FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR PLANT DISASTER ANNIVERSARY

Today is the 6th anniversary of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in Japan, triggered primarily by the tsunami that followed the powerful earthquake on that date.

I have posted 32 posts on this blog relating to this incident, starting shortly after the disaster, and correctly predicting the food contamination that occurred. I have to admit that I was surprised to find that the most popular of the posts dealt with contamination of seaweed, with almost 10,000 views.

Looking once again at the sad photos from this incident in today's New York Times, my heart went out to the victims of this tragic incident.

TSF

IS THERE TOO MUCH RADIATION IN RICE?

This blog warned about nuclear contamination of food in Japan very soon after the Fukushima nuclear plant crisis in northeast Japan on March 11. At that point, there was, as yet, no evidence or discussion of it. (Read the 20 earlier posts on this issue, beginning March 15). These fears have been confirmed. Excessive levels of radiation have been found in milk, vegetables, fruit, seaweed, fish, drinking water, animal feed - and, most recently, in beef.

It was only a matter of time before attention would turn to rice. Back on April 10, I (see "Can Rice be Contaminated?") I mentioned that the Government of Japan had advised farmers not to plant rice in certain areas because of this risk. We'll know soon whether such warnings were enough. The rice planted back in the spring is about to be harvested. Government-required testing of the rice is beginning in at least 14 prefectures in north and east Japan. About 40 percent of the annually harvested over 8 million tons of rice is grown in this area.

The testing will check levels of cesium in rice to make sure that they are not above the maximum government-imposed cap of 500 becquerels per kilogram. If any are, then shipments of rice from the area will be stopped.

Obviously farmers are anxious. But so are consumers. Rice is something that most people in Japan eat every day - including young children and pregnant women, who are at special risk. Cesium can build up in the body, resulting in higher risk for certain cancers as well as other health problems.

To your good health,
TSF

RADIATION-CONTAMINATED BEEF IN STORES

On July 7, I reported about high levels of radiation found in some beef cattle from Fukushima prefecture in Japan ("Why Radiation-Contaminated Cattle are Bad News"). These cattle were raised about 20-30km away from the radiation-spewing nuclear power plant. I also noted that testing had caught the problem before the beef reached the market. Not so. The initial reports were wrong. Some of this beef, with 3-6 times allowed levels of the radionuclide, cesium, has been sold - and eaten. At least 2,650 pounds of it. Consumers in Japan are not happy. With reason.

In fact, it turns out that the contaminated meat has not just been sold in Tokyo, but in at least 13 prefectures of Japan (maybe more). Japan's second-biggest retailer, Aeon Co. admitted today to selling the beef. It's not the only one. The cattle had been fed rice straw tainted with radiation, in spite of the farmer's claims that he was very careful about cattle feed.

New bans and better testing are in the works. Consumers are suffering, and so are farmers, distributors, retailers. As far as we know at present, the suspect beef has not been exported to other countries. Japanese food exports are already down as a result of bans on many products in a number of countries. This will make the situation worse.

Unfortunately, with food contamination events, the news invariably gets worse than in the initial reports: more products are found to be contaminated, hazardous food is found to have been distributed more widely than initially thought, more people become ill. And, on occasions, dangerous food has been sold and eaten when we believed that testing had caught it in time. As in this case.

Is more bad news to come? My guess: as testing is expanded, high levels of cesium will soon be found in more cattle and in other food animals and poultry (read the four questions I raise in the July 7th post).

To your good health,
TSF

WHY RADIATION-CONTAMINATED CATTLE ARE BAD NEWS

Beef with high levels of radiation has been prevented from entering Tokyo's food markets. But only because the meat itself was tested during processing. The earlier pre-shipment external screening of the live cattle had passed them as "safe." According to a government official, this was the first time that excessive levels of radioactive caesium have been found in meat since the start of this Fukushima nuclear crisis in March (still unresolved).

Here are the facts: eleven cattle from a herd in Fukushima prefecture were found to have three to six times the legal limit of radioactive caesium (which can increase cancer risk) in their meat. And these cattle had lived outside the 20-30Km evactuation zone. In fact, they were reportedly moved there to be "safe" from radiation spewing out of Japan's crippled nuclear plant, raised indoors and fed safe food and water.

