Showing posts with label levels. Show all posts
Showing posts with label levels. Show all posts

Saturday, March 29, 2014

The "Massive Gift" That Keeps On Giving: How QE Boosted Inequality To Levels Surpassing The Great Depression

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



The "Massive Gift" That Keeps On Giving: How QE Boosted Inequality To Levels Surpassing The Great Depression

Thursday, March 27, 2014

School Science Project Reveals High Levels Of Fukushima Nuclear Radiation in Grocery Store Seafood


Fukushima Radiation - University Of New South Wales


A Canadian high school student named Bronwyn Delacruz never imagined that her school science project would make headlines all over the world.  But that is precisely what has happened.  Using a $ 600 Geiger counter purchased by her father, Delacruz measured seafood bought at local grocery stores for radioactive contamination.  What she discovered was absolutely stunning.  Much of the seafood, particularly the products that were made in China, tested very high for radiation.  So is this being caused by nuclear radiation from Fukushima?  Is the seafood that we are eating going to give us cancer and other diseases?  The American people deserve the truth, but as you will see below, the U.S. and Canadian governments are not even testing imported seafood for radiation.  To say that this is deeply troubling would be a massive understatement.


In fact, what prompted Bronwyn Delacruz to conduct her science project was the fact that the Canadian government stopped testing imported seafood for radiation in 2012


Alberta high-school student Bronwyn Delacruz loves sushi, but became concerned last summer after learning how little food inspection actually takes place on some of its key ingredients.


The Grade 10 student from Grande Prairie said she was shocked to discover that, in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) stopped testing imported foods for radiation in 2012.



And what should be a major red flag for authorities is the fact that the seafood with the highest radiation is coming from China


Armed with a $ 600 Geiger counter bought by her dad, Delacruz studied a variety of seafoods – particularly seaweeds – as part of an award-winning science project that she will take to a national fair next month.


“Some of the kelp that I found was higher than what the International Atomic Energy Agency sets as radioactive contamination, which is 1,450 counts over a 10-minute period,” she said. “Some of my samples came up as 1,700 or 1,800.


Delacruz said the samples that “lit up” the most were products from China that she bought in local grocery stores.



It is inexcusable that the Canadian government is not testing this seafood.  It isn’t as if they don’t know that it is radioactive.  Back in 2012, the Vancouver Sun reported that cesium-137 was being found in a very high percentage of the fish that Japan was selling to Canada…


• 73 percent of the mackerel


• 91 percent of the halibut


• 92 percent of the sardines


• 93 percent of the tuna and eel


• 94 percent of the cod and anchovies


• 100 percent of the carp, seaweed, shark and monkfish


So why was radiation testing for seafood shut down in Canada in 2012?


Someone out there needs to answer some very hard questions.


Meanwhile, PBS reporter Miles O’Brien has pointed out the extreme negligence of the U.S. government when it comes to testing seafood for Fukushima radiation.  The following comes from a recent EcoWatch article


O’Brien also introduces us to scientists from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute who have been testing waters around the reactors—as well as around the Pacific Rim—to confirm the levels of Fukushima fallout, especially of cesium.


These scientists are dedicated and competent. But they are also being forced to do this investigation on their own, raising small amounts of money from independent sources. They were, explains lead scientist Ken Buesseler, turned down for even minimal federal support by five agencies key to our radiation protection. Thus, despite a deep and widespread demand for this information, no federal agency is conducting comprehensive, on-the-ground analyses of how much Fukushima radiation has made its way into our air and oceans.


In fact, very soon after Fukushima began to blow, President Obama assured the world that radiation coming to the U.S. would be minuscule and harmless. He had no scientific proof that this would be the case. And as O’Brien’s eight-minute piece shows all too clearly, the “see no evil, pay no damages” ethos is at work here. The government is doing no monitoring of radiation levels in fish, and information on contamination of the ocean is almost entirely generated by underfunded researchers like Buesseler.



video news report in which O’Brien discusses these issues is posted below…


It is the job of the authorities to keep us safe, and the Fukushima nuclear disaster was the worst nuclear disaster in human history.


So why aren’t they doing testing?


Why aren’t they checking to make sure that this radiation is not getting into our food chain?


The Japanese are doing testing off the coast of Japan, and one fish that was recently caught off the coast of the Fukushima prefecture was discovered to have 124 times the safe level of radioactive cesium.


So why are all the authorities in North America just assuming that the fish are going to be perfectly fine on this side of the Pacific?


One test that was conducted in California discovered that 15 out of 15 Bluefin tuna were contaminated with radiation from Fukushima.


So how can the authorities say “don’t worry, just eat the seafood”?


