The Tonka Report

Real News In A Changing World

Archive for the ‘EPA’ Category

TEPCO Has Confirmed Nuclear Meltdown In Fukushima Reactor #1

leave a comment »

May 12, 2011: Mike Adams / NaturalNews via The Intel Hub – May 12, 2011

But don’t worry, be happy. Radiation is good for you. Really. The media and government tells us so. Breathe shallow– SJH

Intel Hub Note: This is more proof that the alternative media was correct in our assessments of the Fukushima nuclear disaster…

TEPCO has now publicly admitted it wasn’t telling the truth about the severity of the damage to Fukushima reactor No. 1.

We’re now being told what we’ve suspected all along — that nuclear fuel rods in that reactor are totally exposed and have suffered a nuclear meltdown, releasing vast amounts of radiation comparable to Chernobyl. As Bloomberg now reports, the water level in reactor No. 4 is one meter below the fuel assembly itself.

This means, of course, that the water isn’t high enough to cover the fuel rods, which is why those fuel rods have suffered a nuclear meltdown. (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-…)

The Associated Press is also reporting that “other fuel has slumped to the bottom of the pressure vessel and is thought to be covered in water.” This statement is astonishing all by itself because it means the fuel rods were in a total meltdown hot enough to cause their metal containment cylinders to “slump” and melt their way down to the lower levels of the coolant pools.

Notably, AP carefully avoids using the term “melt” and instead says the fuel rods “slumped.” This is all part of the AP’s determined downplaying of the Fukushima catastrophe (see below).

Not surprisingly, as AP now reports, “The findings also indicate a greater-than-expected leak in that vessel.” But the laws of nuclear physics don’t care what you “expect,” you see. They don’t care about media spin or power company B.S. The laws of physics simply follow their natural course, regardless of what you hope they do.

And in the case of Fukushima, the laws of physics led directly to a core fuel meltdown that now even the mainstream media cannot deny (although they still aren’t calling it a “nuclear meltdown”). As AP reports:

“Nuclear Industrial and Safety Agency officials said the new data indicates that it is likely that partially melted fuel had fallen to the bottom of the pressurized vessel that holds the reactor core together and possibly leached down into the drywell soon after the March 11 quake and tsunami that struck Japan’s northeastern coast.”

Undeniable Meltdown

What AP is describing, of course, is a nuclear meltdown. It doesn’t get any more obvious than this: The fuel reached melting temperature and melted down. Along with this, there would have had to be a massive release of radiation into the containment vessel, which just happens to have numerous holes in it that allow highly radioactive water to leak directly into the environment.

No wonder TEPCO discovered its radiation detectors had all maxed out there and become non-functional. No wonder TEPCO had to selectively stop reporting radiation releases — it was in the middle of a Chernobyl-like core fuel meltdown!

The Telegraph in the UK is refreshingly printing the truth on this story: “One of the reactors at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi power plant did suffer a nuclear meltdown, Japanese officials admitted for the first time today, describing a pool of molten fuel at the bottom of the reactor’s containment vessel.” (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor…)

But the mainstream media in the U.S. has obviously been instructed by the White House to avoid using the term “nuclear meltdown” in describing what happened at Fukushima. There is a rather blatant downplaying of the facts going on behind the scenes at the media giants.

Some of this spin can only be called blatant lies, by the way. In the same story linked above, AP claims “Unit 4 contained no fuel rods at the time of the earthquake…”

Huh? No fuel rods in reactor No. 4? Then what on Earth is this video showing? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKHW…

I love how the media admits it has been misreporting the truth of the situation all along, and then it comes up with new fairytale spin stories in practically the same sentence. They might as well just report, “There was no nuclear fuel in Fukushima at the time of the tsunami, and that’s why governments have stopped monitoring radiation levels.”

TEPCO Once Again Meets Murphy’s Law

In any case, this sudden revelation that reactor No. 4 has already experienced a nuclear fuel meltdown is, not surprisingly, causing considerable setbacks to TEPCO’s plan to have the whole facility deactivated by Christmas. Just as NaturalNews publicly predicted, the Christmas shutdown plan was little more than a combination of fantasyland thinking and industry spin.

“What this means is this is probably going to be a much more difficult cleanup than they originally planned for,” said particle physicist Paul Padley in a Bloomberg story (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-…). The government and Tepco “have consistently appeared to be underestimating the severity of the situation.”

And that’s the story of modern science: Arrogant in its confidence over the laws of nature, yet utterly dishonest in reporting the truth when its Tower of Babel crumbles to the ground. No wonder the reputation of the conventional scientific community continues to plummet as people realize just how dangerous these people really are.

