Fukushima Radioactive Iodine Emergency

http://www.infiniteunknown.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/radioactive.jpg

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) officials calculated an annual thyroid dose of 40,000 microsieverts (or 4 REM) for infants under one year of age in California. Per the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services division of Radiation Emergency Medical Management division (REMM), a child’s dose of 5 REM is immediate grounds for evacuation and prophylactic measures. (REM does not specifically reference an infant dose) Thus, the projected government dose of 4 REM was 80% of the suggested evacuation rate.

Iodine-131, a radioactive isotope, is primarily taken up by the thyroid gland. It is a bio-mimicker. The thyroid gland requires iodine to function. In a nuclear accident large amounts of radioactive iodine-131 are released and this was certainly the case for Fukushima, especially in the early days. The thyroid gland is unable to differentiate between regular iodine and radioactive iodine and will uptake whatever chemical form it is presented with especially when one is already iodine deficient.

The negative health consequences of iodine-131 target the sensitive populations of the pregnant, unborn, babies and children up to 10 years of age most aggressively. If iodine-131 is inhaled or ingested it lingers in the body wherein it emits radioactive energy that results in internal damage mainly to the thyroid and parathyroid glands. According to the EPA iodine-131′s short half-life of 8 days means that it will decay away completely in the environment in a matter of months but with devastating affects to the thyroid tissues if those tissues are deficient in iodine.

Unborn, infants and children have tiny thyroid glands and an overall small body mass. Thus when ingested, a particle of iodine-131 can direct tremendous and damaging energy at cells at a much greater ratio than in an adult.
Critical uptake facts[1] per the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

  • Newborn babies will uptake iodine at rates 16 times higher than adults.
  • Infants under the age of one have an eight times higher uptake than adults.
  • Five-year-old children have four times the adult uptake rate.
  • Pregnant mothers have increased thyroid uptake, most noted in the first trimester.
  • The unborn have an increased thyroid uptake in the second and third trimester of pregnancy.
  • Nursing mothers can secrete 25% of iodine reserves to their babies.

Dr. Brownstein said, “After testing individuals and finding low iodine levels, I began to use smaller milligram amounts of iodine/iodide (6.25 mg/day). Upon retesting these individuals 1-2 months later, little progress was made. I therefore began using higher milligram doses (6.25-50 mg) to increase the serum levels of iodine. It was only with these higher doses that I began to see clinical improvement as well as positive changes in the laboratory tests.”

Dr. Michael B. Schachter says, “The treatment dose when a person is iodine insufficient is generally between 12.5 mg and 50 mg daily. Preliminary research indicates that if a person is iodine insufficient, it takes about three months to become iodine sufficient while ingesting a dosage of 50 mg of iodine and a year to become iodine sufficient while ingesting a dosage of 12.5 mg of iodine daily. However, the patient needs to be monitored closely with awareness of possible side effects and detoxification reactions.”

Iodine and Cancer

http://www.buzzle.com/img/articleImages/524459-4114-32.jpg

High intake of iodine is associated with a lower risk of breast cancer. Low iodine intake is associated with liver cancer.2] Women with a history of low iodine levels (hypothyroidism) face a significantly higher risk of developing liver cancer. [Researchers led by Manal Hassan of Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas concluded that this finding suggested a clinical association between hypothyroidism and hepatitis C, which is contributing to the country’s rising rate of liver cancer.

Dr. Michael Friedman says, “Women are particularly at risk due to environmental agents depleting iodine reserves and other agents exposing them to radioactive 1-131. After the thyroid gland, the distal portions of the human mammary glands are the heaviest users/concentrators of iodine in tissue. Iodine is readily incorporated into the tissues surrounding the mammary nipples and is essential for the maintenance of healthy functioning breast tissue. The radioactive decay of 1-131 in breast tissue may be a significant factor in the initiation and progression of both breast cancer and some types of breast nodules.”

The Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology Volume 50, Issue 3, 2013 contains a paper titled Source term estimation of atmospheric release due to the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant accident by atmospheric and oceanic dispersion simulations. Using the best available data and models it provides new estimates for the total quantity of I-131 and Cs-137 that was released into the atmosphere by the events at Fukushima Dai-ichi during the period from March 12 – March 20, 2013.[3] This report shows that the total amounts of I-131 and Cs-137. discharged into the atmosphere from 5 JST (Japan Standard Time)  on March 12 to 0 JST on March 20 were estimated to be approximately 2.0 × 1017 and 1.3 × 1016 Bq, respectively.

Iodine -129 – A Growing Radiological Risk

While we’ve all been led to believe that I-131 is no longer so much of a threat from Fukushima, we have to also worry about the effects of another type of iodine and that’s I-129. I-129 is another isotope produced by the fission of Uranium-235. Within these fission products approximately 75% is I-131 and 25% is I-129. Iodine-129, although a result of nuclear fission in reactors, also occurs to a small extent in the upper atmosphere due to the interaction of high-energy particles with naturally-occurring xenon. Iodine-129 has a long half-life of ~15.7 million years, which makes this of significant concern when processing nuclear waste or when nuclear accidents occur.

31.6 times as much iodine-129 than iodine-131was
released in the early days of the Fukushima catastrophe.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency when I-129 or I-131 is ingested, some of it concentrates in the thyroid gland. The rest passes from the body in urine. Airborne I-129 and I-131 can be inhaled. In the lung, radioactive iodine is absorbed, passes into the blood stream, and collects in the thyroid. Any remaining iodine passes from the body with urine.

In the body, iodine has a biological half-life of about 100 days for the body as a whole. It has different biological half-lives for various organs: thyroid – 100 days, bone – 14 days, and kidney, spleen, and reproductive organs – 7 days. Long-term (chronic) exposure to radioactive iodine can cause nodules, or cancer of the thyroid.

Iodine-129 and -131 experience beta decay, which means they emit beta particles when decaying from unstable to stable form. Beta particles are moderately energetic. Gamma rays are also emitted and are highly energetic, which means that they can be detected outside the body, for example, when uptake in the thyroid is measured by external sensors. Beta particles easily pass through soft tissue and cause damage to DNA by literally shattering DNA strands and knocking out chunks of gene sequences. What makes them potentially dangerous is the localized accumulation in the thyroid.

“Due to its long half-life and continued release from ongoing nuclear energy production, Iodine-129 is perpetually accumulating in the environment and poses a growing radiological risk,” the authors of a study at Dartmouth point out.[4]

The production rate of these two isotopes in a nuclear reactor occurs at a fixed ratio of 3 parts iodine-131 to one part iodine-129. The two substances travel together, so the presence of the easily detectable isotope also signals the presence of the longer-lived one. “If you have a recent event like Fukushima, you are going to have both present. The iodine-131 is going to decay away pretty quickly over the course of weeks, but the iodine-129 is there forever, essentially,” Joshua Landis, a research associate in the Department of Earth Science at Dartmouth explains, “Once the iodine-131 decays, you lose your ability to track the migration of either isotope.”

In a news report by the Pacific Standard we see that there is now no remediation technology available for the significant quantities of iodine-129 that have already leaked into groundwater at nuclear weapons production locations, including the Hanford Site in Washington state. Meanwhile, France and England — which produce large proportions of their electricity via nuclear power — are reprocessing spent fuel and disposing of vast quantities of iodine-129 simply by dumping it in the ocean.

Ocean disposal of iodine-129 appears to have resulted in massive increases of radionuclide concentrations. Currents carry the British and French iodine-129 northward, and a 2003 Danish study found concentrations in the Kattegat strait between Denmark and Sweden increased six fold between 1992 and 2000. Concentrations of iodine-129 in some Arctic waters are 4,000 times their pre-nuclear era levels. Add to this the I-129 released from Fukushima and we should be aware that there is much to be concerned with.

Conclusion

Every parent needs to come to the conclusion that they need to supplement with iodine at reasonably high levels. The situation is bad and destined to get worse. If one waits for their doctors or government officials to give out warnings one will sooner or later regret it.

