The FDA is reassuring Americans that there is nothing to fear from the fallout cloud circling the globe courtesy of the Tokyo Electric Power Company and General Electric. Their reasoning is that while trace amounts of radioactive iodine has been found in cows milk on the west coast it’s not in concentrations that are harmful.
The question is, why are they finding any radioactive particles in the milk at all? The talking heads on the news explain that the cows go out and graze the grass and concentrate the radioactive dust (in the duck and cover days this was called fallout). These particles pass through the cow and into the cow’s milk at reportedly a thousand times concentration.
As the reporter reads in a reassuring voice from the scrip provided by the nuclear power lobby they also show a close-up of a cow enthusiastically eating grass to emphasize the point. But if you know grass, you’ll recognize it as lawn grass. Milk cows don’t go out and graze and haven’t since the early sixties. It’s simply too inefficient, the cows trample more than they eat. Even in Amish country you’ll see farmers driving a team of horses pulling a diesel powered forage harvester. While you might see cows out in a field, that’s not where they get their feed.
So we are being shown a potential problem that doesn’t really exist so that we can be reassured that testing shows us to be no danger. Of course milk cows do more or less live outdoors. They have plenty of shelter for shade and to keep warm and dry, a happy cow does in fact give more milk.
So, if there really is radioactive iodine in the milk, they aren’t getting it from their feed, they‘re getting it from being out of doors. Maybe we should be testing the homeless people instead of the cows, or just we should just duck and cover.
Okay, I want to make it clear that I don’t think we are in any great danger right now. This is about the corporate media lying to us. The corporate motto always is, “Never tell the truth when a lie will do better”. www.prairie2.com
The question is, why are they finding any radioactive particles in the milk at all? The talking heads on the news explain that the cows go out and graze the grass and concentrate the radioactive dust (in the duck and cover days this was called fallout). These particles pass through the cow and into the cow’s milk at reportedly a thousand times concentration.
As the reporter reads in a reassuring voice from the scrip provided by the nuclear power lobby they also show a close-up of a cow enthusiastically eating grass to emphasize the point. But if you know grass, you’ll recognize it as lawn grass. Milk cows don’t go out and graze and haven’t since the early sixties. It’s simply too inefficient, the cows trample more than they eat. Even in Amish country you’ll see farmers driving a team of horses pulling a diesel powered forage harvester. While you might see cows out in a field, that’s not where they get their feed.
So we are being shown a potential problem that doesn’t really exist so that we can be reassured that testing shows us to be no danger. Of course milk cows do more or less live outdoors. They have plenty of shelter for shade and to keep warm and dry, a happy cow does in fact give more milk.
So, if there really is radioactive iodine in the milk, they aren’t getting it from their feed, they‘re getting it from being out of doors. Maybe we should be testing the homeless people instead of the cows, or just we should just duck and cover.
Okay, I want to make it clear that I don’t think we are in any great danger right now. This is about the corporate media lying to us. The corporate motto always is, “Never tell the truth when a lie will do better”. www.prairie2.com
I agree, and likewise, one doesn't have to be a "conspiracy nut" to acknowledge that buildings full of government number crunchers (literally the best in the entire world) are at work in every way possible calculating every outcome possible every day of every year every time an event like this occurs. Nuclear fallout is what it is...this disaster will, over the course of 10-20-50-100-200 years? have what cumulative effect on the population? And what were those numbers after three mile island? and after chernobyl? It's not crazy to think these numbers are being crunched anymore than it's crazy to think people have walked on the moon or that we're communicating via portable electronic global broadcasts right now.
ReplyDeleteSurfing the edge of critical mass, it's fugged up.
Yup. Exposure to gamma radiation is a cumulative thing and there is no safe level. You have a level called the LD-50, that is where half the population dies instantly. Then you have the excursion limit, that percentage of the LD-50 which most people can survive for six hours out of a life time without immediate illness. "Safe" limits are completely arbitrary and meaningless.
ReplyDeleteTime is the big factor. We are being exposed to the six isotopes being pumped into the air and water 24/7. But so long as the cancer, birth defects, three-legged buzzards etc. crop up over a long period of time, the nuke-pimps can say "Wasn't us..."
I saw David Crosby and Grahm Nash last night. They had a song called, don't dig here. It was about putting a sign on Yucca Mountain so that people for the next ten thousand years would be able to know not to dig here. What language would you write it in?
ReplyDelete