Everyone agrees that a plume of radioactive water has been moving from Fukushima toward the west coast of the United States.


According to researchers at the University of South Wales, that plume is going to hit our shores at some point during 2014…


The first radioactive ocean plume released by the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster will finally be reaching the shores of the United States some time in 2014, according to a new study from the University of New South Wales — a full three or so years after the date of the disaster.



The following graphic comes from that study…


Fukushima Radiation - University Of New South Wales


And multiple independent tests have already confirmed that levels of nuclear radiation are being detected on California beaches that are more than 10 times the normal level.


Clearly something is happening.


So why are the U.S. and Canadian governments willingly looking the other way?


About the author: Michael T. Snyder is a former Washington D.C. attorney who now publishes The Truth. His new thriller entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on Amazon.com.



Be Sociable, Share!


















The Truth



School Science Project Reveals High Levels Of Fukushima Nuclear Radiation in Grocery Store Seafood

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Despite Dangerously High Radiation Levels, No Caution Signs at Surfer"s Beach...

At Not Just The News, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Not Just The News and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Not Just The News makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Not Just The News does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Not Just The News.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Not Just The News and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Not Just The News send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Not Just The News has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Not Just The News"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Despite Dangerously High Radiation Levels, No Caution Signs at Surfer"s Beach...

Sunday, December 22, 2013

NY Post: Snow falling on Navy ship was from Fukushima radioactive steam… “Is that aluminum foil I taste?” — Sailor: People were defecating on themselves in hallways from excruciating diarrhea — Officer: We saw radiation 300 times ‘safe’ levels (VIDEO)

NY Post: Snow falling on Navy ship was from Fukushima radioactive steam… “Is that aluminum foil I taste?” — Sailor: People were defecating on themselves in hallways from excruciating diarrhea — Officer: We saw radiation 300 times ‘safe’ levels (VIDEO)
http://enenews.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-email/images/email_famfamfam.png





Published: December 22nd, 2013 at 9:04 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
4 comments



New York Post, Dec. 22, 2013: Navy sailor Lindsay Cooper knew something was wrong when billows of metallic-tasting snow began drifting over USS Ronald Reagan. [...] she and scores of crewmates watched a sudden storm blow toward them from the tsunami-torn coast of Fukushima, Japan. The tall 24-year-old with a winning smile didn’t know it then, but the snow was caused by the freezing Pacific air mixing with a plume of radioactive steam [...] Senior Chief Michael Sebourn, a radiation-decontamination officer, was assigned to test the aircraft carrier for radiation. The levels were incredibly dangerous and at one point, the radiation in the air measured 300 times higher than what was considered safe, Sebourn told The Post.


Lindsay Cooper, Navy sailor aboard USS Ronald Reagan during 3/11 rescue operation: “I was standing on the flight deck, and we felt this warm gust of air, and, suddenly, it was snowing [...] We joked about it: ‘Hey, it’s radioactive snow! I took pictures and video [...] Japan didn’t want us in port, Korea didn’t want us, Guam turned us away. We floated in the water for two and a half months [until Thailand took them in] “People were s- -tting themselves in the hallways [All the while crew members had been suffering from excruciating diarrhea].”


Cooper interviewed by EON, published Dec. 20, 2013: (at 4:30 in) “As soon as you step foot on the flight deck and went outside you had this taste of like aluminum foil.”[...] (at 10:45 in) We thought that we had felt a plume because there was kind of this warm air that went past the ship and you could kind of tell the differences between jet exhaust — we didn’t have any jets going around at the time. It was like 20 degrees outside and you could feel this warm air and you kind of enjoyed it at first and then you’re like, ‘Is that aluminum foil that I taste?’


Watch the interview here





Published: December 22nd, 2013 at 9:04 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
4 comments




WHAT REALLY HAPPENED




Read more about NY Post: Snow falling on Navy ship was from Fukushima radioactive steam… “Is that aluminum foil I taste?” — Sailor: People were defecating on themselves in hallways from excruciating diarrhea — Officer: We saw radiation 300 times ‘safe’ levels (VIDEO) and other interesting subjects concerning The Edge at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Saturday, November 9, 2013

Magnesium Levels Vital to Brain Health as Population Ages

November is National Alzheimer’s Awareness Month and the serious issues of cognitive health will be in the spotlight in the coming weeks. The medical community agrees that cognitive impairment (CI), ranging from mild to severe, is almost epidemic in the U.S. as the Baby Boomer generation is aging and living longer. Scientists believe one reason is that the human brain begins shrinking after age 25. Structural changes and loss of brain synapses lead to rapid decline in cognitive health.  