Alright, high levels of dangerous radionuclides in 11 cattle is not a big issue. Or is it? You could say, that it raises some very unpleasant - but important, questions. Here are some in my mind:

 How many other cattle with such high levels of radionuclides actually reached the market? Some 3,000 beef cattle from the same area have also passed external testing for contaminants since April. None - as also in the case of this herd - tested positive for radiation during the initial screening. It seems that their meat was not tested before it was sold and eaten. Was it also above safe levels?
 Is the currently performed random testing of actual market-ready food items sufficient to protect the public? According to a Japan's Ministry of Health spokesman, less than 1% of actual food (including meat, fresh produce, and seafood) is being tested for nuclear contaminants.
 What about other food animals such as swine and poultry? The government of Fukushima prefecture has asked farmers in Minamisouma to refrain from cattle shipments (sounds a bit vague) but no action has been taken or advice given on other poultry or livestock.
 How did these cattle end up with such high levels if they were (as claimed) raised indoors and fed safe food? And what does this imply for other food animals - and humans?

To your good health,
TSF

HOW DANGEROUS IS RADIATION IN GREEN TEA?

We tend to think of green tea as a healthy drink. Initially, I found the taste a little difficult to become used to, but am now drinking a couple of cups a day. I have friends who drink ten cups or more. All those wonderful antioxidants that our bodies need! Not only has green tea been drunk for thousands of years in countries such as China, India, Thailand and Japan, but it has been used as a medicine to treat anything and everything, ranging from flatulence to heart conditions. Besides, it is supposed to be good for your complexion.

Now we are reading reports that some of the tea grown in Japan may be accumulating high levels of radionuclides from the crippled Fukushima Dachii nuclear power plant (see yesterday's post). The tea growers from Shizuoka Prefecture, where much of Japan's tea is grown, say this kind of concern is ridiculous. So do some members of the opposition party.

After all, dry tea is a concentrated product. When tea leaves are fresh, and therefore heavier, testing would show lower levels of unhealthy radionuclides such as cesium-137 and 134. And besides, when you add water to dry tea leaves, it becomes even more diluted, thus lowering levels of radionuclides to acceptable levels.

Yes, all this is probably true, but still, I can't say I like the idea of drinking my "healthy" green tea with a touch of nuclear contaminants.

And you had better not chew on the green tea leaves, just in case! Some people do. Not even in your chewing gum, or those delicious Trader Joe's green tea candies.

To your good health,

TSF

UPDATES ON RADIATION IN SEAWEED AND FISH NEAR FUKUSHIMA

No one seems to really know how much radiation has entered the sea near the crippled Fukushima power plant, just how far this water will drift, or how badly radiation will contaminate ocean fish and sea vegetables such as seaweed. What we do know is that hundreds of thousands of tons of highly radioactive water has been dumped in the sea, or flown from the land to the sea. And, we haven't reached the end of it yet.

But, as I predicted in my post on April 15, seaweed has indeed been found to be contaminated. On May 13, the environmental activists group, Greenpeace announced that it had found much higher than normal levels of radiation contamination in seaweed off the coast of Japan, as much as 65Km from the crippled Fukushima power plant (their vessel was reportedly not allowed into territorial waters to do its sampling). It has called on Japan's government to undertake a comprehensive testing of the seaweed along the coast, just as seaweed harvesting is beginning.

And, as I also predicted - March 27th post "Radiation in Fish?" which is now 40 posts ago, abnormally high levels of radiation have turned up in seafood in the Pacific waters near the Fukushima plant. But but so far they have only been detected in only one species of fish. But I can promise you that more will be found - especially in fish that are predators, eating contaminated smaller fish (as I blogged earlier) and in fish from lakes and probably rivers as well. Longer term, radiocaesium rather than iodine will be of more concern.

The trouble is that people who eat fish and seaweed from those waters have no way of knowing which fish is contaminated, and which seaweed is contaminated. On the positive side, a few meals are unlikely to hurt you.

To your good health,
TSF

ARE FUKUSHIMA CUCUMBERS SAFE?

I just checked my blog statistics for search keywords, and found this exact phrase: "Are Fukushima cucumbers safe?" I have been thinking about cucumbers lately anyway, so this prompted me to address the issue.