Read my related story on this to learn the truth of how modern conventional science is based on a mindless, soulless, false belief that human beings have no free will or consciousness. And therefore, human beings are all expendable in science’s big experiments: Nuclear power, GMOs, vaccines and much more: http://www.naturalnews.com/032372_s…

CNN: Japan Nuclear Reactor Fukushima Meltdown

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: The MSM is simply reporting what I and others did a month ago! – SJH

Link to link to original article below…

http://theintelhub.com/2011/05/12/tepco-now-confirms-nuclear-meltdown-in-fukushima-reactor-no-1/

Advertisements

BPs Gulf Of Mexico Oil Disaster: Seafood Has Dangerous Radiation

leave a comment »

May 1, 2011: Stuart Smith / The Stuart Smith Blog via Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Blog – May 1, 2011

This world is insane– SJH

It’s been more than a year since BP’s runaway Macondo Well began filling the northern waters of the Gulf of Mexico with more than 200 million gallons of sweet crude, fouling shorelines from Louisiana’s marshes to the Florida Panhandle.

As our nation’s worst man-made environmental disaster unfolded, it quickly became the lead story of the summer – with photos of oiled birds and video of gushing oil entrancing the American public, and the world.

Yet despite the barrage of around-the-clock coverage and the army of scientists studying the impacts, one of the stories that hasn’t made headlines is that in addition to the crude and toxic dispersants, the spill also released dangerous amounts of radioactive material into the Gulf.

Once the well was capped in mid-July of last year, mainstream media resources and the public were quick to turn away from the disaster and its far-reaching impacts on the environment, marine life, wildlife and, of course, people. Much like the oil itself – strategically sunk to the Gulf floor by BP’s use of the toxic dispersant Corexit – national news coverage of the spill’s effects has largely vanished, although we did see the expected round of first-year anniversary stories. But still no mention of radioactive material.

The true extent of the spill’s damage is just now beginning to come into view for clean-up workers, commercial fishermen, oil-well workers, charter boat captains, restaurant owners, Gulf Coast denizens and independent scientists studying the effects of the spill – and the fallout becomes more troubling by the day. Independent researchers, like Samantha Joye from the University of Georgia, report that oil coats the Gulf floor where it has decimated deep-water marine life. Residents up and down the Gulf Coast report that tar balls and mats continue to litter their beaches, and re-oilings are common. The multi-billion-dollar Gulf seafood industry is reeling from both small catches and plummeting demand brought on by very real concerns about contamination. Dead dolphins and sea turtles continue to wash ashore at record-breaking rates. Oyster beds have been devastated and are in desperate need of restoration. And perhaps most disturbing of all, increasingly large numbers of clean-up workers and coastal residents are getting sick.

Reports of unexplained health problems are soaring – and the primary suspects are the toxic compounds contained in BP’s oil and the chemical dispersants used to break down the crude. From flu-like symptoms to blindness to intense chest pain to severe sinus inflammation, people across the Gulf region are reporting debilitating illnesses in the wake of the spill.

To determine how the spill may be causing this spike in sicknesses, we need to look at how the toxins are released into the environment.

The production of oil delivers several different waste streams into the environment in an uncontrolled release like the BP disaster. Besides the oil itself, highly toxic compounds are also present in the gas streams jettisoned from the well, including methane and hydrogen sulfide. A waste byproduct known as “produced water” is also simultaneously discharged with the oil and gases from the well. Every oil and gas formation, or reservoir, contains these waste streams.

The toxins associated with these streams can be broken down into three primary categories: (1) organic elements like benzene; (2) inorganic heavy metals including lead, chromium and cadmium; and (3) most important, naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM).

Radioactive elements such as radium, thorium and uranium are known byproducts of the oil production process. These toxic elements are extracted from the ground along with the oil and gas, and are separated from the fossil fuels as part of the production process. Once the NORM is extracted, it is flushed directly back into the ocean in the waste-stream byproduct known as produced water. Their discharge into the Gulf of Mexico has been a daily reality since the 1950s – but the amount that was released into the water from the runaway Macondo Well is unprecedented.

As if NORM exposure from offshore drilling processes wasn’t enough to worry about, the New York Times published a high-profile article in late February (see link below) on the dangers of radioactive exposure onshore from the drilling process known as hydrofracking.

Fracking, as it is commonly called, involves the injection of water and a mixture of highly toxic chemicals into wells to break up rock formations that hold large amounts of natural gas. However, just like the offshore drilling process, the produced-water waste stream created by fracking contains dangerous levels of NORM that can contaminate inland waterways and has even been dumped in water sewage plants in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and New York. These types of treatment facilities don’t test for radioactivity so there is no way of telling just how much NORM is being mixed directly into drinking water.

