You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: What's inside a 1960s American Civil Defense Geiger Counter
I haven't checked any fish but I assume they would be insignificantly radioactive. Most things contain radioactive elements but aren't really radioactive in a detectable way because of the tiny amounts of radiation produced, so anything from Japan's reactor disaster would likely just raise the overall background radiation slightly. Unfortunately I don't have readings from before the earthquake to compare to.
Debris is another story, but I know that almost all of it has been confiscated to avoid contamination, so I unfortunately can't measure much.
Thanks for your reply.
It would be interesting to see the results of people around the world checking radiation levels of our food at markets and stores even if the levels are low, just to assure us it's safe or not. I don't think the government is checking.
Some larger fish travel long distances and might have passed through a highly contaminated area or ate other fish from a contaminated area. I would like think that is all being monitored, but is it?
Sometimes reports cause concern because maybe they aren't telling the whole story to avoid panic. Here's a news story from last year.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/02/08/unimaginable-levels-radiation-fukushima-pacific-ocean-leaks
And a video on youtube:
I can definitely check some driftwood the next time I'm at the beach (unfortunately I almost never buy fish due to being too busy/lazy to cook anything other than spaghetti haha) but I doubt the radiation will be detectable higher than background.
I noticed that map in the thumbnail lists radiation levels as Bq/m^3. The red zones were 10 Bq per m^3, so 10 decays per second per ton of water. I could be wrong, but I doubt this is even detectable on this detector - Am-241 sources containing over 30,000 Bq in a tiny point source are somewhat detectable but don't blow out the meter or anything. 10 Bq spread out among an entire cubic meter of water would be less radioactive than potassium salt at the store. I'm sure it would raise your cancer risk slightly over time if you drank it nonstop, but the human body contains enough potassium to easily outstrip this radiation source, unless the Cs-137 is being stored in the body for long periods of time.
I apologize if that was covered in the video but I honestly don't have time to watch it right now - massive amounts of work has piled up this week. I plan to come back and check this out later this week.
You're probably right that there's nothing in any of our food that would standout from background radiation. Maybe someday if you have some free time it might be interesting to show that our food is not dangerous because of Fukushima. It could be an interesting steemit post and a great informational video that others would also like.
If one day I decide to get a Geiger counter, I'll be looking for a CDV 700 because of your informative post.
Thanks