Someone must know the truth about West Coast radiation, but it's not me. Not absolutely, anyway.

I go more or less on how much I trust the messenger in each case. People I respect have said that there is danger if you are in the sea water or eat fish. In other words, for them the danger is present but not as extreme as some others might state. Notice that my most respected sources would not eat the fish. I have not eaten any fish for years, because of its OTHER toxic components. The idea of going to a seafood restaurant is way off my radar.

But there are other radiated places NEAR the West Coast which are proven to have caused radiation damage, by most sources. I'm thinking of the Hanford Nuclear site in Eastern Washington, which is hundreds of miles inland but still what most people would think of "on the coast." This radiation comes from a proximate source, the storage places themselves, rather than from ********** Because reports of repeated leaks from Hanford over decades, and also reports of human illness and animal illness attributed to even the air around the plant, I believe it's true. Long experience with reports from Hanford make me believe this is true.

I know what it's like to be in an area which has both pro and con claims on radiation danger. I live in Los Alamos, where the atomic bomb was invented. Most sources say we are not in danger here, but a few sources--from the environmental movement, claim we are. Both pro- and con-base their opinions on measurement by instruments.
Is anyone not telling the truth? Each side has an interest in s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g the truth, so I don't know the real exact truth.
Recent studies from WIPPS in southern New Mexico (which had a radiation leak) are also in non-agreement. I think most of the residents of Carlsbad, 26 miles from WIPPS, are fearful of what is going on, from newspaper and radio reports I have read and heard the past weeks. I think they should be fearful. But of course I don't know for sure! And that's a source of anxiety!

Probably our very biggest danger is our nuclear power plants on the edge of the ocean in California. They are in danger of a ********* type breach. Why did anyone build them so close to the ocean? Of course, the concept is that the ocean could be used to cool them in emergency, but ********* experience shows us that this would not
work, if the plants are (as reported many times) similar in construction to the ruined ********* plants. Many of our other American nuclear plants are built on waterways, and this is now a source of anxiety...and trusted science sources vote for it being a real danger.

The people I trust most on the radiation subject are more fearful of earthquakes and associated volcanoes than they are, as yet, of radiation from **********

I think it's probable that Japan itself, and the Pacific, have really been radiated to a danger point, and that therefore the sea coming to our shore, and the fish and animals within it, are really a source of danger to us. This would probably be true in Hawaii too, don't you think? I would not swim in Hawaiian waters now...but then it always did have a shark danger. I lived there for a while, too. People died of shark bites while I was there, before **********
The reports of sailors from the USS Ronald Reagan now sick because of radiation exposure when they rushed to help ********* after the tsunami--these reports are by far the most convincing to me. These reports are similar to the Agent Orange reports from Vietnam, which we now know, after many years of problems exposed by even the questionable media, are true. Our service men and women always get the brunt of problems with the environment.
And our service people, from all reports, do not get adequate help after exposure. This is the story I believe the most.