A few days ago, while involved in my daily reading of The New York Times, and as always, checking on the situation in Japan, I came across an interview with a Fukushima Prefecture farmer. He was not farming inside the evacuation zone, but nearby. (In the Nakadori area which is the agricultural center of the prefecture). He was saying that he had to throw out his entire crop of cucumbers because no one would buy them. How sad. Having worked with small farmers much of my professional career, I know how devastating the loss of an entire crop can be. And growing some vegetables myself, I know what hard work it is, with so many climatic and wildlife risks involved. And on top of all this, who needs radiation?

But could his cucumbers have been contaminated with radiation, even tens of kilometers from the evacuation area? Yes, they could have been. The radiation waste is spreading much further than the evacutation area, though at lower levels, and any growing vegetables absorb and concentrate such toxic substances.

Back on April 28, I blogged "The Biggest Threat in the U.S. Food Supply." Wait - you are asking what this has to do with Fukushima cucumbers. Well, it does. Radiation in Fukushima cucumbers would be one of those longer term type of hazards in Japan's supply, especially relevant to people who are younger - and particularly children, who will have several decades of life ahead of them. But even then, someone would have to eat radiation-contaminated cucumbers regularly for a while before they were affected. How long it would take, would depend on how badly contaminated they were, and the eater's own age and health.

But take Salmonella bacteria in cucumbers (as occurred in the U.S. food supply - see Post of May 3). If cucumbers in Japan were carrying Salmonella, eating just half a contaminated cucumber could be enough to cause a case of food poisoning.

So particularly if you are older, I would not worry about eating a few Fukushima cucumbers. But wash it well and peel it, and don't eat a cucumber a day for several months.

To your good health,
TSF

IS EATING SEAWEED GOOD OR BAD?

Seaweed has been flying off the store shelves in recent weeks in China, Russia and many other countries - metaphorically speaking, of course. Why? Because people believe it can protect them against nuclear radiation - what everyone seems to be afraid of these days.

Yes, it is true - most types of seaweed such as nori, wakame, dulse, kombu, arame and other sea vegetables, contain large (though variable) quantities of iodine 127 - a trace element that our bodies need. This is the "good iodine" used in potassium iodine pills and in iodized salt, which have also sold out in many places. This good iodine helps protect our thyroid gland by giving it what it needs so that it won't take up the radioactive kind if we happen to be exposed. It's a bit like giving your puppy a tough rubber toy to chew on, so it won't eat your carpets (as mine did recently).

But then there is the other point of view. Can seaweed - especially seaweed harvested in the Pacific ocean near Japan, itself be absorbing the radiation that is being released into the sea from the Fukushima power plant? Such fears are making some people wary about eating seaweed. I have a friend who used to order seaweed salad every time we ate out, who has even started taking the nori wrap off her sushi. Several countries such as Australia and Indonesia, have halted or restricted seaweed imports from Japan in case it is contaminated with radioactive iodine.

True, seaweed can in theory absorb the dangerous iodine-131 from nuclear waste as well as all those good minerals and other substances that give it such a healthy reputation. Unfortunately, the seaweed can't tell the difference between the safe kind of iodine and the unsafe kind. But don't get too nervous. Remember, the ocean is a big place, not all seaweed comes from the ocean near Fukushima (even Japan imports seaweed from other countries as well), and many seaweed farms in the disaster area have (sadly) been wiped out by the tsunami. On top of all this, much of the iodine-131 in seaweed would usually have degraded before it reaches our plate.

What I am saying is that the risk of dangerous doses of radioactive iodine from your seaweed salad or miso soup or sushi are pretty small. But also, you shouldn't eat huge amounts of those wonderful sea vegetables thinking that they will protect you if nuclear radiation does come your way in air currents, water or food. This is not a case of "more is better." Too much "good" iodine can be toxic to your body.

TSF

MORE ON RADIATION IN FISH AND SHELLFISH

I blogged on March 27 about the likely risk of radiation contamination of fish and shellfish near the Fukushima power plant. That was over a week ago. It was also before we heard about the tons of radiation-contaminated water flowing into the sea near the Fukushima power plant. In fact, the latest numbers say about 7 tons of radiated water an hour is flowing into the sea from that crack in the pit at the damaged Reactor No. 2 (where ongoing efforts are now resorting to newspaper and sawdust to plug it). It was also before concerns about radiation in fish affected fresh fish sales in Tokyo, and before the media began to discuss it all over the world, including in the U.S.