The Times also uncovered a bombshell “secret industry study” from the American Petroleum Institute (API). The study, written in 1990, states that consuming seafood from the Gulf of Mexico poses “potentially significant risks” of cancer to humans due to the radium levels in produced water discharges. The EPA has yet to publicly release a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the volume of produced water being discharged in the Gulf of Mexico or its effect on human and marine life.

As someone who has spent the last 20-odd years litigating against the oil and gas industry for damages caused by radioactive oilfield waste, I had serious concerns that the BP spill released a significant amount of NORM into the Gulf. I knew the damage from the radioactive material could be acute and long-lasting to the Gulf ecosystem – and could linger for hundreds of years. Radium-226, a primary component of NORM, has a half-life of 1,600 years (the time it takes for the element to decay to half of its original mass).

In pursuing my hunch that large amounts of NORM were discharged during the nearly three months the oil spewed from the Deepwater Horizon site, I obtained a sample of the oil from the Macondo Well and had it sent to an independent laboratory in the United Kingdom. The results are now in and the presence of a significant quantity of radioactive material has been confirmed by Dr. Chris Busby, a chemical physicist of the U.K.-based environmental watchdog organization Green Audit.

Dr. Busby’s report (see link below) on the laboratory findings suggests that as much as 50 kilograms of uranium, or about 110 pounds, were released into the Gulf of Mexico from the BP spill. According to Dr. Busby, the tests showed the uranium content in the oil to be 0.073 mg/kg, or more than 500 times the normal concentration of uranium in seawater. The Gulf of Mexico is a large body of water but even a small amount of radioactive material can have a devastating impact on life in a marine ecosystem – as well as on humans who are unfortunate enough to come into direct contact with it.

Alarmed by his findings, Dr. Busby warns: This level of uranium exposure is thousands of times more dangerous than the ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) risk model suggests. We should be very concerned that this material is showing up in an ecosystem with shrimp, crabs, fish, and other animals that humans consume on a daily basis.

The uranium content in the oil is not the only concern, radon gases would also have been present in the methane expelled from the well and significant concentrations of radium-226 and radium-228 would have been present in the produced water discharged from the well. No estimates of these radioactive discharges have been publicly released by BP or the federal government.

To significantly compound the potential human health risks associated with the disaster, the radioactive oil burned off at the water surface resulted in radioactive isotopes becoming airborne. Once airborne, the radioactive particles can be easily inhaled into the human respiratory system. We are unaware of any studies or dose reconstructions that have been done, or will be done, by BP or the federal government to assess the risk from this human exposure pathway.

Dr. Busby explains the health risk: Uranium is increasingly seen to be a very serious hazard to humans due to its high affinity for genetic material and its ability to trap and amplify natural background gamma radiation at the one place in the body it can do most harm. For this reason, humans have developed responses to uranium ingestion over evolutionary time scales in the form of low absorption from the gut. But humans have never had to deal with uranium inhalation. Once inhaled, uranium can directly enter the brain or pass through the lungs into the lymphatic nodes and blood system, causing the wide range of neurological conditions that were identified as Gulf War syndrome at one extreme and cancer at the other.

Busby said the workers who were closest to the controlled burns of the oil would have been particularly susceptible to radiation exposure. The physical symptoms of radioactive exposure are very similar to the symptoms produced by exposure to the other toxic compounds in the oil, flu-like symptoms which continue over long periods of time. Specific symptoms from radiation exposure include: neurological problems such as memory loss, headaches and balance problems, even seizures; stomach and digestive problems, such as diarrhea; sweating; dizziness; nosebleeds and bleeding from the ears, rectum and urinary tract; trouble sleeping; and rashes or skin irritations are also to be cause for concern.

If any of these symptoms are observed, it is imperative that the person affected seek medical attention as soon as possible. If first contact with a medical professional results in a dismissal of the person’s symptoms, he or she should not be discouraged. Many people across the Gulf region are experiencing similar health problems, and most doctors are not familiar with the effects of chemical or radiation exposure. Affected persons should continue to seek medical help.

Uncontrolled NORM discharges occur on a daily basis during the oil production process in the Gulf of Mexico. While much of the material produced in deeper waters is dispersed into the water column and partitions into smaller concentrations, production in shallower waters produces radioactive material that settles on the ocean floor where it accumulates and comes into direct contact with bottom-feeding marine life. The radioactive elements are consumed by these benthic organisms then work their way back up the food chain to larger animals – and can eventually contaminate humans who consume seafood from the Gulf.