The solution is still unclear, however the good news is that the human brain has a greater degree of plasticity than scientists previously believed, and new studies, specifically those made in nutritional research, show that magnesium deficiency in adults may play a more important role in CI, and more seriously, Alzheimer’s Disease (AD), than previously thought.


The results of one medically significant study spearheaded by Dr. Guosong Liu, one of the world’s leading cognitive health researchers, suggest that elevation of brain magnesium through dietary intake of magnesium threonate exerts substantial positive effects on brain synapes in a mouse model of AD, actually restoring aging brains to their youthful conditions. The study is the first to show a mechanism for reversing cognitive decline in advanced stage AD mice, and is also the first to show an effective long-term treatment in AD mice.* More exciting, though, are the implications of this study for the potential for treating AD in humans.


Commenting on his work, Dr. Liu said, “The body of our peer-reviewed and published work underscores that magnesium threonate can help maintain healthy brain activity. There is no doubt that magnesium threonate has dramatic effects in preventing synapse loss and reversing memory decline in mice with Alzheimer’s disease.


Furthermore, he states, “There is no question that cognitive impairment is a major fear and health issue for the nation. People are living longer and they want to take steps to maintain the quality of their physical and mental health. Cognitive impairment can affect a person’s memory, language, perception, ability to plan and carry out tasks, and judgment. A recently concluded double blind, placebo-controlled human study, the ‘gold standard’ of science, demonstrates that dietary supplementation of Magtein, patented magnesium threonate, can significantly enhance human cognitive functions and decrease symptoms of cognitive impairments.” The study is expected to be published in a leading peer-reviewed journal in 2014.


Dr. Peter Osborne, a Board Certified doctor of clinical nutrition, said, “Healthy cognitive function begins with a solid nutritional foundation. We know magnesium is essential to maintaining healthy brain functions. We know 50 million Americans are magnesium deficit because people do not eat enough foods that contain magnesium. We know that as we age our bodies naturally lose magnesium. For example, drinking coffee or caffeinated products increases the loss. This deficit must be replaced by taking a nutritional supplement. I use Magtein with my patients as a valuable part of my treatment protocols.”


According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, estimates show that approximately 20% of people ages 55 and older will experience some form of cognitive impairment. The number and growth of the aging population in the U.S. is unprecedented. Two factors — longer life spans and aging baby boomers — will combine to double the population of American’s aged 65 years or older during the next 25 year to about 72 million. By 2030, older adults will account for roughly 20% of the U.S. population.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131104142343.htm






Magnesium Levels Vital to Brain Health as Population Ages

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Online dating levels the romantic playing field for women

Online dating levels the romantic playing field for women
http://isbigbrotherwatchingyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/23ec9__16607?ns=guardian&pageName=Article3Aonline-dating-positives-negatives-gender-equality3A1985640&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Online+dating2CGender+28News292CDating+28Life+and+style292CTechnology2CInternet2CSocial+media&c5=Unclassified2CNot+commercially+useful2CMedia+Weekly2CTechnology+Gadgets2CFamily+and+Relationships&c6=Jill+Filipovic&c7=20132F102F23+043A24&c8=1985640&c9=Blog&c10=Comment&c13=Jill+Filipovic3A+On+gender+and+other+agendas&c19=GUK&c25=Comment+is+free&c47=UK&c64=US&c65=Online+dating+levels+the+romantic+playing+field+for+women&c66=Comment+is+free&c67=nextgen-compatible&c72=&c73=&c74=&c75=&h2=GU2FComment+is+free2FComment+is+free2FOnline+dating


Old rules of dating put men in charge. Online dating offers an increasingly gender-equal and progressive world of romance


Online dating isn’t the future of romance, it’s the present. According to new Pew findings, one-in-ten Americans and nearly 40% of singles on the romantic hunt have used an online dating site or app. It seems to be working: nearly a quarter of online daters have met a long-term partner or spouse through the sites.


While many folks still hold a low opinion of internet daters, the cultural tides are turning, and romances kindled online are increasingly mainstream. There are, of course, downsides to meeting people online, just as there are to meeting people in any other venue. But for better or worse, internet dating is revolutionizing how we find partners – and it’s making the dating process an increasingly gender-equal and progressive one.


Old rules of dating put men in charge. Men did the asking, the planning of the date, the paying, and the asking-out-again. Women waited, made ourselves presentable, and hoped flirtations with the object of our interest would lead to an ask-out. There have always been a small handful of women who would pursue men directly, but traditionally, dating has been led by the male of the species.


