The following post is mostly for historical preservation.  It is copied directly from the 'comments' section of Cal FireNews home page on April 20, 2012.  There are severl things that make this noteworthy, the first of which is my original comment (dated Thursday, March 31, 2011 3:03:00 PM ) which I made in the attempt to clarify the confusion that the previous commentors were experiencing regarding radiation exposure levels vs time.  At the time, this was my understanding of the situation regarding radiation exposure.  As it turns out I was completely wrong.  In my ignorance, I had aparently supplied the perfect propaganda that CalFireNews was looking for.  Their moderator approved my explanation and it was posted.  Other than MY additional comments that followed, there were NO OTHER COMMENTS by anyone for over a year, allowed to be posted on the CalFireNews home page.  It makes me sick when I think of the number of people who read that explanation, knew it was wrong and commented about it only to find out that their comment would never be posted.  Ever.

CALIFORNIA FIRE NEWS - California News with Focus on Firefighting, Firefighters and Wildland Fires throughout the state. The Real Scoop Fire News When You Need It. CAL FIRE news, Fire & EMS News, Wildfire Intel, Structure Fires, Vehicle fires, Haz-Mat, Earthquakes, SAR, Wildfires, Floods, Firefighter Jobs, Public Safety Information

http://calfire.blogspot.com/

9 Comments: (As of 04-20-2012)

http://www.blogger.com/profile/16430453484247896537 said...

How does one convert Radnet CPM to millisieverts?

Friday, March 18, 2011 1:15:00 PM

Rancher Rick said...

That's a great question. It would be very helpful for your readers to understand the conversion between millisiverts (being quoted in Japan) and the units that are quoted by the EPA RadNet. Also, it would be useful to know the what values of the EPA RadNet units are considered dangerous (first for children, and then for adults).

Friday, March 18, 2011 9:12:00 PM 

Rancher Rick said...

The following three paragraphs are excerpted from CNN, but it is still unclear how this correlates to the EPA RadNet data units. "G. Donald Frey, a medical physicist and professor of radiology at the Medical University of South Carolina. "The limit for radiation workers in the United States is 50 millisieverts per year, but we try to keep them to less than 5 millisieverts per year." After a single acute exposure of 1,000 millisieverts, people tend to start feeling nauseated and vomiting, Frey said. At 5,000 millisieverts over the course of a few hours, "people start dying." After exposure to 150 millisieverts per day, "you're definitely in the range where you have significantly increased risk of radiation-induced cancers." "

Friday, March 18, 2011 9:37:00 PM

aweasd said...

This is confusing, as usual with technical news reporting. This "100 millisieverts received over the course of a year is the lowest level at which any increased cancer risk is evident." and this "After exposure to 150 millisieverts per day, "you're definitely in the range where you have significantly increased risk of radiation-induced cancers." " " are not consistent statements. 150 millisieverts per day is 54,750 millisieverts per year. Quite a bit larger than 100 millisieverts per year. In fact it's 54.75 sieverts. If it's 5 millisieverts per hour that's 120 millisieverts per day, and 43.8 sieverts per year. 5 sieverts is lethal. So what does it all mean?

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 9:20:00 PM 

Rod said...

I'm no expert, but I think a good analogy would besomethingh like this; If you drink a gallon of water a day, that is 5.33 oz./hour. That's fine, but that also translates to 365.25 gallons per year, which is way, way too much for one sitting. It all has to do with how fast your body can eliminate what you take in. Or if your body retains it, as in the case of Iodine. It's the acute exposure that is the most dangerous.

Thursday, March 31, 2011 3:03:00 PM

Rodinator said...

What I'd like to know is why you people at CAL FIRE NEWS have stopped updating the radiation levels on March 18th. I'm guessing that you are all running for shelter and there's nobody there to do the updates!

Wednesday, April 06, 2011 12:43:00 PM

Rodinator said...

Here it is May 6th, a Month since my last post (above) and still the latest info is from MARCH 18th. What is up with that! Japan is still spewing radioactive material 24/7 from not only the FD NPP but from another nuclear power plant as well. You can't buy a geiger counter anywhere. HELLO! is there anybody there at Cal Fire News? How about some real, official news from the people we trust.

Friday, May 06, 2011 10:20:00 PM

Rodinator said...

OK it's been a month (now May 6th) and the data on this page is still from March 18th. Why has Cal Fire News stopped updating their web page? I for one would sure like to get some factual information from this official site that we can trust.

Friday, May 06, 2011 10:32:00 PM

Rodinator said...

OK this is really insane. Now it's August 5th, 2011 and still no updates. Still the now ominous March 18th date on all your posted data relating to radiation. I was under the impression that these measurements were taken quarterly in the past. So that means that there should have been an update somewhere back in june, that's two months ago people, WTF. I have since aquired two geiger counters and have watched the background levels go from an average of 10 to 20 CPM back in March, to an average of around 35 to 45 CPM at present, with two occasions where it spiked for several hours at 100 to 200 CPM. It's real people! Yes it may be true that there "is no immediate danger", as all the news keeps saying, but tell that to the parents that are in Philly, with a 48% increase in infant mortality. That increase in varying amounts is nationwide. Do some research, While you still can...

Tuesday, August 02, 2011 1:13:00 PM