Ashland Posted January 15, 2014 Author #26 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Define "high radiation levels". One problem with radioactivity is that we have instrumentation that can detect radiation at far below the level where it is hazardous but significantly above the normal background level. As an example, suppose the normal background level for radiation is 2 and the level where it is hazardous is 50. If the radiation level increases from 2 to 6, this is 3 times the normal level and it is definitely high. However, looking at it from the hazardous viewpoint, it is about 1/10 of the level it has to reach to be hazardous. Also, most exposure levels are set very conservatively so if the hazardous value is set to 50, the true hazardous level is probably 500. You need to know at least a bit about science before you can intelligently read anything in the general press on scientific matters. My prior comment stands - tell the worrywart to either stopping bothering the rest of the group with their irrational worries or stay home. DON The concern our family member has is for that of their 17 month old child...(our grandson) as we don't have the option to leave him home since we've all planned to go on this family cruise..... We all, or most of us know the worries new parents can have. Thanks so much for your take on the whole matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanceholt Posted January 17, 2014 #27 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Sounds like they should probably stay home and skip this one. Paranoia is not a good companion on a cruise. The concern our family member has is for that of their 17 month old child...(our grandson) as we don't have the option to leave him home since we've all planned to go on this family cruise..... We all, or most of us know the worries new parents can have. Thanks so much for your take on the whole matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted January 19, 2014 Author #28 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Sounds like they should probably stay home and skip this one. Paranoia is not a good companion on a cruise. Looks like the thought now is/was "Much A Do about... Maybe Not So Much"...Full steam ahead...North to Alaska :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tee_harbor Posted January 20, 2014 #29 Share Posted January 20, 2014 I literally had to take a day to calm down after reading this. That thousands of people around the Pacific Northwest are going to lose their livelihoods as this snake of disinformation and panic thought gets longer and longer is so infuriating. As a matter of fact, NPR just did a story this morning as I was brooding on this. Of course, again, reasoned scientific theory put forward, which will all be swept aside by Chicken Littles. Humans seem to be built to panic about immediate perceived threats and ignore long-term damaging threads. You want to save your grandchild? Don't fly to the West Coast and then get aboard a cruise ship, spewing carbon dioxide pollution the entire way. It's not a one time event of radiation which will possibly end your child's life, but the on-going, endless exposure to levels of pollutants at an unacceptable level, constantly assaulting his cells. and when EPA Commissioner Whitman declared that "the air is safe to breathe" around ground zero did u believe that? You didn't have to be a scientist to know better. Yes, it's terrible that thousands of people who lived near the site or worked there will have serious health effects. However, as I say above, I'm much more worried about situations such as China's lack of pollution control, leading to huge drifts coming to Alaska than I am by the Japanese radiation. Carbon dioxidefalls into the ocean, acidifying it and will eventually kill Alaska's fish. But hey, what about radiation! An interesting little note. I work for AK Fish and Game, where we age rockfish. These are very long-lived species; can live over 100 years. Their ear bones are extracted and the layers carefully counted like rings on a tree to calculate their age. However, to create a control for the aging, the fish is also radiocarbon dated from the atmospheric testing of atomic bombs in the 1950's and 1960's. These organisms, living in some of the world's most remote, deep oceans, were marked by those bombs. Everything on Earth was, and every living person. So really, not so worried, as I said. I'll take my soapbox and go now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPacificbound Posted January 21, 2014 #30 Share Posted January 21, 2014 The concern our family member has is for that of their 17 month old child...(our grandson) as we don't have the option to leave him home since we've all planned to go on this family cruise..... We all, or most of us know the worries new parents can have. Thanks so much for your take on the whole matter. Have the parents considered staying home with their baby? If I was that stressed out about anything I would probably choose to not do it. It is not going to be fun if they are that worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted January 21, 2014 Author #31 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I literally had to take a day to calm down after reading this. That thousands of people around the Pacific Northwest are going to lose their livelihoods as this snake of disinformation and panic thought gets longer and longer is so infuriating. As a matter of fact, NPR just did a story this morning as I was brooding