” link between the aggressive thyroid upticks, and Radon, perhaps to be established with post-Fukushima regional soil samples. It will be very interesting to see how they’ll conduct their further research.

    Although they may focus on pesticide use, I think it not going to be the pesticides themselves per se, but the Uranium-trace-containing fertilizers used alongside, as pointed to in the blogpost already. I do think they are intentionally seeking to establish links that can come in handy to dismiss the actual cause of the thyroid cancers, which is already known: radiation exposure. If they can pull this of, those studies will come in handy to explain away future cancer increases: Blame it on pesticide/fertilizer-induced Radon progeny in crops.

    Anyways. I’ll leave at this, for now. It’s definitely a story to follow up on when they get further along in their research…

  4. bo says:

    I totally appreciate the layer upon layer of nuance in your thinking. And yet the world will only have these 2 knee jerk responses:
    – ‘FUKUSHIMA ! THE WORLD WILL END!’ Bang Bang Bang.. (banging pots and pans)
    And
    -‘This data is pre-Fukushima, dumb-ASS!’ (rolls eyes)

    OF COURSE it’s a plot. When msm picks up radiation related story, there is ALWAYS a plot. Like the mutant daisies, monster godzilla fish, and now this. They lay a bait trap, wait for anti nuke to snap onto it, then they toss it altogether into the trash pile.

    Recently Japan Times reported ‘Rice near Fukushima was definitely confirmed to have been contaminated from debris removal in 2013’ This is totally facetious psy-op too. The headline is carefully engineered – AS IF rice isn’t contaminated NOW, currently, always, and widely beyond just ‘near the plant!’

  5. MVB says:

    Thanks for understanding. I re-watched the ABC news piece ( http://abc7.com/1159674/ ) and it’s really incredible how they’re making a case for RECENT increases, having a patient who just recovered speak, and all. Nowhere is it suggested that the significant increase in thyroid cancer that was studied was from a 10 year period that ended in 2008. Unbelievable “honey trap” indeed.

    It seems likely that the thyroid incidence is spiking in California in the past couple years, far worse than in the 1999-2008 study period, due to the effects of a local radiological release from 15-20 years ago (which obviously was covered up) being compounded with the effects of Fukushima fallout (which they continue to work very hard to keep covered up).

    If anyone has the most recent data, do please leave a link.

  6. In my opinion if they are looking to “find long-term fool-proof solutions for the increasing piles of nuclear waste.” I would throw all of in the nearest Volcano and put it back where it came from. You pulled it out of the earth for energy, you can put that waste back in the earth through a fire portal which is also energy. Who wrote the book, “How dispose of Nuclear Waste for Dummies?”

  7. MVB says:

    I’m glad you’re not in charge of waste disposal…

  8. bo says:

    Apologies for posting a slightly angry toned post.. too muvh coffee.. and also I don’t mean any ill will to the researchers who researched the rice contamination – I just was pointing out how those who make headlines engineer the tone. The researchers aren’t guilty. Also, I wasn’t forcing you into a conclusion that it’s ‘definitely a trap’ either.

    Similar:
    I remember Marco Kaltofen had just published data about West Lake Landfill in St Louis, and even though the paper was just data and he had not concluded any such thing, Wall Street Journal gave this headline ‘Radioactive Fire Has Most Likely Migrated Off-site’…!’

  9. MVB says:

    You weren’t forcing anything, Bo.

    The ABC piece was trap to throw off Fukushima truth seekers, to then dismiss them due to a key detail not mentioned in the TV report. It obvious. How on Earth they could have left out that detail about the study period? They do think about how they frame things. That was on purpose. There have been many such traps. This was a good one. But at the same time, the researchers are clearly suggesting the upward trend is continuing. I’d like to see the 2011-2015 data and see if the rate of increase increases too.

  10. MVB says:

    Same for the original (Dec. 10, 2015) REUTERS press release: no mention of the study period.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cancer-california-idUSKBN0TT2YN20151210

  11. Pingback: Wake the Fuck up California! The Nuclear Cartel is MURDERING You! | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  12. John Montgomery says:

    Someone should tell Predator what his Mrs. is doing now.

  13. Dud says:

    Quote: … “why would they then want to focus on ‘pesticides and radon’?”

