#1 By: Xeni Jardin, September 26th, 2013 13:56
#2 By: millie fink, September 26th, 2013 14:30
#3 By: Bob "Genghis" Khan, September 26th, 2013 15:07
Blinky (Someone was going to link to him)
#4 By: Suzanne, September 26th, 2013 15:14
(psst - you can copy and paste images in; just discovered that)
#5 By: Joe Castleman, September 26th, 2013 15:26
Holy mackerel, that catch doesn't even look like fish.
#6 By: Víctor, September 26th, 2013 15:36
Nah, I don't want to know if Fukushima´s daikons have developed sentience and/or tentacles or not.
#7 By: Preston, September 26th, 2013 16:08
As long as it's GMO free.
#8 By: Tim Quinn, September 26th, 2013 16:12
Consider this my daily error.
#9 By: Juan Rudametkin, September 26th, 2013 16:23
You have to wonder how much trust the Japanese people have in the authorities who pre-tsunami, deemed Fukushima "safe", turned out to be in way over their heads in the cleanup efforts, then we find out 300 tons of water are seeping into the ocean every day. Etcetera.
Now the seafood has been declared safe. How much moral weight does that official stamp of approval carry?
#10 By: abarthol, September 26th, 2013 16:43
#11 By: Anselm Lingnau, September 26th, 2013 17:18
Cetaceans are whales, porpoises and dolphins. Some Japanese like to eat these but I doubt they're catching them off Fukushima. Are you sure you don't mean crustaceans, as in crabs, crayfish, and so on?
#12 By: Clever Emi, September 26th, 2013 18:06
Between general purpose ass-covering, preventing panic, and getting the industry moving again, is it even possible to know if the seafood is actually safe? I mean, I'm assuming that it's possible to know based on science, but based on the word of the fisheries cooperatives? Is this an economic decision? Is it even possible for Japanese consumers to know for sure?
I might be basing my skepticism on my own distrust of industry groups in the US, for what that's worth.
#13 By: Cowicide, September 26th, 2013 18:46
I guess as long as they test low for radiation it should be fine. Nonetheless, I would use my own Geiger counter on any seafood I'd eat from there.
#14 By: RFMarine, September 26th, 2013 20:13
you can buy gieger counters on ebay. If they missed any radioactive sea food one person with a gieger counter can point that out on twitter or facebook or youtube
#15 By: fuzzyfuzzyfungus, September 26th, 2013 20:13
Initial 3rd party reports suggest that the official stamp of approval has a mass that suggests the presence of several additional neutrons, compared to stable official stamps of approval; but TEPCO urges calm.
#16 By: Noah Django Gross, September 26th, 2013 21:25
#17 By: fuzzyfuzzyfungus, September 26th, 2013 22:27
Gieger-counter-ology isn't necessarily as trivial as you might want. In addition to some fleabay Gieger counters being worth even less than you pay, you have to deal with a number of different variants, each with their own specialties and limitations.
Doesn't make the task impossible; by any means; but if some n00b with a device designed for hunting gamma and X rays declares an alpha-emitter riddled fish to be A-OK, it wouldn't be a huge surprise.
#18 By: fuzzyfuzzyfungus, September 26th, 2013 22:48
Better skip the mushrooms, though, among a few other non-animals noted for their ability to soak up delicious isotopes....
#19 By: bombblastlightningwaltz, September 26th, 2013 22:55
Frogs and lilly pads have been dead for over a decade in urban water ways in north america. Eat' em while they hot.
#20 By: Numfar, September 27th, 2013 07:21
So here's something I've always wondered: algae are known for storing huge amount of iodine. And we know iodine-131 is usually released in nuclear disasters. Does that mean I should stop buying nori from Japan or does the short half life of radioiodine mean it's perfectly safe now?
next page →