And women, not wanting to appear rude, have for decades accepted invitations for dates we simply were not interested in going on. It’s a well-documented social phenomenon that women are expected to be nice and accommodating, especially to men, including the ones who ask us out. It puts women in an awkward situation, it makes men feel resentful and it wastes everyone’s time.


Online dating upends that to various degrees. It’s just as acceptable in an online space for a woman to message a man she thinks is cute as it is for a man to reach out to a woman. Most sites also have a variety of functions to show your interest if you’re not quite ready to send a full message. You can “favorite” a person’s profile, for example, letting them see that you’re interested and encouraging them to go from there.


You can also reject someone politely and efficiently with no (or at least few) hard feelings. While there are folks who get bent of out shape when their message goes unanswered – newsflash: there are crazy people on the internet – most online daters recognize that every message is a shot in the dark, and no one is obligated to respond unless they’re similarly interested. For a lot of women, the ability to avoid unwanted dates without risking offense or breaking social norms is an incredible relief. And men benefit too, by going into a date with relative certainty that the person he’s going out with at least finds him attractive on “paper” and in pictures.


Online dating also cuts through some of the unnecessary confusion in “normal” dating. Critics argue that finding a mate online removes serendipity and organic connection. That’s true, sort of – you do need to interact with someone in person to really evaluate a connection or a physical attraction. But you don’t need to meet someone in the subway or at a bar to discern a connection.


Initial offline meetings come with their own set of perils: meet someone through a friend and you’re more likely to think they’re a good person who shares your general interests and perspectives, which simply might not be true at all. It’s easy to disrupt your social group if you go out with someone a few times and then one of you loses interest while the other feels a connection.


More troubling is connecting, dating and developing real feelings before realizing you aren’t fundamentally compatible based on factors that would have been deal-breakers if you read about your partner on paper – maybe common ones like religion, politics and life goals, or specific interests like needing someone who will tolerate your playing video games for eight hours a day.


By contrast, being clear in your own dating profile can filter out fundamentally incompatible mates. Are you, say, a liberal feminist Brooklynite who would never have sex with a Republican, considers dating someone in Queens a long-distance relationship and has actual nightmares about waking up in a suburban house with a Range Rover in the driveway? That can all be specified.


Up-front disclosure helps to find someone who fits your needs, whether you want to date someone who shares your religious values, or if you have a particular fetish that you may not want to mention on a first date but that you won’t be satisfied without. Perhaps most crucially, a dating website opens up a new universe of people to meet – far more than you’ll see out at the bar down the street.


Meeting dates online, just like meeting them off, comes with negatives. The most obvious is that people lie in ways large and small. My online dating profile says I’m 5’3″ when I’m actually five-two-and-a-half, indicates I’d date anyone in the New York region when, in fact, wild horses couldn’t drag me to Staten Island and fails to disclose that in terms of hours watched, Say Yes To The Dress might qualify as one of my favorite shows.


There is also the lack of agreed-upon rules and social conventions. After how many dates with someone do you both take down your profiles? How much information is too much? It took a week for that guy to message me back – is it because I’m a hideous beast, or is he just busy? With the seemingly endless supply of internet singles and without the accountability of overlapping social groups, it’s easy for a post-date week to consist of one party going on half a dozen new dates while the other sits home waiting for a call to be returned.


And for each person who seems great, there’s a sea of other possibilities just a click away. You may get along with the person in front of you, but maybe there’s someone else out there who shares your dedication to Crossfit or your penchant for Italian cinema, or who’s just a little bit taller, or has a more interesting job. It can be overwhelming, and too tempting to resist.


What’s most heartening about the Pew poll, though, is the recognition that the internet plays a crucial role in our “real” lives, and there isn’t such a clear dividing line between how we live digitally and how we live in the world. We do our activism online, signing petitions and emailing our politicians. We do our learning online, having access to many more opinion and news pieces than we did in the pre-digital age, and even taking college courses. We’re even able to interact directly with writers, thought leaders and fellow interested citizens on platforms like Twitter and Tumblr just as we can remain connected to our family and friends near and far, seeing their pictures and updates on Facebook. We can keep in regular contact with our closest confidants, g-chatting throughout the work day or texting to make plans.


It makes sense that dating is part of that new world too. We can start romances through dating sites, get laid with apps like Grindr or Tinder, and flirt with our romantic interests or our long-time loves by sending racy Snapchats, or sexy texts. Or we can at least attempt to make our exes jealous by posting enviable Instagrams.


