ARTICLE: SURPRISE: You're Eating Fukushima Radiation and Bloody, Cancerous Tumors in Fish Contaminated By Radiation Way too long to quote, and there's lot of pictures. Is this site legit? Is there anyone here on the west coast in the fishing industry? Or know someone? Are those pics photoshopped? Is this topic not board appropriate? If this is a hoax, I apoligize, and please delete.
M79: The Turner Radio Network is a fringe NEO-NAZI website! It's the textbook definition of an illegitimate source. To say the least! Sharks do get cancer, fish do get tumors, and there will always be some proportion of fish caught with tumors or unusual growths. If the globe was contaminated with radiation of a level sufficient to cause acute radiation sickness to seals and polar bears thousands of miles from Japan, we would be so thoroughly screwed that none of us would be viewing this forum right now. It would take a lot more than a civilian nuclear meltdown to cause that situation, if it were even possible. Fukushima was a bad accident. It did cause serious radioactive contamination locally. It has caused levels of Cs-137 in the Pacific to rise above the amount that already existed there from Chernobyl and bomb testing, but not to levels that would result in any detectable increase in cancer in fish living far from the plant. The contaminant to be most concerned about in fish is still the mercury...
Well, are you eatting fish exposed to radiation, yes, yes you are. Some sites sensationalize it, others deny it, but there was a huge radiation leak. That went into the water. What do you expect? However, as AP said above, if your concerned, you should be more concerned about Mercury. You want to hear a scary fact. In NYC, you can only eat 3 fish per month that you catch from the Ocean. But we have been doing this to our enviroment for a long time. That is why I wonder if farmed fish are actually healthier then fresh caught ocean fish.
Question how far away from Japan are you? and are you woried abour Chernobyl or 3 misle island or Sellafield? 2nd question how mutch watter is between you and Japan and how mutch fish do thay eat? Radiation from Fukushima dropps to normal levels arround 15 miles away. and reactor walls are pretty Super saian proof. they test those things by crashing Jets in to them. (There is a cool vidio of that.) Yes fish are contaminated but not by Fukushima more buy your own countery.( no im not being political im scottish i dont give a crap. but i work with A.B.C. materials.) Fish farmed fish contain high amounts of mercury as previously stated and unhealthy fats. scare mongering about Fukushima distracts people from other enviromental risks like ileagal dumping ect. AS for legit info. no that site is bogus if you want legit info try Thunderf00t on youtube he is pretty mutch right on the money.
We've most likely been eating radiated fish since the bombs went off on Marshall Islands and the Bikini Atoll.
Dude due to normal background radiation you were a radioactive fish at one point. any fish you have ever eaten has had trace amounts of radiation in it. just in tiny amounts. i saw one "Troof" Vidio about EVIL fukushima radiation in a Calefonia beach. but the geological makeup of that state is radioactive look at the Rockie mountans. they are made of granit. but im telling you dont trust me but even 15 minuits of reserch is all it takes.
It's all a matter of dose, technically we've been eating irradiated fish since fish evolved within sight of a giant nuclear furnace their world orbits. But no, the fish you are eating are no more or less safe than they were before the Fukushima incident. In general, take anything a random internet site whose mantra is "We provide the facts that the mass-media won't. We have come to a point in time where using common sense, speaking factual truths and asking honest questions is deemed radical behavior." with a MASSIVE grain of salt.
Radiated by the sun at least. There has been radiation in the world since the beginning. We are all about blaming other countries for anything it could be radiation from 3 mile island for all they know.
The skin of a fish is made to limit pollutants into their insides, much like all skin's purpose...so, it's healthier to eat small fish than big fish because the bigger fish feed off of small fish, consuming the pollutants on the skin of the smaller fish.
I heard that for roughly 12 hours a day people in major north american cities are exposed to uncontrolled levels of radiation shown to increase the incidence of some forms of cancer and the government is just LETTING IT HAPPEN. Not so much ON the skin as accumulated in the flesh. But those pollutants don't get filtered out of the body, so the more little fish with small amounts of pollutants a big fish eats, the more pollutants stay trapped in their body. The longer they live, the more pollutants they eat, and whatever eats them absorbs all those pollutants. This is the principle of bio-accumulation.
They breath through big open holes in their faces and are floating in water their skin isn't protecting them from radiation and their insides since the absorb everything in the water.
Do you eat animals that prey on fish and seafood? Radiation and chemicals can move up the food chain, after all.