Due to lack of research, little is known about the effects of NORM exposure in the Gulf of Mexico and how it affects ocean life and humans. However, numerous land-based studies have shown that human exposure to even small traces of radioactivity can prove deadly. Radium has a half-life of about 1,600 years while uranium lingers for billions of years. Yes, that’s billions with a “b.” Once the material is introduced into the Gulf ecosystem whatever effect it has, for the most part, it will be permanent.

A white paper authored by radioactive waste experts Marvin Resnikoff, Ph.D and Stanley J. Waligora, Jr. for the Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN) suggests that as much as 6,000 Ci (curie) of radium are released into the Gulf waters by the oil production process every year. Very little regulation and monitoring has been put in place by the EPA or state agencies to assess the amount of radioactive material being discharged into the Gulf.

Of particular concern is the cumulative effect of the radioactive fallout occurring from oil and gas platforms near fragile marine estuaries such as oyster beds. In fact, as the white paper notes, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) doesn’t even require rig owners to test for radioactive material in their produced-water discharge. We really don’t know how bad the problem is, but the cursory data is cause for serious concern. Despite repeated requests, the LDEQ has refused to require the oil and gas industry to pay for an independent environmental impact statement (EIS) to assess the risk inherent in these discharges.

Aside from the human impact, the BP spill is a clarion call to recognize the damage inflicted on the Gulf’s fragile ecosystem for the past half century brought on by the race to, “Drill, baby, Drill!” The coastal ecosystem of Louisiana is a litmus test for states who are considering drilling off their own shores. With possible plans to expand offshore oil production from California to Florida, this isn’t just a Gulf Coast problem, it’s a national and even international problem we all have to face. The mad scramble for offshore, black gold continues unabated around the world despite the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Major offshore installations are either in place or planned for South America, Asia, Africa, Australia, and the Arctic Ocean region. The very health of our planet’s oceans is at stake.

Here’s the NYT article on the dangers of fracking: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/us/27gas.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&ref=usn-oscar-controversy/

See state and federal agency documents on fracking and the associated toxic waste here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/02/27/us/natural-gas-documents-1.html#document/p417/a9945

Dr. Busby’s report on the discharge of radioactive material into the Gulf is here: http://www.scribd.com/full/49647149?access_key=key-1xcpnhn9boiq0tewc6iu

The white paper on produced waters is here: http://leanweb.org/campaigns/produced-waters/produced-waters-white-paper.html

Source: Chernobyl in the Gulf of Mexico

Revelation 8: Gulf Oil Catastrophe

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: Our world is literally being destroyed by a pack of psychopaths– SJH

Link to link to original article below…

http://gulfofmexicooilspillblog.com/2011/04/30/gulf-of-mexico-oil-spill-blog-gulf-seafood-radium-levels/

Fukushima: 154 Trillion Bq’s/Day – West Coast Radiation Forecast

leave a comment »

April 25, 2011: Uploaded by  / YouTube – April 24, 2011

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: As I have stated from the beginning, this will dwarf Chernobyl. Off topic, I finally figured out a way around the current WordPress.com problem in order to post and format images and videos again. It is a major pain in the ass to do, but it works until their software is hopefully patched! – SJH

Link to original video below…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2wLbwuJeMM&feature=player_embedded

BP Gulf Oil Disaster: The Biggest Chemical Poisoning In US History

leave a comment »

April 18, 2011: Dahr Jamail / Al Jazeera – April 16, 2011

April 20, 2011 marks the one-year anniversary of BP’s catastrophic oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. On this day in 2010 the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded, causing oil to gush from 5,000 feet below the surface into the ninth largest body of water on the planet.

At least 4.9 million barrels of BP’s oil would eventually be released into the Gulf of Mexico before the well was capped 87 days later. It is, to date, the largest accidental marine oil spill in the history of the petroleum industry.

BP has used at least 1.9 million gallons of toxic dispersants to sink the oil, in an effort the oil giant claimed was aimed at keeping the oil from reaching shore. Critics believe the chemical dispersants were used simply to hide the oil and minimise BP’s responsibility for environmental fines.

Earlier this month Transocean Ltd, the owner of the Deepwater Horizon, gave its top executives bonuses for achieving what it described as the “best year in safety performance in our company’s history”. Transocean CEO Steve Newman’s bonus was $374,062. BP has plans to restart deepwater drilling on 10 wells in the Gulf of Mexico this summer after being granted permission by US regulators.

Meanwhile, marine and wildlife biologists, toxicologists, and medical doctors have described the impact of the disaster upon the environment and human health as “catastrophic,” and have told Al Jazeera that this is only the beginning of what they expect to be an environmental and human health crisis that will likely span decades.

The Demise Of Gulf Vertebrates

Less than four months after the disaster began, very large fish-kills began to appear along the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida.

