U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Alaska
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-06-2013, 02:01 PM
 
18,893 posts, read 24,242,729 times
Reputation: 10336

Advertisements

That's not what I stated, and I'm interested in having a discussion with someone who twists things in the manner than you just did. One more time, my point was that the blogs and other material posted here tried to claim that Alaska's fish count was significantly down this year, and that is not at all the truth. Such a blatant lie makes me wonder what else they are lying about.

I doubt if you know this, but the majority of those who fish in Alaskan waters are residents of Washington state.

Last edited by Metlakatla; 10-06-2013 at 02:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2013, 02:03 PM
 
18,893 posts, read 24,242,729 times
Reputation: 10336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawknest View Post
I as I said, I live where most likely I won't be directly affected. But, should the cruise lines decide to not operate due to an imminent threat, it will have a ripple effect to many thousands from Skagway to Sitka to Ketchikan and down to Seattle. So, it bears closer scrutiny that just saying it won't happen.

I seem to remember in Minimata, Japan - residents were told the mercury in the oyster beds wasn't a problem. Thousands died of mercury poisoning. Their govt did nothing - just ignored it for years.

I would lean on the side of caution.
Why do you think that the cruise lines will decide not to operate because of an "imminent threat?"
They're pretty self contained, and they don't depend on Alaska seafood to feed their passengers.

I wouldn't worry; the Skagway jewelry stores will be there along with the cockroaches and rats even if the rest of the planet was nuked to cinders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 02:12 PM
 
18,893 posts, read 24,242,729 times
Reputation: 10336
Quote:
Originally Posted by induchman2 View Post
Ok, so Alaska would rather wait to see if the predictions are wrong? Washington State isn't waiting.

Can you post some links to legit sources about this? I'm not saying you're wrong, but one of the sources that you've posted is called "Washington's Blog." I'm wondering if you're mistaking that blog for something that has anything to do with Washington State because of the name. It doesn't; it's a Canadian blog.

All I can find on it is old news that doesn't have a lot to do with the current leaks in the Japanese plant. I'd say that if you're concerned about it, don't eat seafood. To my knowledge, the tests done in Washington State several years ago didn't find elevated levels of anything.

https://dec.alaska.gov/eh/fss/Food/radiation_news.htm

You don't have to believe anything that's posted on the state of Alaska website, but it's a good starting place for those who'd prefer to get their information from sources other than blogs out of BC.

Last edited by Metlakatla; 10-06-2013 at 02:26 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 04:11 PM
 
Location: Naptowne, Alaska
15,577 posts, read 32,963,142 times
Reputation: 14528
There have been some folks gathering up flotsam/jetsam along the beaches of PWS all summer. All kinds of stuff. They have a mountain of floats and stuff in Whittier. My brother grabbed a black float for me. It is stamped with Japanese symbols or some kind of ID markings. I know have it anchored off our beach in front of our cabin to use on a running line for the boat. I hope it isn't radioactive! I'm going to guess and say no...or those guys gathering the stuff up would probably be in exposure suits and would not be giving it to the public.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 04:34 PM
 
18,893 posts, read 24,242,729 times
Reputation: 10336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawknest View Post
I as I said, I live where most likely I won't be directly affected. But, should the cruise lines decide to not operate due to an imminent threat, it will have a ripple effect to many thousands from Skagway to Sitka to Ketchikan and down to Seattle. So, it bears closer scrutiny that just saying it won't happen.

I seem to remember in Minimata, Japan - residents were told the mercury in the oyster beds wasn't a problem. Thousands died of mercury poisoning. Their govt did nothing - just ignored it for years.

I would lean on the side of caution.
You stated in your first post that Alaska salmon has been contaminated. I've looked all over the Internet and can't find anything legit about that. Perhaps I'm missing it. Do you have any legit links?

I would err on the side of caution as well -- just don't eat seafood if you're worried.

