dat5h wrote:

Radioactive iodine levels in Tokyo water facilities are unacceptable for infants.
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/2011032 … 21000.html

I hope I'm not misreading that, but it certainly makes me want to move to bottled water.

Yeah, but they're also saying it won't affect health unless ingested long term.

dat5h wrote:

Radioactive iodine levels in Tokyo water facilities are unacceptable for infants.
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/2011032 … 21000.html

I hope I'm not misreading that, but it certainly makes me want to move to bottled water.

Scientists haven't really found much of a statistical link between radiactive iodine and cancer in adults.  It increases the risk in children however, and many children who lived in the area near chernobyl developed thyroid cancer.  I wouldn't worry about it too much unless you're pregnant or will be pregnant soon (after treatment with radioactive iodine patients are usually recommended to not get pregnant for six months).  The reason the limited level for infants is so much lower is because it actually can have a negative effect on their health.  It doesn't apply to you for a reason.

Nevertheless, it's good information to know about.  If I had a baby and was in Tokyo, I wouldn't be giving it tap water for the time being.

Last edited by Tzadeck (2011 March 23, 1:50 am)

Nuclear disaster cartoon goes viral
Mar 22 - Frustrated by the technical explanation of the nuclear crisis in Japan, artist Hachiya Kazuhiko creates cartoon character ''Nuclear Boy'' for clarification.

Last edited by astendra (2011 March 23, 2:22 am)

That's some brilliant reporting.

Depressing numbers, but excellent work.

EDIT: Ah, I see, I was wrong about the Koshien... I had no idea there was a Spring tournament. That kind of makes it even weirder if they're playing the tournament now, but whatever.

Last edited by rich_f (2011 March 23, 3:47 am)

cangy wrote:

(all else being equal, e.g. no further leaks or concentration etc.)

Yes yes, here is where my concern has been lying considering the continued delays, smoke, and problems associated with the plants. They have no idea what it's like inside the reactors or pools still, plus black smoke was spotted again (albeit no radiation increase this time). Furthermore, the presence of these contaminants does not exclude the future release of longer lasting contaminants like Cesium.

This is still not calming yet is all I'm saying, but I'm still trying to be optimistic since it is good to see the lights turned on in one of the bad reactors.

However, I wish I knew what caused black smoke? I originally thought it would be electrical, but wouldn't they tell us that? Let's get some spectrometers for collected smoke and other devices for readings.

Last edited by dat5h (2011 March 23, 9:02 am)

It seems the levels of radioactive material went down. They lifted the restrictions in Tokyo for now.
東京都 水道水の摂取制限解除

This picture has been popular in the interzone: http://www.bouletcorp.com/blogen/bonus/Japan.jpg

I appreciate the spirit it's meant in, at least, and think it's an interesting form of solidarity.

aphasiac wrote:

Interesting developments on Facebook, as several people have linked to this "Don't donate to Japan" blog and controversy surrounding it:

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2 … -to-japan/

Sadly the author is now getting death threats, but he does make a good point. Since the earthquake the bank of Japan have "injected" (i.e. printed) over $400billion of new yen. So if Japan is able to just create money out of thin air, what's the point of donating money to them? Does this make a mockery of all the charity appeals being made overseas?

Here's another blog trying to balance the matter, but don't know if it properly answers the questions:

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2 … n-do-good/

Thoughts?

It's a rather silly blog entry, in my mind, looks like it was merely intended for trolling. The inflammatory headline to grab attention and get the emotions going straight out of some social marketing guru handbook, followed by a clumsy attempt to tie together Japan's efforts with regards to its economy to the efforts of individuals and organizations in and for Japan. I'm not surprised that despite its nature, I've not heard much about this blog entry till now.

If the author had simply wanted to argue against some form of careless ‘trendy’ giving, that's one thing, but it seems they're overgeneralizing and oversimplifying just to meet the needs of their own pet peeves and earning money for their CNN blog (another Japan-related news blunder for CNN, how surprising). Rather selfish and myopic. I've seen this type of thing elsewhere very recently.

Lately I just can't be arsed to destroy other people's terrible logic unless I think it's actually having an effect that needs to be counterbalanced—and even then I think I prefer to place that effort in particular venues, so, I'll mostly ignore them and let the various reasonable articles I've seen do their jobs.

Last edited by nest0r (2011 March 24, 5:56 pm)

aphasiac wrote:

Interesting developments on Facebook, as several people have linked to this "Don't donate to Japan" blog and controversy surrounding it:

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2 … -to-japan/

He's absolutely right that you should donate to organizations like Red Cross or Doctors Withour Borders that don't promise to spend the funds on a particular thing.  But he's still an idiot for a very poorly written post that sends the wrong message.  He should have explained that if you do want to donate to Japan, you should choose organizations like the Red Cross, because they don't waste money and can use it where it is really needed--even if Japan isn't where it is needed.  He shoudn't have phrased it as 'Don't donate to Japan.'

Last edited by Tzadeck (2011 March 24, 9:06 pm)

aphasiac wrote:

Sadly the author is now getting death threats, but he does make a good point. Since the earthquake the bank of Japan have "injected" (i.e. printed) over $400billion of new yen. So if Japan is able to just create money out of thin air, what's the point of donating money to them? Does this make a mockery of all the charity appeals being made overseas?

They printed the money to stop inflation. If all of a sudden your currency becomes extremely expensive, you can't sell goods and services because they will get them from someone else for cheap.

If they keep printing money, then the value of the money will go down and they won't be able to afford anything.

The government cannot just print money and then go buy whatever they want, the value of their currency will be adjusted accordingly.

Charity redistributes the money, whether it is globally or locally. It doesn't lower value or increase value.

The morality of charity is a completely different animal.

With my twisted values, I wanted to donate to Japan because I felt more inclined to. I'm not Japanese, but all the studying over the past year and a half made me feel a bit closer to the country. Sad to say, when the Haiti earthquake hit, I didn't really care as much even though they had suffered (and are still suffering) an enormous amount of damage.

Even then, I don't feel comfortable about giving money. I'd rather go out and get out there and help people out, but that's just not possible.

I'm also wondering if charity really is the best way to help. I'm thinking about investing in government/construction bonds, even if I get little to no return... it's *like* I'm contributing to help their economy.

So is there a reason printed money cannot be exchanged for tangible goods or services?

As part of previous quantitative easing efforts, both Japan and Taiwan have tried handing out money and shopping vouchers directly to their citizens. Is there any reason this couldn't be done here, but instead with buying relief aid?

Not trolling, just genuinely trying to understand the economics. I'm sure there's a good reason but just needs to explain it in simple terms..

NHK配信、終わっちゃった　T_T

Fukushima radioactive fallout nears Chernobyl levels

Pretty shocking headline, though it might be exaggerated. A leak in the containment vessel seems to be likely though. Both CNN and Japanese media report it. I think I would start to be scared if I lived anywhere near the 30 km exclusion zone.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/0 … tml?hpt=T1

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/news/ … T00121.htm

Edit: @icecream thx for that link. Listening now.

According to the latest news, the exposed workers received between 2000 to 6000 millisv or 2 to 6 sv. Thats puts them in the severe to fatal dose range on the xkcd chart.

source: http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/news/ … from=main4
http://xkcd.com/radiation/

Last edited by Eikyu (2011 March 25, 5:08 pm)