Trollhattan
Swedish town of trolls
- 17 May 2009
- 117
- 1
Natural radiation is everywhere,including your food.For example ~ bananas are radioactive.
Mike, maybe it's a cultural thing that I'm misunderstanding here. Please let me know.
I'm so frustrated with the level of my command of English language!!!
What I m trying to say is something like this.
Say the level which may affect one's health 100.
The standard for safety is 5.
The current level is 10.
Even if you take 10 - 20, it does not affect one's health immediately. (Except long term consumption and accumulation.)
The authority ordered the farms and agri coops to stop these agri produces and not consume them by themselves either. They'll collect these produces in question from the market as far as possible.
Note: all these figures are my made-ups.
This is what I expressed as "safe", maybe my choice of the word is wrong.
Please read the news articles I posted and judge the situation yourself.
I'd be most grateful if you could translate them and post here to convey more accurate information to other members.
edit: maybe this thread helps to explain the situation?
Spinach Contamination in Ibaraki...NOT COOL!
And I repeat my previous post:
"The standard is based on the 1 kg of the item, and MHLW (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare) said that (the amount the radioactive material in question) is in case a person eat 1 kg of spinach everyday, and even if one eats 1kg a day, it does not affect one's health immediately."
(Sorry my translation is rather poor and could be misleading.)
Hopefully more jobs as well.Mike the flip side is that the people who leave will free up more food, electricity, and medical services for those that choose to stay. That's just my half full take on the situation.
Mike, maybe it's a cultural thing that I'm misunderstanding here. Please let me know.
Everybody else?....if you're leaving, pack your sh!t and stay gone.
Natural radiation is everywhere,including your food.For example ~ bananas are radioactive.
http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/03/80435.htmlThe good news is only iodine 131 is detected in the water, not caesium. Iodine 131 has a half-life of eight days (caesium has a half-life of 31 years,) so as long as contamination ceases levels of iodine 131 should decrease. The levels are low, but since water is something consumed frequently it would build up the more you consume. Keep in mind nuclear regulations are always far lower than the risk of health complications for safety reasons.Radioactive iodine exceeding the limit for infants found in Tokyo tap water
The Tokyo metropolitan government warned Wednesday that infants should not drink tap water as radioactive iodine exceeding the limit for them was detected in water at a purification plant.
The advisory covers Tokyo's 23 wards and five cities―Musashino, Mitaka, Machida, Tama and Inagi.
According to the metropolitan government, 210 becquerels of radioactive iodine were detected per 1 kilogram of water against the limit of 100 becquerels in a survey Tuesday at a water purification plant in the Kanamachi district of Katsushika Ward.
But the amount of the radioactive substance detected at the purification plant is lower than the 300-becquerel limit for people other than infants.
A lot of people I know, including myself, had to leave because we were forced to when our universities either canceled the study abroad program or were ordered to get out. Others did it for their worried-sick family. I know one girl who was constantly getting emails from friends saying she was going to die if she stayed in Japan. Her mother and siblings called her every day breaking down crying, begging her to come home. I know that's a bit of an extreme, but can you blame some people for putting their families worries at ease?
So, you are therefore saying that unless someone consumes an extraordinary portion of the tainted foods, they are safe.I'm so frustrated with the level of my command of English language!!!
What I m trying to say is something like this.
Say the level which may affect one's health 100.
The standard for safety is 5.
The current level is 10.
Even if you take 10 - 20, it does not affect one's health immediately. (Except long term consumption and accumulation.)
The authority ordered the farms and agri coops to stop these agri produces and not consume them by themselves either. They'll collect these produces in question from the market as far as possible.
Note: all these figures are my made-ups.
This is what I expressed as "safe", maybe my choice of the word is wrong.
No, no, no! People should not buy and consume iodine tablets just to assuage their mental fears. Buying iodine unnecessarily will deprive others, and taking it unnecessarily could cause even more medical problems!people who are worried about it very much should get the iodine tablet "just in case", because constant worrying does affect one's mental health. If having some tablets ready makes one feel better, then he/she should get them - though one should be very careful about actually taking them.
The problem now is that a lot of people have decided to buy bottled water and deplete shelves in many places in Tokyo, thereby depriving others who really need it. Sheesh. Herd mentality.If you are concerned, sticking to bottled water for a few days is not a bad plan but it may not be necessary. :?