[2] Hassan, Manal et al; Association Between Hypothyroidism and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: USA Case-Control Study. Hepatology, May 2009

[3] Source term estimation of atmospheric release due to the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant accident by atmospheric and oceanic dispersion simulations; Takuya Kobayashia, Haruyasu Nagaia, Masamichi Chinoa & Hideyuki Kawamuraa ;Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology;Volume 50, Issue 3, 2013; pages 255-264; http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223131.2013.772449#tabModule

[4] Dartmouth scientists track radioactive iodine from Japan nuclear reactor meltdown; Dartmouth College; April 2, 2012

For questions pertaining to your own personal health issues or for specific dosing of Dr. Sircus's protocol items please seek a consultation. Please visit our knowledge base to see if your question may have been answered previously.

Comments:

  • Sheree Phillips

    take your iodine

  • FVB

    Dr. Sircus: As a result of your article it is now well understood that inhaling the Iodine-131 via the respiratory system is very dangerous.

    Now the question remains what type of gas mask would you recommend to protect a person in case of severe radiation levels that could reach the west coast of the U.S., in case of a further accident at Fukushima. .

  • Eva

    Here’s my question, traditional doctor’s won’t even test you for iodine. How much can I safely supplement with if I’m not sure what my current levels are?

    • Erika

      I am wondering this myself.

      I give my daughter about 400mcg/day, I probably take 1mg. Previously I took 400 mcg, and disclosed it to my doctor. The horror on her face was disturbing… A traditional doctor will not suggest you take iodine, and will not test you just so you can self- medicate. People as crazy as I need guidelines:)

    • http://drsircus.com/ Claudia French

      You can get iodine testing through some alternative medicine doctors. .
      http://drsircus.com/medicine/iodine/iodine-dosages

      Search the internet for “Iodine Loading Test” and you will find labs that will do this test with a mailed in urine specimen.
      You can also consult with Dr. Sircus on your needs for iodine.

      http://drsircus.com/consultations/

      Most people are deficient in iodine so depending on what co-existing problems you might have it is safe to take the amounts recommended on the packaging of Nascent Iodine from LL’s Magnetic Clay co. More may be needed if other problems are present and many doctors follow the philosophy of giving high doses…up to 50 mg./day (well above the RDA of 150 mcg/day) and they do so safely.
      See:

      http://www.magneticclay.com/store/nascent-iodine-supplement-1.aspx

      If in an area of high radiation exposure more will be needed.. See Dr. Sircus books on Iodine and Radiation:
      http://drsircus.com/books/e-book/iodine/

      http://drsircus.com/books/e-book/nuclear-toxicity-syndrome/

      Claudia French
      IMVA

  • anti_banker

    Why is iodine-129 no longer detectable once iodine-131 decays?
    Surely if it still emits radiation for millions of years, then it’s radiation must still be detectable?

    • http://drsircus.com/ Claudia French

      Good question!

      The reasons being given are that the radioactivity release from I-129 are not nearly as strong as that from I-131 and this is causing the detection difficulty, even though its half-life is so much longer. There are scientists working on the ways to better detect the prescence of I-129. These efforts are described in numerous articles and two are quoted in the essay. The gradual accumulation of this type of iodine is where the danger lies….not the immediate exposure as it is in I-131. Apparently now they are finding “hot spots” of greater accumulations of I-129 in some streams.

      • anti_banker

        I assumed because I-129 has a much longer half life that I-131, it therefore must emit much higher amounts of radiation and clearly from what you say that is NOT true. Thanks for clearing that up for me!

        Any idea how radioactive cesium compares in regards to these 2 factors? (ways of measuring radiation).

        • michas

          The dangers of radioactive materials depend on a number of factors including half-life, and like iodine, there are more than one isotope of radioactive cesium, and each has a different half-life; so there is no simple answer to your question. Iodine 129 decays and emits particles so slowly that its acute risks are very low, but if there is enough of it around, it can be harmful. We are exposed to natural and man-made radiation from many sources; for long-term problems its a question of how many additional cases of cancer might be generated because of an increased exposure. You are correct, though, in thinking that radioactive cesium is of concern.

  • quicksilver

    Scary stuff. The development of nuclear power appears to be not necessarily something that we need to fear in the future so much as something that is already a catastrophe that can and will only get worse.