Is there something lost in this new world of dating? Of course. Is it often terrifying to tread new territory without the clear romantic rules our grandmothers knew? Yes. Is this universe with its dizzying array of options and increasingly equal playing field far better than the old model, even with the attendant fear of choosing the wrong thing? You bet.





theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds









Comment is free | theguardian.com


Read more about Online dating levels the romantic playing field for women and other interesting subjects concerning Internet Spying and Secrecy at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Radiation Found in Penn. Watershed 300 Times Over Normal Levels



Get the Intellihub.com Official Newsletter HERE


SACRAMENTO, CA - Protestors hold signs against fracking during a demonstration outside of the California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) headquarters on July 25, 2012 in Sacramento, California. Dozens of environmental activists staged a

SACRAMENTO, CA – Protestors hold signs against fracking during a demonstration outside of the California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) headquarters on July 25, 2012 in Sacramento, California. Dozens of environmental activists staged a ‘Stop Fracking With California’ demonstration outside the California EPA headquarters ahead of public workshop hosted by the Division of Oil Gas and Geothermal Resources where protestors are planning to voice their opposition to the rushed regulatory of fracking and the many threats to the environment imposed by the process of hydraulic fracking for oil and gas. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)



By Shepard Ambellas
Intellihub.com
October 2, 2013

WESTMORELAND COUNTY, PENN. — The disposal of toxic chemical byproducts used in U.S. oil and gas production (i.e. fracking) has led to the poisoning of our watersheds and water supplies in some areas of the country. In fact, in some instances gaseous the chemical byproduct has been so heavy  it has made it into homes, peoples sink faucets have ignited into flames right at the tap. However, flames aren’t enough anymore, the corporations keep pushing for profits and now our water supply is at stake.


Now, runoff from chemical plants is threatening plant, animal, and human life more than ever as radiation has been discovered in the local watershed.


The official website for Blacklick Creek Watershed Association  reads, “The Blacklick Creek watershed is 420 square miles in Indiana and Cambria counties. The largest streams are Blacklick, Twolick and Yellow Creeks.  These and other streams are degraded by severe acid mine discharges.  Many streams within the watershed are polluted with high levels of metals and acidity.  There are many discharges from abandoned underground mines, poorly reclaimed surface mines and coal refuse piles”[1]


The journal for Environmental Science and Technology published a peer-reviewed study which yielded findings showing very high levels of Radium (226RA) exist in the Westmoreland County Watersheds, Blacklick Creek, which flows into the Allegheny River. “This study examined the water quality and isotopic compositions of discharged effluents, surface waters, and stream sediments associated with a treatment facility site in western Pennsylvania.”, reads an excerpt from the study entitled, Impacts of Shale Gas Wastewater Disposal on Water Quality in Western Pennsylvania.[2]


The study concluded that chemicals used in the fracking process have ended up in the watershed, posing a great risk. The study documents how Radium “226Ra levels in stream sediments (544–8759 Bq/kg) at the point of discharge were 200 times greater than upstream and background sediments (22–44 Bq/kg) and above radioactive waste disposal threshold regulations, posing potential environmental risks of radium bioaccumulation in localized areas of shale gas wastewater disposal.”[2]


Wikipedia describes Radium as “a chemical element with symbol Ra and atomic number 88. Radium is an almost pure-white alkaline earth metal, but it readily oxidizes on exposure to air, becoming black in color. All isotopes of radium are highly radioactive, with the most stable isotope being radium-226, which has a half-life of 1601 years and decays into radon gas. Because of such instability, radium isluminescent, glowing a faint blue.”[3]


The problem with all of this is that radiation is accumulative, which means over time the levels will concentrate posing even more danger. As of now likely a good portion of the nearby plant life fish, and wildlife in the area are severely contaminated with radiation. This also goes for anything downstream.


BusinessWeek.com reported, “While earlier studies have identified radiation in drilling wastewater, today’s report is the first to examine the long-term environmental impacts of dumping it in rivers. Proper treatment can remove a substantial portion of the radioactivity in wastewater, though it does not remove many of the other salts, including bromide, Vengosh said.


“Our findings indicate that disposal of wastewater from both conventional and unconventional oil and gas operations has degraded the surface water and sediments,” Nathaniel Warner, a postdoctoral researcher at Dartmouth College and co-author of the study, said in a statement. “This could be a long-term legacy of radioactivity.”


Blacklick Creek is a tributary of the Conemaugh River, which flows into the Allegheny. In 2011, regulators found high levels of bromides in western Pennsylvania rivers, prompting some plants that supply Pittsburgh and other cities to change the way they treat drinking water.”[4]


Sources:


[1] Blacklick Creek Watershed Association – BlacklickCreekWatershed.org


[2] Impacts of Shale Gas Wastewater Disposal on Water Quality in Western Pennsylvania – ACS Publications


[3] Radium - Wikipedia.org


[4] Radiation in Pennsylvania Creek Seen as Legacy of Fracking Waste – BusinessWeek.com


Writer Bio:

Shepard AmbellasShepard Ambellas founder, director and editor-in-chief of Intellihub.com, is a researcher, investigative journalist, radio talk show host, activist, and filmmaker. Follow him onTwitter.