This company has done their own testing, by the way, through a 3rd party lab.

http://www.vitalchoice.com/shop/pc/v...asp?idpage=141

Last edited by Metlakatla; 10-06-2013 at 05:11 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 05:42 PM
 
10,386 posts, read 9,364,544 times
Reputation: 4841
Do you honestly think that they are going to publish accurate reports? I would tend to doubt that. I will find a source for your questions Ms. Met.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 05:57 PM
 
18,893 posts, read 24,242,729 times
Reputation: 10336
Quote:
Originally Posted by AADAD View Post
Do you honestly think that they are going to publish accurate reports? I would tend to doubt that. I will find a source for your questions Ms. Met.
LOL. I knew that was coming. I didn't claim it was accurate, and I'm not going to claim that it isn't. Nonetheless, I'll trust the company in question before I'll trust a known shill for BC farmed salmon, especially one that is trying to claim that the Alaska salmon runs were way down this year when in reality, the numbers just made history.

Honestly, I think that the company in question is one of the ethical ones. I'm not sure I'd trust the same data coming from Trident. I'd trust either one before I'd trust the BC farmed fish industry, though.

Don't eat if you think it's unsafe. Simple fix.

Last edited by Metlakatla; 10-06-2013 at 07:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 08:29 PM
 
Location: Not far from Fairbanks, AK
15,587 posts, read 24,976,058 times
Reputation: 11045
I was listening to Professor Michio kaku on his Sunday's radio show, and according to him and the scientists in his show, numerous tests have been done on some of the debris floating away after the tsunami, and no significant radiation has been found.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 08:39 PM
 
941 posts, read 1,388,594 times
Reputation: 767
Default Radiation Damage

The amount of radioactive material coming out of that reactor when compared to the volume of the Pacific Ocean is miniscule. The escaping material is being diluted by movement of the ocean currents into the volume of the Pacific Ocean and it is doubtful you could find more than a trace amount of that radiation. In reality it would be doubtful you could measure it against the background radiation that is normally found in any large body of water. Radiation in this World is a fact of life and if you would wear a dosimeter during your life time you might be appalled by the amount of natural radiation in the environment. If you were to swim in the ocean in Alaska the amount of radiation you could be exposed to might be less than a dental X-ray of your teeth each time you visit the dentist. In fact a flight from Anchorage to Seattle would probably give you a larger dose of radiation than you would get from a years supply of Salmon if you ate it three meals a day. And if you get a chest x-ray you would think you had been inside a nuclear reactor all day when you saw the full body load you were exposed to. Radiation can kill you but in such small quantities you are apt to be exposed to you would be hard pressed to determine the damage to your chromosomes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2013, 10:27 PM
 
18,893 posts, read 24,242,729 times
Reputation: 10336
Quote:
Originally Posted by AADAD View Post
Do you honestly think that they are going to publish accurate reports? I would tend to doubt that. I will find a source for your questions Ms. Met.
After investigating further, yes, I believe that this company posted accurate reports. There are too many eyes on them for them to have pulled off doing otherwise, and the CEO is known in the industry as a person of high integrity.

I keep coming up with the same contradiction; those claiming that salmon levels in BC are due to the nuclear accident in Japan keep saying that Alaska was affected the same way. Again, Alaska just finished off its biggest salmon year in recorded history. When someone tells a lie of that magnitude, it's only smart to question their other claims. It's too consistently out there for it to be just a mistake. Again, not saying that it couldn't happen, but the fact that these people are trying really hard to prove their point with lies indicates that they're a bit short on truth.

Interesting side note; at least one of the bloggers listed as "sources" in this thread was crying the blues not too long ago about how the dismal returns of wild salmon in BC being due to Alaskan fishing vessels fishing over the line and gobbling up all of BC's fish. Funny thing is, though, that fish runs in southern Southeast have been moving northward in the past few years.

Last edited by Metlakatla; 10-06-2013 at 10:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2013 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Alaska

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top