Posted on 07/23/2014 8:04:25 AM PDT by huldah1776
It’s been more than three years since the Fukushima disaster, in which an earthquake and subsequent tsunami devastated the Fukushima region of Japan and significantly damaged its nuclear power plant. *******snip*****
Once the demand for news from Japan waned, however, little follow-up ever occurred in the media to those stories being told days after the tsunami struck, particularly those of American first responders.
The USS Ronald Reagan responded almost immediately to the tsunami disaster. The carrier, reports in 2013 noted, may have coasted through a radiation plume. Photos of bizarrely foamy snow aboard the ship began to circulate in some publications, most notably, the New York Post.
As our vessel inched its way toward the disaster site, ship’s leadership learned that we had navigated directly through a radiation cloud. The commanding officer warned us that our water and ventilation systems had been contaminated, posing a critical health risk to all of us onboard. We were advised to refrain from showering or drinking water until it was declared safe. Sailors worked tirelessly around the clock to facilitate victims on shore, while being left vulnerable to dangerous levels of radiation.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Atomic veterans. Rainbow herbicides. Cheaper than Chimps. Gulf War Syndrome. Burn pits. Now this...
Easy enough to prove if it was Fukushima related. Look at the occurence rates of health issues for the sailors on each of the other nuclear carriers during the same time frame and see if they are different. If they are it’s Fukushima if not it is normal occurrence rates.
The fact they had detected radiation and did a scrub down is not itself proof it came from Fukushima as there are other sources on the RR - it is a nuc after all. It may have been precautionary to do the scrub down. The crewmembers are already required to wear personal monitors if their work take them into certain spaces. The personal monitor data itself would be another source of potential data to prove that the exposure was increased during that time frame - in my day they were checked on a monthly basis.
If the Navy wants to argue that it isn’t an issue then publish the data - either way let’s get the vets the care they need.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.