For media inquires, interviews, questions or suggestions for this author, email: shepard@intellihub.com or telephone: (347) 759-6075.

Read more articles by this author here.

*****

This article is brought to you by Intellihub.com


Intellihub.com makes our content available for everyone to distribute and re-post as the information contained is vital. However, with that being said, we encourage you to donate as we are not funded by large corporate interests.


Note: Intellihub.com expressively grants permission to repost any article text on this site bearing the name “Intellihub.com” on the article’s byline header, attributing proper link-backs, keeping intact the article’s original byline header and writer bio. Images are subject to copyright by other parties. Intellihub.com maintains a contract with Getty Images.




Intellihub News



Radiation Found in Penn. Watershed 300 Times Over Normal Levels

Friday, September 27, 2013

Senator Says Politics Have Reached Civil War Levels


Matt Berman
nationaljournal.com
September 27, 2013


As the clock ticks down toward a possible government shutdown, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, isn’t holding back.


On the Senate floor before 10 a.m. Friday, the senator gave a speech describing how American politics have reached the level at which “a small group of willful men and women who have a certain ideology”—read: the tea party and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas—have been able to take over the congressional budget debate in the last week. “Since they can’t get their way,” Harkin said, “they’re going to create this confusion and discourse and hope that the public will be so mixed up in who is to blame for this, that they’ll blame both sides.”


This isn’t just congressional business as usual, Harkin said. It’s much, much more dire:


Read more


This article was posted: Friday, September 27, 2013 at 10:55 am


Tags:









Infowars



Senator Says Politics Have Reached Civil War Levels

Monday, June 3, 2013

Al Gore backlash: Why environmentalists are celebrating rising CO2 levels


Mike Adams
Natural News
June 3, 2013


Thank goodness carbon dioxide levels are finally rising ever so slightly in our atmosphere, bringing much-needed carbon dioxide to the plants and forests of the world which have been starving for CO2. The lack of CO2 in the atmosphere is one of the most devastating limiting factors for plant growth and reforestation of the planet, and at just 400ppm — that’s just 400 micrograms per kilogram — carbon dioxide is so low that Earth’s plant life can barely breathe.


Author’s note: I have added substantially to this story since it was first published in order to attempt to educate what appear to be a mass of brainwashed, mathematically illiterate commenters on Facebook who demonstrate a wholesale inability to process information with anything resembling rationality on this subject.


Let me clarify three things before we even get into the story:


#1 – NO, I do not support the coal and oil industry, and in fact I think they are terrible polluters of our planet for lots of reasons that have nothing to do with CO2. As it turns out, all the coal and oil being burned across our world right now only slightly impacts CO2 levels, especially when compared with CO2 emissions by ocean life. So my support of CO2 as an essential plant nutrient in no way is any kind of endorsement of the oil and coal industries. My long track record of activism against corporate monopolists is irrefutably solid.


#2 – YES, CO2 is an essential plant nutrient. Despite all the idiotic beliefs of people who have been brainwashed by Al Gore into believing scientific mythologies, higher CO2 levels support faster plant growth and the re-greening of our planet, period! Anyone who disagrees with this is flatly uninformed, brainwashed or just plain ignorant of plant biology (and that’s a lot of people). Recent science is proving that rising CO2 levels are, in fact, expanding plant growth and reforestation around the world. Read Increase in Carbon Dioxide Levels “Greening” the Deserts at NatureWorldNews.com or read the press release from the original researchers out of Australia who documented this correlation. And everybody needs to read www.PlantsNeedCO2.org


#3 – The current level of CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere is 400ppm. By comparison, Oxygen exists in the atmosphere at 210,000ppm. When you exhale, your own breath contains 40,000ppm of CO2, and if you know anything about emergency first aid, then you know that breathing this 40,000ppm of CO2 into another person’s body (mouth-to-mouth resuscitation) is a lifesaving action. It’s not uncommon for CO2 to reach levels of 3000ppm in homes, schools and offices. OSHA allows workers to work in environments with up to 5000ppm of CO2. (Because, again, oxygen is present at 210,000ppm, vastly out-weighing the CO2.)


So all this talk of carbon dioxide threatening the entire planet at just 400ppm — less than one-half of 1/1000th of the air — is pure nonsense. Total quack science fearmongering.