On August 18, a team from Georgia Sea Grant and the University of Georgia released a report that estimated 70-79 per cent of the oil that gushed from the well “has not been recovered and remains a threat to the ecosystem”. More recent studies estimate that figure could be closer to 90 per cent.

Dr Ed Cake, a biological oceanographer, as well as a marine and oyster biologist, has “great concern” about the fish kills over the last year, which he feels are likely directly related to the BP oil disaster.

In recent months, more than 290 corpses of dolphins and their newborn have washed ashore in the areas of the Gulf most heavily affected by the disaster, along with scores of dead endangered sea turtles.

“If we use several models to see what is going on, the sea turtles and neo-natal dolphin deaths, the impacts of the dispersed oil are lingering”, Cake told Al Jazeera. “The oil is out there and still coming onto our shores”.

On May 20 of last year, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) told BP it had 24 hours to find a less toxic alternative to its dispersants, but the EPA’s request was ignored.

Then on May 25, BP was given a directive by the EPA to scale back their spraying of the Gulf of Mexico with dispersants. The US Coast Guard overlooked the EPA’s directive and provided BP with 74 exemptions in 48 days to use the dispersants.

A March 1987 report titled Organic Solvent Neurotoxicity, by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), states:

“The acute neurotoxic effects of organic solvent exposure in workers and laboratory animals are narcosisanaesthesiaia, central nervous system (CNS) depression, respiratory arrest, unconsciousness, and death.”

The dispersants are banned in at least 19 countries, including the UK. Cake’s assessment for sea turtle and dolphin populations in the Gulf is bleak. “The two models of the turtles and dolphins indicate that something is drastically wrong in the marine environment, that I believe point towards the demise of these vertebrates in the Gulf.”

Underscoring his concern, a new study published in Conservation Letters this March reveals that the true impact of BP’s oil disaster on wildlife may be gravely underestimated. The study argues that fatality figures based on the number of recovered animal carcasses will not give a true death toll, which may be 50 times higher than believed since most carcasses sink before they are spotted.

Cake believes the National Marine Fisheries Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have been remiss in determining the cause of the deaths.

“In the year since the spill began, NOAA admits to doing no tissue sampling, which to me is scientifically incredible, for if you have forensic samples, you are bound by protocols to have them analysed right away so they do not degrade, unless your purpose is not to know what is killing these dolphins”, he said.

In February the Obama administration, via the National Marine Fisheries Service, issued a gag order to force marine scientists who were contracted to document the spikes in dolphin mortality and to collect specimens and tissue samples to keep their findings confidential.

Bleak Prognosis

Dolpins and sea turtles can be considered the canaries in the coal mine in the Gulf since they are at the top of the food chain and directly reflect what is happening to the marine environment in which they live.

Ed Cake, a biological oceanographer, as well as a marine and oyster biologist, has “great concern” about the fish kills over the last year, which he feels are likely directly related to the BP oil disaster.

“Adult dolphins’ systems are picking up whatever is in the system out there, and we know the oil is out there and working it’s way up the food chain through the food web and dolphins are at the top of that food chain.”

Cake explained: “The chemicals then move into their lipids, fat, and then when they are pregnant, their young rely on this fat, and so it’s no wonder dolphins are having developmental issues and still births”.

Since last fall, Dr Wilma Subra, a chemist and MacArthur Fellow, has been conducting tests on seafood and sediment samples along the Gulf for chemicals present in BP’s crude oil and toxic dispersants.

“Tests have shown significant levels of oil pollution in oysters and crabs along the Louisiana coastline”, Subra told Al Jazeera, “We have also found high levels of hydrocarbons in the soil and vegetation.”

Cake, who lives in Mississippi, said: “In the past months we’ve lost the young of the year population of dolphins in this area. We are not seeing any young of the year dolphins in the Mississippi and Alabama coastal area. The question is, for us as humans, could we withstand a similar impact if all our children were born dead because of environmental pollutants? I would say we could not.”

It has been more than 31 years since the 1979 Ixtoc-1 oil disaster in Mexico’s Bay of Campeche, and the oysters, clams, and mangrove forests have still not recovered in their oiled habitats in seaside estuaries of the Yucatan Peninsula.

It has been over 21 years since the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil disaster in Alaska, and the herring fishery that failed in the wake of that disaster has still not returned. From a biological oceanographer’s perspective, we are still in the short-term impact stage of BP’s oil disaster. Cake, who is 70-years-old, said:

“I will not be alive to see the Gulf of Mexico recover. Without funding and serious commitment, these things will not come back to pre-April 2010 levels for decades.”

Toxic Chemicals ‘In The Air’

Two-year-old Gaven Tillman of Pass Christian, Mississippi, has been diagnosed with severe upper respiratory, sinus, and viral infections. His temperature has reached more than 39 degrees [Celsius] and he has been sick since last September.