    A hypothesis might be – to distract from the real causal factors relating to Iodine-131.
    Shame is also a powerful force for these ‘tools’ to use, which is loosely reminiscant of how the Radium Girls were horribly mistreated.

    One interesting factoid (from wikipedia) is that 131I is apparently used in fracking processes.

    I found these posts by XdrFox 4 years ago (concerning Feb 2008), then read your post on ENEnews, and felt compelled to put finger to keyboard (as putting pen to paper doesn’t apply, but i digress …).
    http://enenews.com/forum-discussion-thread-jan-24-30-2012/comment-page-4#comment-195561

    Am not certain if it applies, as i don’t know what the animations are modelling … ??? If it is what i think it is, it explains some shitty health that year, as apparently, even here in the Fraser Valley, we are downwinders too. A close relative had a lump on thyroid diagnosed recently. Nobody here seems to be monitoring my nieces for thyroid implications. :( :( :(

    XdrFox prolly knows more. Bobby1 prolly remembers what other organs concentrate Iodine (hypothalamus???).

    I don’t want to anger Bobby, whom i much respect & admire, with my presence on his blog, as he probably hates me & i don’t want to cause him any trouble. See his latest post from November 2015.
    Am still puzzled if it was indeed En form able that sent him “hate mail” within a couple of days, concerning my uncovering of commenter email addresses being disclosed via that web site. I did disclose that to the web site owner, and delayed public disclosure for well over a month.
    Has Enf. halted the disclosure of commenter email addresses via that web site? I don’t know. If not, i wish he would stop. Ask stock more about that bit of infamy, if you feel compelled. In addition, Gravatar apparently takes email addresses and only performs a simple MD5 hash upon them without even so much as salting the hash, which apparently makes deducing a commenter’s email address only a rainbow-table away (found that info recently was dated from 2009 !!!! – ask stock about MarineChemist, if you like – he has a recent post exposing Dana’s nemesis as a ‘newser !!!)

    Anyway, Thank you for your time and consideration sir.

  14. MVB says:

    ” to distract from the real causal factors relating to Iodine-131.” Yes, it was meant as a rethorical question. When something as obvious as thyroid cancer begins to spike, you got a smoking gun that major radiological contamination occured. Instead of finding out which facility leaked what when… the focus on radon and pesticides is pretty blatant avoidance of what’s not to be researched somehow.

    On the latter part of your comment… WHile I appreciate some of their contributions, I’m not acquainted with any of the folks behind enformable, ENEnews, NukePro, OptimalPrediction, etc. The interpersonal drama circus, often out in the open at ENEnews and other comment threads, is too much of a diversion / drain for me to focus on.

  15. Pingback: Bit and Pieces of Recent Radiation Data (EURDEP, Radnet), incl. (from partly deleted previous post) Cs-137/Th-232/Be-7 Uptick in Kotka, Finland, Data Gaps in the US Pacific Northwest, Etc. | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  16. Pingback: Plume Gate and the NRC FOIA documents 5 Years Later | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  17. Pingback: Hillary Clinton’s Email (March 12, 2011) Re. Fukushima Nuclear Catastrophe: “STAY INDOORS, WEAR MASK, SHOWER IMMEDIATELY AFTER COMING HOME,…” | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  18. Pingback: Any Thorium-231 in Fukushima Fallout ? | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  19. Pingback: (A Mix) EURDEP: New Record at Exeter, UK. Cs-137 Helsinki (5 months), and other Radiation Observations; Microcephaly & Zika? | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  20. Pingback: Rambling Along a Decade of Gamma Radiation Data from Lamia, Greece | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  21. Pingback: Decade-Long Gamma Radiation Record from Argos, Greece | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  22. Pingback: Amay, Belgium; ETC. (EURDEP, 3 months & some snippets from its past) | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  23. Pingback: A Decade of English Ninjas Crawling through Wattisham’s Gamma Alleys… | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  24. Pingback: 3x Germany, EURDEP, 3 months (and then some…) | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  25. Pingback: The Thyroid Cancer “Hockey Stick” | Allegedly Apparent Blog

  26. Pingback: Do you have any clue how dark it gets further down these corium-dug rabbit holes? | Allegedly Apparent Blog

Thank you for commenting. Your comment won't show until approved. Sometimes that can take awhile. - mvb

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s