And, it was before there were any reported findings of radiation in seafood near the Fukushima plant. The International Atomic Energy Agency has now reported that at the port of Choshi, in Chiba prefecture south of Fukushima, about 20% of the fish caught have been found to have elevated levels of caesium-137 (not high enough to be considered unsafe - yet).

Caesium-137? Isn't everyone talking about iodine-131? Well, yes. But most radioisotopes, including Iodine-131, have pretty short half lives (the time it takes for half the amount that initially enters the water to decay), measured in days or weeks. Testing may show elevated levels in surface seawater now (and I bet it's in lakes and rivers too) but it will get diluted, and soon just decay. In fact, the International Atomic Energy Agency said iodine-131 in seawater would “soon be of no concern.”

But other radioisotopes such as caseium-137 and stronium-90 can stick around for a long time - years, and even decades. I gather from the research on Chernobyl, that if it's in water bodies it's likely to sink down into the sediment and bioaccumulate (that is, build up) in the fish and shellfish in the area.

I wonder when we'll hear about the levels of caesium-137 found in seafood in rivers and lakes near Fukushima? I would guess, pretty soon.

By the way, I notice that my local store has stopped selling scallops imported from Japan.

TSF

RADIATION IN FISH?

Radiation in food is becoming a big issue. People everywhere are becoming nervous - not just in Japan. Even in America. Radiation fears are slowing sales of fish from Japan, and sushi restaurants are finding their customers disappearing. But is the situation at the Fukushima nuclear power plant really likely to result in radiation-contamination of fish as well as of vegetables and milk?

The experience of Chernobyl, as well as of smaller incidents at power plants (including in the U.S.) would argue that it is. And it is not just a question of contaminated marine fish. The Chernobyl disaster of 1986 showed that radiation can also enter rivers and lakes and show up in the fish living there. Fish is very important in the Japanese diet. Fish is also a major export commodity. It comes from a variety of sources: wild-caught ocean fish, marine aquaculture, inland fishing and inland water aquaculture.

After plowing through a number of research studies and scientific papers, I concluded that the levels of radionuclides entering a particular water body will not be the only factor in determining which fish are most likely to become contaminated. A number of other factors are also likely to be involved. One is whether the water is flowing rapidly or not. Another is the type of fish: whether it is predatory, and whether it is a bottom feeder or a surface feeder. The experience of Chernobyl suggests that fish in lakes and ponds will have higher build-up of radionuclides than the same type of fish from fast-moving rivers and streams. Predatory fish will have higher levels than fish which were not predatory. Benthic fish (those that like to lie on the bottom, such as carp - Japan's most popular fish) are more likely to pick up contamination than those fish which tend to live near the surface.

As far as I know, no contamination of seafood from Japan has been reported so far. But the chances are, that it will be soon. If so, don't panic. As I keep saying, in most countries, any radiation-contaminated fish is likely to be caught before it reaches the market. Even if it does get there, a few meals are unlikely to harm you. But if you are pregnant, and for young children, it is still better to stick to the safer fish.

TSF

RADIATION IN EXPORTED FOOD FROM JAPAN

Radiation has now been found in exported Japanese vegetables. The Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority of Singapore has found traces of radiation in Shiso (perilla leaves), Mitsuba (wild parsley), Mizuna ('water' green vegetable), and in Nanohana (green rapeseed blossom) that were imported from Japan. In fact, Singapore has now suspended import of milk and milk products, fruits and vegetables, seafood and meat from Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi and Gunma prefectures (note - food in all these areas has shown higher levels of radiation). There is also concern about certain processed foods from Japan, such as infant formula and yoghurt.

Consumers in other countries, including in China, the United States and Canada are also becoming concerned that their food may become radioactive. Some of this worry is overdone. First - as I have said before - the levels of toxic substances such as iodine-131, cesium-134 and cesium-137 that have been found in some exported food so far, are not likely to harm you if you eat a few meals of it. Secondly, radiation in food is easily detected, unlike some toxic chemicals in our food. Thirdly, radioactive iodine has a fairly short life, so levels will decrease quickly, and cesium 137 is excreted rapidly from the body if we ingest it.

I am not saying radiation in food is not unhealthy or not to be avoided if at all possible. It is. But at the present time at least, you don't need to lose sleep over it.

TSF