Mineral water from France ? Major Yakuza families/syndicates based in Kanto will at least get bottled water non-locally so as not to disrupt Japanese suppliers. It's good to know that everyone is pitching in to help out.The problem now is that a lot of people have decided to buy bottled water and deplete shelves in many places in Tokyo, thereby depriving others who really need it. Sheesh. Herd mentality.
Have they even looked at the bottles to see what the source of that "pure water" is?
Let's just say jelly beans cure radiation problems and see how many people make a run on candy stores to buy all of the jelly beans.
I put my family's worries at ease and never budged an inch. I reject the premise that leaving was the only way to accomplish that. My opinion is still the same. People are free to leave whenever they like and for whatever reason they like, but I wouldn't hand out re-entry permits to the Good-Time Charlies. Want to leave? Fine. Have a nice flight. Stay gone.
For some people it wasn't that easy.
Out of curiosity, who do you group into the Good-Time Charlies and everyone else deserving of a reentry permit?
What was there about my initial post that wasn't sufficiently clear?
It'll be interesting to watch the overpriced bottled water generation struggle to survive if they ever see hard times and damage worse than the war.
It's probably best to ask for some clarification then, because I'm a little confused over your first two posts as to who exactly you refer to as Good-Time Charlies. Are they those who only stay when the going is good or everyone who is not fleeing/leaving Japan from a directly affected area? If it's the former I can understand your point about reentry permits.
I don't understand how anyone could possibly construe it as the latter. Why would people who are not fleeing be lined up for re-entry permits?
I meant those who are leaving Japan, except they are from an area outside of Tohoku i.e. Tokyo or Kansai. The question I'm trying to ask is how do you feel about those who may be outside of the disaster area but are still leaving Japan either because they are forced to or because their families are hysterical about them? I ask because the comment I quoted in my first post makes it seem as if you only classify people in two ways; those from the disaster area with nowhere else to go and good-timers.
Does anyone have a personal story of knowing someone who left from either the disaster or potential radiation zones ? For those that do eventually return, I hope they thoroughly explain the reasoning behind their actions actions to Japanese friends and co-workers so as to not create any further misunderstandings or erosion of trust between the two communities.
I am not going to say anything negative about foreigners since I I don't live in the country and have no doubt Japanese would have acted the same had the situation been reversed. Do not judge others lest they judge you...
Does anyone have a personal story of knowing someone who left from either the disaster or potential radiation zones ? For those that do eventually return, I hope they thoroughly explain the reasoning behind their actions actions to Japanese friends and co-workers so as to not create any further misunderstandings or erosion of trust between the two communities. A decision that was painful or made under duress from pressure at home will be easily understand. A fair number of Japanese also "migrated" to the West of the country, seeking refugee in Kansai at least temporarily.
I am not going to say anything negative about foreigners since I I don't live in the country and have no doubt Japanese would have acted the same had the situation been reversed. Do not judge others lest they judge you...
Redorklous... that is new word i have made up just for this occasion of stupidity.have packed their bags and gone home for fear of radiation.
I was referring specifically to making a blanket judgment without knowing exactly the extent of the damage in Japan, details of the situation or what options they have, if any. For those in positions of responsibility that have have quit their job, dropped commitments to others who depended on them, or in other ways made a mess by leaving, that is cowardly and contemptible. But I have no reason to believe that represents the majority of cases and certainly wouldn't lose respect for someone simply standing in a re-entry line in areas directly affected by the catastrophe.I believe it goes more like "Judge not lest ye would be judged also" and is not an admonition not to judge. It is an admonition not to judge unless you're fine with being judged in return. I am fine with being judged in return. I am highly opinionated and highly judgmental and not in the least apologetic about it. It strikes me that in the time since I grew up and left it American society has developed the "You're Being Judgmental Card" as a trump card to shut down conversation in a manner very akin to the "That's Racist! Card". I refuse to participate or to be cowed by it. My thoughts on the matter is that anyone who claims not to be judgmental is either lacking in principles or standards or lying about it (whether to themselves or others) out of fear. Everybody makes judgments, favorable or unfavorable, on countless things every single day. Our opinions are nothing more than our judgments based upon application of our own personal set of principles and standards. Anyone who has an opinion regarding anything has made a judgment about it, so I really don't understand this aversion people these days have to being perceived as "judgmental". Sometimes tact may dictate that it is better to keep our opinions/judgments to ourselves, and that is fine; it is a natural and necessary aspect of humans functioning together as a society.
While I'm up on my soapbox, I would like to say that I find it amusing that people are chiding me for an unfair or unkind opinion on the re-entry permit matter when I stipulated right up front that the opinion may be unfair or uncharitable.