{"id":526,"date":"2011-04-06T10:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-04-06T10:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/?p=526"},"modified":"2024-04-24T14:54:39","modified_gmt":"2024-04-24T14:54:39","slug":"fda-eating-fish-caught-japan-radiation-2400-federal-limits-poses-health-risks-14501","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/uncategorized\/fda-eating-fish-caught-japan-radiation-2400-federal-limits-poses-health-risks-14501\/","title":{"rendered":"FDA: Eating Fish With Radiation 2400% Above Federal Limits \u201cPoses No Health Risks\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n<\/div>\n
\n<\/div>\n

What I would really like know at this point is what levels qualify as \u201clevels of concern\u201d?<\/p>\n

\n

\"ATSDR\"<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Agency<\/th>\nMedia<\/th>\nStandard<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency<\/td>\nDrinking water*<\/td>\n4 mrem\/yr equivalent to 3 pCi\/L (0.1 Bq\/L) continuous exposure<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Air**<\/td>\n2.1X10-13<\/sup> Ci\/m3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Food and Drug Administration<\/td>\nFood in commerce (derived intervention level)***<\/td>\n170 Becquerels per kilogram (4,600 pCi\/kg)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
NRC, DOE, OSHA, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP), and International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP)<\/td>\nAnnual occupational exposure limits\u2020<\/td>\n50 mSv (5 rem) for whole body dose 500 mSv (50 rem) for thyroid dose<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Source: CDC: http:\/\/www.atsdr.cdc.gov\/csem\/iodine\/standards_regulations.html<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

To be clear, the radiation limit for radiation in food is 170 Becquerels per kilogram. Here is screen shot of the FDA limits for radiation published on the CDC website<\/strong><\/a> with the food radiation limits highlighted.<\/p>\n

\"FDA<\/a><\/p>\n

FDA Radiation Limits With Food Radiation Limits Highlighted From The CDC<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The New York Times reported that radiation levels in fish being caught in Japan are up to 4,080 becquerels of radioactive iodine 131 per kilogram<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Japan Sets Radiation Standards For Fish<\/h1>\n

\u2026<\/p>\n

The small fish caught Friday \u2014 before the intentional dumping began \u2014 had 4,080 becquerels of iodine 131 per kilogram. The new standards allow up to 2,000 becquerels of iodine 131 per kilogram, the standard used for vegetables in Japan, but it was unclear how the government would enforce the new rules.<\/p>\n

The fish also contained cesium 137, which decays much more slowly than iodine 131, at a level of 526 becquerels per kilogram.<\/p>\n

\u201cClearly the fish are consuming highly radioactive food,\u201d said Paul G. Falkowski, a professor of marine, earth and planetary sciences at Rutgers University. But Professor Falkowski emphasized that even those levels were not likely to present health hazards in Japan or elsewhere, since fishing is restricted in Japan and these levels of radiation are not likely to travel far.<\/p>\n

Still, experts on radiation in seafood said it was nearly impossible to get a full sense of the scope of the environmental and health risks until the Japanese released information on radiation levels in more species of fish and seaweed and in a greater number of locations. Measurements in the seawater are often not a good indication of how much radiation may be entering the food chain, scientists say.<\/p>\n

Fish and seaweed can concentrate radioactive elements as they grow, leading to levels that are higher, sometimes far higher, than in the surrounding water. Seaweed can concentrate iodine 131 10,000-fold over the surrounding water; fish concentrate cesium 137 modestly.<\/p>\n

\u2026<\/p>\n

Source: The NY Times<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

4,080 becquerels per kg is clearly 2400% higher than the federal food limits for radiation in food\u00a0 of 170 <\/strong>becquerels per kg<\/strong>. <\/strong><\/p>\n

FDA Says Japanese Fish With Radiation <\/strong>2400% Higher Than Federal Food Limits Pose No Health Risks<\/strong><\/h1>\n

The Feds say that fish with radiation levels 2400% above federal food limits is safe to eat.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

U.S. Seeks to Reassure on Contaminated Food<\/h1>\n

U.S. public-health officials sought Tuesday to reassure consumers about the safety of food in the U.S., including seafood, amid news that fish contaminated with unusually high levels of radioactive materials had been caught in waters 50 miles from the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan.<\/p>\n

No contaminated fish have turned up in the U.S., or in U.S. waters, according to experts from the Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. They expressed confidence that even a single fish sufficiently contaminated to pose a risk to human health would be detected by the U.S. monitoring system.<\/p>\n

They also dismissed concerns that eating fish contaminated at the levels seen so far in Japan would pose such a risk.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Thomas Frieden, head of the CDC in Atlanta, said he expected continued detection of low levels of radioactive elements in the water, air and food in the U.S. in coming days, but that readings at those levels \u201cdo not indicate any level of public health concern.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2026<\/p>\n