  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t



In fact, most of what we’ve all been told about CO2 over the pat few years is a complete lie. It’s time to stop believing these lies and wake up to reality. Most importantly, stop defending the CO2 / global warming hoax. Yes, CO2 is rising, but it’s mostly from non-human activity, and rising levels actually support forests and plants everywhere.


How did I “wake up” to this information? It’s simple: I used to be a believer in the CO2 hoax until I really began to study plant physiology and aquaponics production. Only then did I discover that CO2 is a vital nutrient for plant growth and that levels of CO2 in the atmosphere were radically deficient for optimal reforestation and plant biology. My awakening to this in no way means I endorse coal or oil industries, both of which are dirty polluters of the planet. But I am no longer allowing myself to be conned by the likes of Al Gore who has successfully convinced far too many people that their own breath is a global pollutant that needs to be regulated and taxed.


The CO2 scam is nothing more than a global tax moneymaking scheme being pushed by people who hope to get rich off our collective guilt for a problem that’s entirely fabricated and fictional.


My original story continues here:


Throughout the history of our planet, atmospheric CO2 was much, much higher, and it supported eras of lush rainforests, rapid plant growth and far greater biodiversity than what we see today. In fact, 525 million years ago, Earth’s atmospheric CO2 levels were as high at 7,000 ppm — and far from the planet “dying” as global warming hoax pushers try to claim, it was one of the most lush and biodiverse times in our planet’s history.


As the following chart clearly shows, CO2 levels are at one of their lowest levels in the history of our planet:



Carbon dioxide is greening the planet
Global warming alarmists and hoaxers, of course, have warned that CO2 levels crossing the threshold of 400ppm will spell certain doom for the human race. What they don’t mention is that rising CO2 levels actually set off a “global greening,” complete with forests re-growing at an accelerated rate, gardens producing more food and arid regions seeing a restoration of green plants.


In fact, a study just published in Geophysical Research Letters has documented that a 14% increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere gave rise to a 5% – 10% increase in green foliage, with a total increase in plant “cover” of 11%. That study is entitled, CO2 fertilisation has increased maximum foliage cover across the globe’s warm, arid environments.


That study refers to CO2 as a “fertilizer” that causes a “fertilization effect.” As the study authors explain:


Our results confirm that the anticipated CO2 fertilization effect is occurring alongside ongoing anthropogenic perturbations to the carbon cycle and that the fertilisation effect is now a significant land surface process.


CO2, you see, isn’t a “pollutant.” It’s a nutrient!


By the way, your body is 18% carbon and 65% oxygen. (I’m going to pre-empt some stupid Facebook trolls who will say, “Not true! Your body is 75% water!” by answering in advance that H2O is made of hydrogen and oxygen. Hydrogen has such a low atomic weight, however, that it doesn’t contribute more than about 10% to your total body mass. Then again, trying to teach science to Facebook trolls is a lot like trying to teach pigs to write javascript.)


In total, you are 83% made of the same stuff as CO2, just in a different molecular arrangement. CO2 is, of course, constantly reformed and recycled throughout the planetary ecosystem. Ocean biological activity alone produces 90 billion tons of CO2 each year — many multiples of the far smaller amount produced by human activity (about 6 billion tons). If CO2 alone caused global warming and global death, we’d all be dead by now. It turns out that CO2 actually helps fertilize the growth and restoration of plants and forests!


Ocean plants love carbon dioxide, too!
By the way, it’s not just land plants that are starving for CO2. Marine plants also need more CO2, and most marine biology came into being in a time when CO2 levels were far higher than they are today.


The higher CO2 levels are in the atmosphere, the more CO2 gets absorbed into ocean water, making it available to help marine plants thrive. This CO2, importantly, is also used to build coral reefs.


Wait a second! Haven’t we all been told that CO2 is destroying coral reefs? I used to think so, too, because I hadn’t scrutinized the science closely enough. But if you really dig into this issue, it turns out that coral reefs are largely being destroyed by toxic chemical runoff from human activity, not from CO2.


If you love plants and forests and gardens, you gotta love CO2
The bottom line in all this is that if you love plant life on planet Earth, you’ve gotta love carbon dioxide. CO2 is the key nutrient that’s needed to bolster the rapid growth of nearly all plants, and right now Earth’s atmosphere is in a state of carbon dioxide deficiency.


That’s why professional greenhouse owners actually pump CO2 into their greenhouses to increase plant production.


Rising CO2 levels are a huge benefit to plant life across the planet. Hare-brained plans to “sequester” CO2 will cause an artificial reduction in this crucial plant nutrient, resulting in the mass global die-off of plants and the thinning of forests. Carbon sequestration is, quite literally, plant starvation and an attack against Mother Nature.