“He has been seen by nine different doctors and had twenty-four doctor & ER visits,” Shirley Tillman, his grandmother and former BP oil cleanup worker told Al Jazeera, “Some of his diagnoses include severe inflammation of his upper sinuses, upper respiratory infections, ear infections, sore throats, headaches, fever, vomiting & diarrhea.”

Both Shirley and her husband Don’s blood tested positive for chemicals from BP’s crude oil, but now Gaven’s blood has tested positive as well.

“We expected to find BP’s toxins in our bodies after working in the VOO [Vessels of Opportunity] program,” she added, “But we did not expect our two-year-old grandson to test positive for having them too, with levels higher than ours. He has not been to the beach and has not eaten any seafood. Therefore, it is in the air.”

Shirley Tillman, along with her son and husband, all tested positive for having BP’s toxins in their blood [Erika Blumenfeld/Al Jazeera] Dr Riki Ott, a toxicologist, marine biologist, and Exxon Valdez survivor, told Al Jazeera that: “The dispersants used in BP’s draconian experiment contain solvents such as petroleum distillates and 2-butoxyethanol.

Solvents dissolve oil, grease, and rubber”, she continued, “It should be no surprise that solvents are also notoriously toxic to people, something the medical community has long known”.

“They evaporate in air and are easily inhaled, they penetrate skin easily, and they cross the placenta into fetuses…For example, 2- butoxyethanol [in BP’s Corexit dispersants] is a human health hazard substance; it is a fetal toxin and it breaks down blood cells, causing blood and kidney disorders”, Ott said.

Pathways of exposure to the dispersants are inhalation, ingestion, skin, and eye contact. Health impacts include headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pains, chest pains, respiratory system damage, skin sensitization, hypertension, central nervous system depression, neurotoxic effects, cardiac arrhythmia, and cardiovascular damage. They are teratogenic, mutagenic, and carcinogenic.

Since last July, Al Jazeera has spoken with scores of Gulf residents, fishermen, and clean-up workers who have blamed the aforementioned symptoms they are experiencing on the chemicals from BP’s oil and dispersants.

“I have critically high levels of chemicals in my body,” 33-year-old Steven Aguinaga of Hazlehurst, Mississippi told Al Jazeera.

Aguinaga and his close friend Merrick Vallian went swimming at Fort Walton Beach, Florida, in July 2010. “At that time I had no knowledge of what dispersants were, but within a few hours, we were drained of energy and not feeling good,” he said, “I’ve been extremely sick ever since.”

According to chemist Bob Naman, these chemicals create an even more toxic substance when mixed with crude oil. “I’m scared of what I’m finding,” Naman, who works at the Analytical Chemical Testing Lab in Mobile, Alabama, added, “This is an unprecedented environmental catastrophe.”

Aguinaga’s health has been in dramatic decline. “I have terrible chest pain, at times I can’t seem to get enough oxygen, and I’m constantly tired with pains all over my body,” Aguinaga explained, “At times I’m pissing blood, vomiting dark brown stuff, and every pore of my body is dispensing water.”

And Aguinaga’s friend Vallian is now dead. “After we got back from our vacation in Florida, Merrick went to work for a company contracted by BP to clean up oil in Grand Isle, Louisiana,” Aguinaga said of his 33-year-old physically fit friend. Two weeks after that he dropped dead.”

Problems Will Continue

Most of the human blood Dr Subra has tested has toxic chemicals present at levels several times higher than the national average.

“Ethylbenzene, m,p-Xylene and Hexane are volatile organic chemicals that are present in the BP crude oil”, she said. “We are finding these in excess of the 95th percentile, which is the average for the entire nation. Sometimes we’re finding amounts five to 10 times in excess of the 95th percentile.”

Ethylbenzene is a form of benzene present in the body when it begins to be broken down… m,p-Xylene is a clear, colorless, sweet-smelling, flammable liquid that is refined from crude oil and is primarily used as a solvent.

Al Jazeera asked Subra what she thought the local, state and federal governments should be doing about the ongoing chemical exposures.

“There is a lack of concern by the government agencies and the [oil] industry,” She said, “There is a leaning towards wanting to say it is all fixed and let us move on, when it is not. The crude oil is continuing to come onshore in tar mats, balls, and strings…So the exposure continues. There is still a large amount of crude in the marshes and buried on the beaches. As long as that pathway is there for exposure, these problems will continue quite a long time into the future.”

Dr Mike Robicheux is a doctor in Louisiana who has been treating scores of people he says are being made sick from BP’s toxic chemicals.