Source:<\/strong>Wall Street Journal<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Back in the real world\u2026<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Radiation Experts: Radiation Standards Are Up to 1,000 Higher Than Is Safe for the Human Body<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n

NHK: Japan Nuclear Reactor Radiation Levels NOW So High They Can\u2019t Be Measured!<\/h2>\n

NHK reports that radiation levels at the Fukushima nuclear reactor in Japan are now so high that they can\u2019t be measured.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Update<\/h1>\n

This comes via email from a reader.<\/p>\n

\n

Hi Alexander, <\/p>\n

I was reading up on the Japanese water radiation levels and the discovery of irradiated fish and I came across your blog post on the federal radiation levels. I found your post extremely interesting and it\u2019s quite surprising to learn that fish containing radiation 2400% above the federal limit do not constitute as a health risk. I complete agree with your sentiment and find myself curious as to what exactly qualifies as \u201clevels of concern\u201d. <\/p>\n

I thought you might also find this video from newsy.com to be interesting: <\/p>\n

http:\/\/www.newsy.com\/videos\/japan-s-highly-radioactive-waters-scare-fishermen\/ <\/p>\n

The clip uses multiple sources to provide a comprehensive analysis on the story. Please feel free to embed the clip into your original post if you think your readers would find it useful. <\/p>\n

Please let me know if you have any comments or questions. <\/p>\n

Thanks for the post<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Here is the video mentioned.<\/p>\n

<\/object><\/p>\n
\n

(Image Source: National Geographic)<\/p>\n

BY PAUL ROLFE<\/p>\n

ANCHOR JIM FLINK<\/p>\n

You\u2019re watching multisource environment news analysis from Newsy<\/p>\n

Radioactive water continues to spill from the damaged Fukushima reactors, and the fishing industry is now on full alert. On Tuesday, Japanese officials adopted their first-ever rules regarding safe radiation levels in fish \u2014 but the Wall Street Journal reports levels are already higher than that \u2014 much higher.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe government says it\u2019s not dangerous to human health. However, at the same time, they found fish 50 miles away from the nuclear plant with an unusual amount of radioactivity and that\u2019s scaring some people\u2026 especially the fishing industry that\u2019s all worried now that people are not going to buy, want to buy the fish even if the fish is caught miles \u2014 hundreds of miles away from the reactors.\u201d<\/p>\n

The LA Times reports water radiation levels are 7.5 million times the legal limit and the radiation in fish is at least twice the newly set legal limit. Fox News says the real risk is with the big fish.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe government is saying, well it looks like small fish will actually be absorbing this, but the problem is when the bigger fish come along and start eating them, and those are the kind of fish that end up further, much further down along the coast line towards Tokyo, that ends up getting into the food chain. People could become sick as a result of that, but they\u2019re saying that could be some weeks perhaps months down the line. But it is very much a real risk.\u201d<\/p>\n

NPR spoke to Dr. Masashi Kusakabe, an expert on ocean radiation. He says big fish will never stick around the Fukushima area long enough to be contaminated \u2014 the biggest threat to fishing markets is actually fear.<\/p>\n

Dr. Kusakabe: \u201cMost people now think, Oh its very dangerous to eat fish in Japan or fish around its coast. But I think it\u2019s very safe. So now is your chance to eat fish because its cheap.\u201d
\nReporter: \u201cAre you still eating fish?\u201d
\nDr. Kusakabe: \u201cOh of course, why not?\u201d<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Tepco \u2014 the power company that owns the reactors \u2014 is offering about $240,000 to each of the ten surrounding towns voluntarily. Officials from the city of Namie tell the LA Times they are refusing because they have other pressing matters.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe coastal areas of Namie were hit hard by the earthquake and the tsunami but because of the radiation and the evacuation order we haven\u2019t had a chance to conduct a search for the 200 people who are missing\u2026 Why would we use our resources to hand out less than 1,000 yen ($12) to every resident?\u201d<\/p>\n

Many countries are weary of food from Japan and have restricted or stopped Japanese imports. The EU has recommended radiation testing of all Japanese food imports.<\/p>\n

Source:<\/strong> Newsy<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n


\n\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What I would really like know at this point is what levels qualify as \u201clevels of concern\u201d? Agency Media Standard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking water* 4 mrem\/yr equivalent to 3 pCi\/L (0.1 Bq\/L) continuous exposure Air** 2.1X10-13 Ci\/m3 Food and Drug Administration Food in commerce (derived intervention level)*** 170 Becquerels per kilogram (4,600 pCi\/kg) … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/526"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=526"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/526\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1393,"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/526\/revisions\/1393"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=526"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=526"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.alexanderhiggins.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=526"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}