on this. Of course, again, reasoned scientific theory put forward, which will all be swept aside by Chicken Littles. Humans seem to be built to panic about immediate perceived threats and ignore long-term damaging threads. You want to save your grandchild? Don't fly to the West Coast and then get aboard a cruise ship, spewing carbon dioxide pollution the entire way. It's not a one time event of radiation which will possibly end your child's life, but the on-going, endless exposure to levels of pollutants at an unacceptable level, constantly assaulting his cells. Yes, it's terrible that thousands of people who lived near the site or worked there will have serious health effects. However, as I say above, I'm much more worried about situations such as China's lack of pollution control, leading to huge drifts coming to Alaska than I am by the Japanese radiation. Carbon dioxidefalls into the ocean, acidifying it and will eventually kill Alaska's fish. But hey, what about radiation! An interesting little note. I work for AK Fish and Game, where we age rockfish. These are very long-lived species; can live over 100 years. Their ear bones are extracted and the layers carefully counted like rings on a tree to calculate their age. However, to create a control for the aging, the fish is also radiocarbon dated from the atmospheric testing of atomic bombs in the 1950's and 1960's. These organisms, living in some of the world's most remote, deep oceans, were marked by those bombs. Everything on Earth was, and every living person. So really, not so worried, as I said. I'll take my soapbox and go now... Thanks so much..I personally was only asking a question in my OP and much appreciate the feedback from everyone.... We're all very excited about our upcoming cruise...This will be our 3rd time but the rest of the family's first one to Alaska. Again much thanks to all that posted :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted January 21, 2014 Author #32 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Have the parents considered staying home with their baby? If I was that stressed out about anything I would probably choose to not do it. It is not going to be fun if they are that worried. Only one of the parents had any concern at all...but now the other parent is realizing it was just an over-reaction to a few news stories and the fact that a jealous family member (that was not invited) was our "Chicken Little". We're now all very excited about this trip :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donaldsc Posted January 21, 2014 #33 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Only one of the parents had any concern at all...but now the other parent is realizing it was just an over-reaction to a few news stories and the fact that a jealous family member (that was not invited) was our "Chicken Little". We're now all very excited about this trip :) I never do trips w family - for obvious reasons. DON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted January 21, 2014 Author #34 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I never do trips w family - for obvious reasons. DON Most of our cruises are just the two of us...but some of the best ones have been when we've brought the kids and then as they became adults and then with their spouses...this will be our first time with a grandchild and a whole new experience for us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TessM Posted January 21, 2014 #35 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Most of our cruises are just the two of us...but some of the best ones have been when we've brought the kids and then as they became adults and then with their spouses...this will be our first time with a grandchild and a whole new experience for us all. Enjoy your cruise and your grandbaby. I hope you all have a great time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted January 21, 2014 Author #36 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Enjoy your cruise and your grandbaby. I hope you all have a great time. Thank you so very much TessM...I'm sure we will !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKStafford Posted January 23, 2014 #37 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Here's another article that breaks down the numbers.... http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20140122/yeah-about-fukushima-radiation The final conclusion: "To be clear: there may well be more [naturally occurring] radiation in a banana (and who doesn't love bananas?) than off our Alaska coast." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lammy23 Posted January 26, 2014 #38 Share Posted January 26, 2014 It is absolutely ignorant to believe that the Fukushima disaster is not impacting our ocean and air quality in a negative way. There are legitimate studies that have found incredibly high percentages of radiation in the fish being caught in the Pacific. Among many other concerns. As a PP said, you can find information on the Internet to support whatever you believe is happening. But to think that such a colossal disaster is only impacting Japan, I mean…come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bottom-dragger Posted January 27, 2014 #39 Share Posted January 27, 2014 tuesday 1/28 1000 ak std time (you have to do your own math), a state wide call in on the APRN network. http://www.alaskapublic.org/2014/01/24/radiation-from-fukushima/ you're more likely to be eaten by a bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now