Robicheux says new patients from the exposure are coming into his office daily, and believes that the broader medical community across the Gulf Coast are either unwilling or unable to deal with the crisis. Robicheux, who has appealed to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for help, said:

“The medical community has shut this down…They either don’t understand or are afraid to deal with it properly because they are afraid of the oil and gas industry…This is the biggest public health crisis from a chemical poisoning in the history of this country,” Robicheux told Al Jazeera, “We are going to have thousands of people who are extremely sick, and if they aren’t treated, a large number of them are going to die.”

Revelation 8: Gulf Oil Catastrophe

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: I will venture to say that not one single human being alive today will live to see the Gulf of Mexico ever recover from this aggregious crime against both nature and humanity– SJH

Link to original article below…

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/04/20114161153981347.html 

Despite Gulf Oil Disaster Transocean Claim It’s Best Year In Safety

leave a comment »

April 2, 2011: Kase Wickman / The Raw Story via What Really Happened.com – April 2, 2011

We are living in the twilight zone of ‘faux reality’ as our world is murdered– SJH

The company that owns the now-infamous Deepwater Horizon, the oil rig that caused immeasurable damage to the Gulf, recently applauded itself for the “best year in safety performance in our Company’s history.” The company, Transocean Ltd., rewarded its executives millions in bonuses for the achievement, according to the annual report it released yesterday.

Steven L. Newman, Transocean’s president and CEO, awarded himself $4.3 million in cash bonuses, stocks and options. Eleven people died as a direct result of the disaster in the Gulf, nine of them Transocean employees, according to Forbes.

“Notwithstanding the tragic loss of life in the Gulf of Mexico, we achieved an exemplary statistical safety record as measured by our total recordable incident rate and total potential severity rate. As measured by these standards, we recorded the best year in safety performance in our Company’s history, which is a reflection on our commitment to achieving an incident free environment, all the time, everywhere,” the company wrote in their annual statement to shareholders.

Transocean leased the Deepwater Horizon to BP, so it contends it has no liability for the spill and explosion.

Revelation 8: Gulf Oil Catastrophe

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: This has to be the most despicable time in all of human history– SJH

Link to original article below…

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/04/02/transocean-hails-best-year-in-safety-gives-execs-bonuses-despite-gulf-spill/

EPA Detects Radiation In Washington State Milk — FIVE DAYS AGO

with one comment

March 30, 2011: Alex Thomas / The Intel Hub – March 30, 2011

Five friggin’ days ago? – SJH

Today the Environmental Protection Agency reported that radiation has been found in milk from Spokane, Washington.

The EPA released data taken on March 25th that indicates low levels of radiation have been detected.

Not only is this startling, it also shows that it either takes the EPA five days to test milk or there is a five day waiting period before information is released to the public.

The EPA’s Radnet system conducts radiological monitoring of milk and then hands jurisdiction over safety, labeling, and identify of milk and milk products to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

“Results from a screening sample taken March 25 from Spokane, Wash. detected 0.8 pCi/L of iodine-131, which is more than 5,000 times lower than the Derived Intervention Level set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.”

“These types of findings are to be expected in the coming days and are far below levels of public health concern, including for infants and children. Iodine-131 has a very short half-life of approximately eight days, and the level detected in milk and milk products is therefore expected to drop relatively quickly,” according to an EPA statement released today.

The statement then went on to say that we are exposed to radiation everyday and that these levels are too low to cause any health effects. “Iodine-131 has a half-life of eight days, and the level found in milk and dairy products is expected to drop relatively quickly,” the agencies said.

The fact that multiple experts, including Dr. Chris Busby have debunked the myth that low levels of radiation are harmless seems to remain unimportant to the same agency who told us the air was safe to breath after 9/11.

At the same time that radiation is being detected in the United States, certain officials within the EPA are actively campaigning to make significant changes to the Protective Active Guidelines or PAGs. PAGs are used by the EPA to enforce the law following any incident involving the release of radioactive material.

Michael Kane, reporting for Collapse.net wrote about the huge increase that the EPA is attempting to make to these guidelines:

“In 1992, the EPA produced a PAGs manual that answers many of these questions. But now an update to the 1992 manual is being planned, and if the “Dr. Strangelove” wing of the EPA has its way, here is what it means (brace yourself for these ludicrous increases):

  • A nearly 1000-fold increase for exposure to strontium-90;
  • A 3000 to 100,000-fold hike for exposure to iodine-131; and
  • An almost 25,000 rise for exposure to radioactive nickel-63.i

This increase is absolutely ridiculous considering many people believe the levels that are considered acceptable now are actually harmful over a long period of time.