    Germany took the bold step to finish with nuclear power and France has an excellent solar power system where people can feed their surplus energy into the grid. But Frances action to increase safety at the nuclear plants only emphasises the failure to be safe in the past. Thyroid problems in France are some ten times what is an acceptable level already.

    But if we study the after effects of Chernobyl where we have over 25 years of knowledge we can be sure that the harm from Fukushima will be unfurling for the next 20 years and we need to take actions now to reduce the effects upon us. WHO and Atomic Energy admissions of deaths bear little regard to reality.

    Just look at population data for the Ukraine and project the population you might expect today and there is a loss of up to 15 million humans.

    And in common sense terms Fukushima must outrank Chernobyl in the harm caused and yet to be caused. Chernobyl was confined to mostly land areas whereas Fukushima is harming the Pacific Ocean as well as the island of Japan.

    What I find most frightening is that for all catastrophes such as Nuclear Pollution that we have only people like Dr Marc Sircus and few others to keep us informed while governments and industry provide the usual head in the sand or everything is under control or drive like some maniac with his foot on the throttle and blindfolded.

    Sadly the ignorance, incompetence and arrogance of those in power is not confined to nuclear matters but expands into nearly all realms of biology and chemistry.

    Radioactivity is easy to measure but the effects of GMO and toxic chemicals also threaten us not in the future but from exposure already upon us and treated with the same expertise as shown at Chernobyl and Fukushima and their aftermath.

    Time for common sense and good science and to stop the harm already way, way, way beyond the point of no return.

    • anti_banker

      There’s no ignorance & incompetence of those in power. They know full well what they are allowing to happen. Like with big Pharma nuclear is a gigantic, multi-billion dollar industry.

      • Ciaran

        Exactly, anti_banker. And quicksilver, better believe all of this–nukes, GMOs, toxic chemicals, depleted uranium, etc–is a massive population culling measure by those who think they own and control this planet.

        • anti_banker

          I don’t know if I would call it population control though. Think about it, they BENEFIT from masses of cheap labour. The more people the more supply of labour for the same demand, the less they can pay people to mine the uranium, process it, etc. In fact the more people for them the better. It’s just about not caring about what damage they are causing – it’s all about the money.

          I don’t buy the whole population control thing, never have. If anything they want sick people not dead people. Sick people “need” radiation “therapy”, can’t sell that to a dead person. It’s unbelievable, they give you thyroid cancer from the radiaoactive pollution, then they use even higher doses radiation to entirely destroy the rest of your cancerous thyroid gland before the cancer can spread to the rest of your body, then they sell you sythetic thyroid hormones for the rest of your life because your thyroid gland can no longer produce hormones because you no longer have a thyroid gland!!!

          • Ciaran

            I’ll concede you have a point, but at the same time, there has been talk in some circles of reducing the human population to a much more manageable level– enough to provide cheap labor, but not enough to cause environmental degradation.

            I think we can agree on thing: they’re insane, power-mad. Also see: “hubris.” Whom the gods wish to destroy…

          • anti_banker

            The don’t care about environmental degradation, they are the main ones causing it, they don’t care about anything except money & power. Even when they “donate” money they have a hidden agenda which goes beyond simple tax dodges.

          • Collette

            I completely concur with all that you have said here, anti_banker. The Powers That Be are probably living in underground cities they built with our money they reel in from a multitude of arenas – Big Pharma being just one of them. We are SO through – I came here while doing research on thyroid cancer because I reside on the West Coast & today for the third day consecutively, I awoke with a lump in my throat; precisely where the thyroid is located – only today it feels a bit bigger. I’m going to pursue Silver Biotics therapy and Chinese medicine – for the only other treatment offered is – Whaat?! Radiation therapy! Right – “As treatment for radiation exposure, we suggest more radiation.” Doesn’t take a Rocket Scientist to determine that is nuts. Like Bob Dylan said in the 60′s: “You don’t have to look too far to see that not much is really sacred.”
            (“It’s Alright Ma, I’m Only Bleeding” by Bob Dylan)

        • Amy Warren

          And I thought I was being paranoid about this but after reading some comments here, I don’t think so anymore.