So don’t buy into the disinfo hawked by CO2 alarmists like Al Gore. They are pushing an utterly fictional story about how “CO2 will destroy the world” and end human civilization if we don’t stop its rise. I welcome rising CO2 levels and being scientifically trained, I know that carbon dioxide only exists at less than 1/1000th of the atmosphere. In fact, it’s currently at less than half of 1/1000th of the atmosphere. That’s an extremely small amount of CO2 — just 400ppm. And it’s just barely enough to keep Earth’s plants from dying en masse.

Conclusion:

• CO2 is an essential plant nutrient that accelerates the growth of plants, gardens and forests.


• CO2 is present in the atmosphere at just 400 ppm. By comparison, oxygen is present at 210,000 ppm. There is barely any CO2 in the atmosphere at all.


• Higher CO2 levels means better reforestation and “greening” of the planet. As CO2 levels rise, barren regions are able to “re-green” with trees that couldn’t grow there before.


• CO2 is chronically deficient in the atmosphere today; many plants are “starving” for carbon dioxide.


• NO, I do not support the oil and gas industries. In fact, there is hardly any link between energy usage and the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere. The vast majority of CO2 emissions come from biology, not burning fossil fuels.



This article was posted: Monday, June 3, 2013 at 12:28 pm









Infowars



Al Gore backlash: Why environmentalists are celebrating rising CO2 levels

Friday, February 22, 2013

Insulin levels wax and wane daily

Modern life may clash with hormone’s natural cycle

By Tina Hesman Saey

Web edition: February 22, 2013

Like the sun, insulin levels rise and fall in a daily rhythm. Disrupting that cycle may contribute to obesity and diabetes, a new study suggests.

Many body systems follow a daily clock known as a circadian rhythm. Body temperature, blood pressure and the release of many hormones are on circadian timers. But until now, no one had shown that insulin — a hormone that helps control how the body uses sugars for energy — also has a daily cycle. Working with mice, researchers at Vanderbilt University in Nashville have found that rodents are more sensitive to insulin’s effects at certain times of day. Disrupting the animals’ circadian timers interferes with the hormone’s daily rise and fall and makes mice prone to obesity.

If the findings hold up in humans, they could help explain why people who work night shifts tend to be overweight and suffer health problems. The discovery may also tie the obesity epidemic in part to staying up late and eating at the wrong time.

Many people had thought that it was best for the body to maintain insulin at a relatively constant level, says Carl Johnson, a circadian biologist who led the new study. “But that’s not how organisms have adapted,” he says. Since the environment cycles through light and dark, body processes often coordinate with that rhythm.

To uncover insulin’s natural rhythm, Johnson and his colleagues performed an “insulin clamp” procedure on mice. The clamp infuses glucose or insulin around the clock into mice that are moving freely in their cages. Measuring how much insulin or glucose the mice need to maintain constant blood sugar levels tells the researchers how responsive the animals are to the hormone at any given time of day.

Mice are naturally less sensitive to insulin during the day, when the nocturnal animals normally sleep, the team found.

Mice with a genetic flaw that breaks their circadian clock don’t follow the regular insulin cycle. Neither do mice whose circadian clocks have been disrupted by living in constant light. Both groups of animals are more resistant to insulin than normal mice are, the researchers discovered. Insulin resistance is one hallmark of diabetes.

Mice with broken clocks also became obese despite eating the same amount as other mice. The team then found that feeding normal mice a high-fat diet could throw off their circadian rhythms.

The findings suggest that timing meals to coincide with insulin sensitivity could help protect against diabetes, says Satchidananda Panda, a geneticist and biologist at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, Calif. Chronically mistimed clocks could contribute to insulin resistance and eventually lead to diabetes, he says.

People who hope to bend their biological clocks to fit modern lifestyles are probably out of luck, says neuroscientist Randy Nelson of the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. After billions of years of adapting to the world’s natural rhythms, he says, “We’re stuck with these clock genes and these metabolic processes. Electric lights, that’s what’s strange.” Besides avoiding after-dinner snacks, people might protect their body clocks by using dim red lights at night. Red light doesn’t confuse the circadian clock the way bright white or blue lights do.

But Johnson warns that it is early to apply his findings directly to humans. He says eating the main meal at lunch time and not eating overnight are probably healthful practices, but people shouldn’t expect to lose a lot of weight by just shifting when they eat. Poor diet and lack of physical activity are the main drivers of obesity, he says.


Science News


Insulin levels wax and wane daily