Whether or not radiation from the Fukushima nuclear power plant will cause harm in the United States over a long period of time is unknown due to the fact that most experts are pushing the official line and data is being kept secret.

With that being said, it is highly unlikely that milk tainted with Iodine-131 will cause radiation sickness, (the shelf life is very short) the real worry is whether or not other radioactive particles with longer shelf lives will end up in the food and water supply.

EPA Says Radiation Found in U.S. Milk

Japan Radiation Found in Milk Sample; U.S. Steps Up Monitoring

 Fukushima Radioactive Particles Concentrated Over Midwest On April 1-2

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: We are all on our own, folks… This government will not help us! – SJH

Link to original article below…

http://theintelhub.com/2011/03/30/epa-detects-radiation-in-washington-state-milk/

EPA: Raising Radiation Exposure Levels For Government Cover-Up

leave a comment »

March 29, 2011: Brandon Turbeville / Activist Post  – March 28, 2011

There is no safe dose of radiation! – SJH

As Americans focus on March Madness and Dancing With the Stars instead of the radioactive plume spreading all across the country, the US EPA is attempting to make the mainstream media cover up of the Fukushima cloud a bit easier.

The agency now notorious for its infamous claim that the air was safe to breathe after 9/11 is now seeking to raise the PAGs (Protective Action Guides) to levels vastly higher than those at which they are currently set allowing for more radioactive contamination of the environment and the general public in the event of a radioactive disaster.

PAGs are policies established by the EPA that guide the agency in enforcing the various environmental laws such as the Clean Air and Water Act in the invent of a radioactive emergency such as a nuclear/dirty bomb or factory meltdown like that occurring in Japan. The EPA had already established PAGs in this area in 1992. They can be found here. However, the agency now plans to amend and revise these standards this year.

Because regulatory agencies form their own policies (although they can be directed by either the President or the Congress), there is no requirement to seek Congressional approval for these changes. All that is required is that the agency place the proposed changes in the Federal Register for public comment before it finalizes its draft into legal policy.

According to PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, the new standards would drastically raise the levels of radiation allowed in food, water, air, and the general environment. PEER, a national organization of local, state, and federal employees who had access to internal EPA emails, claims that the new standards will result in a “nearly 1000-fold increase for exposure to strontium-90, a 3000 to 100,000-fold hike for exposure to iodine-131; and an almost 25,000 rise for exposure to radioactive nickel-63″ in drinking water. This information, as well as the emails themselves were published by Collapsenet on March 24.

In addition to raising the level of permissible radiation in the environment, PEER suggests that the standards of cleanup after a radioactive emergency will actually be reduced. As a result, radioactive cleanup thresholds will be vastly lowered and, by default, permissible levels of radiation will be vastly increased in this manner as well.

As Michael Kane writes for Collapsenet, the current EPA numbers, as well as those generally agreed upon in the international radiation assessment community, all point to the fact that these increases in permissible levels would create a level of radiation where approximately 1 in 4 people would contract cancer from exposure to them.

The changes to the 1992 PAGs are not a new attempt by the EPA. The agency attempted similar changes in 2009 but the revisions were stopped largely by a barrage of FOIA requests and a lawsuit filed by PEER. However, in 2009 there was no massive radiation disaster the EPA needed to cover up as there is at the current time. In 2009, the EPA could afford to back off, regroup, and try again at a later date. Unfortunately, it is not likely to react the same way this time around.

As of the time of this writing, a toxic cloud of radiation has not only reached the US West Coast, but has spread all the way across the country to states like South Carolina, North Carolina, Florida, and Massachussetts. Both the US government and the mainstream media have largely denied any risk associated with the radiation and have actively engaged in covering up the extent to which it has spread across the country.

In the event of any real journalism, the revelation of the danger and scale of the Japanese radiation cloud could be disastrous for those who hide the truth from the people who are sure to suffer the consequences. Indeed, the revelation that a toxic cloud of cancer-causing particles is littering the United States (especially in real time) might even be too much for the average television- and sports-obsessed American to handle.

However, the lowering of safety standards for radiation contamination would be a major victory for those wishing to cover it up. After all, the talking heads would then be able to claim that the radiation levels are within the safety range set by the EPA. No cause for worry.

Regardless of the motivation behind these new changes, they must be actively opposed. We cannot allow the veil to be pulled even further over the eyes of the American people. At the very least, we cannot allow an agency charged with protecting both the environment and the people who live in it to set standards alleviating itself of that responsibility.

 Radioactive Exposure Expert: “There Is No Safe Dose Of Radiation”

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: Let me repeat… There is no safe dose of man-made radiation! – SJH

Link to original article below…

http://www.activistpost.com/2011/03/epa-to-help-mainstream-media-obscure.html#more