Then you should know better than to make unscientific speculations about the Fukushima radiation. Not only that, but if you are a marine biologist, you should have a pretty good idea of what causes massive fish kills—a better idea than I do, since my specialty is human health.
The last time I took a class on radiation, I got to handle a piece of trinitite. I also used to use radioisotopes for labeling biological molecules all the time. Then I had a scan done, and was injected with a higher quantity of radiation than all I have ever handled, combined. And I’m still alive.
Mmmmyes....and I have used unshielded radioactives sources. WHy didn’t you handle a piece of uranium instead of trinitite? Why didn’t they inject hi-levels of uranium or strontium directly into your flesh? Because isotopes vary wildly in their physiological effects - how is it you don’t know this?
One of the most common smoke-and-mirrors acts put on by nuke engineers is to provide the dosimetry math “proving” that bananas are more “dangerous” than nuclear fuels. They never stop to wonder, well hey, why don’t we just grow bananas instead of mining uranium? We’d get the regulators off our backs and put up a sign saying nuke power is green.
You know you didn’t ingest radioactive materials with that scan, right? And you didn’t ingest trinitite. Why dramatize the fact that you are “still alive” when you aren’t taking into account the types of radiation you chose to expose yourself to? “Higher radiation” doesn’t matter if you’re talking about bannas and you are limiting your exposure - why have you no clue about these parameters.
Re the “unscientific speculation”, I was responding to the assertion that there have been “no die offs” with proof of die offs. I do have a pretty good idea of what causes die offs and I have noted over the past few years the location and novelty of the type of die offs that are occuring and the way the various agencies say it’s unprecedented and they don’t know the cause. The fed gov will not permit funding to 0test for evidence because they are the insurers against nuke damage to the environment - they aren’t going fund anyone who is going to prove that the gov is financially liable.
“In 1945, Trinitite was marketed for use in jewelry, but it was later found to cause radiation burns if worn for extended periods of time. In 1952, the Atomic Energy Commission had the test site bulldozed over, but not before collectors scavenged the site for these pieces of atomic history.
Authentic Trinitite is still mildly radioactive today as it contains materials like Cesium 137, Americium 241, Europium 152, Plutonium 239, Barium 133, Cobalt 60, and Silver 108m to name a few”
http://enformable.com/2014/07/authenticating-trinitite-nearly-70-years-later/
So, trinitite has small enough quantities of radiation remaining to make it safe to handle short-term but even low level ionizing radiation contributes a small amount of risk so it’s not used in jewelry. The fact that low levels of ionizing radiation still pose a health risk is well documented with each generation of the state of the art BEIR report created by the Board on Radiation Effects Research; Division on Earth and Life Studies; National Research Council.
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11340/health-risks-from-exposure-to-low-levels-of-ionizing-radiation