Dear Science

Dear Science,

I read on Slog that the Tokyo Electric Power Company dumped tons of radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean (because they had to make room for MORE radioactive water). Japan’s nuclear safety agency said the disposal will pose “no major health risk”—why do I not feel reassured? I know the ocean is big, but are all the fish soon going to have three eyes like that one on The Simpsons? Will we still be able to eat seafood safely?

Concerned Food-Eater

Science wishes to tell you something in all earnest sincerity: Any right-thinking person would’ve been a concerned food-eater well before Fukushima. Bluntly and simply: The US food supply is unsafe, and has been since roughly the Reagan administration.

Let’s consider for a moment what you were exposing yourself to while eating seafood before the Fukushima disaster occurred. The entire Pacific food chain is contaminated with vast—shockingly vast—quantities of mercury. Mercury is a potent neurotoxin and teratogen (something that causes birth defects). The bigger the predatory fish, the more mercury—shark, swordfish, tilefish, and mackerel are among the worst offenders. The FDA bluntly states that children and pregnant women cannot eat these fish safely. Canned tuna isn’t much better. The FDA says you can eat two average meals a week of tuna and not receive toxic doses of mercury. Where did all this mercury come from, and how did it get into fish? Industrial pollution—particularly the burning of filthy fossil fuels—is the overwhelming source.

If you choose beef or chicken over fish in the Fukushima interval, you’ll be exposing yourself to some of the most resistant bacteria on the planet. The animal products in your fridge often contain bacteria capable of liquefying the brains of children, capable of turning their kidneys into mush. The industrial slaughterhouses are so filthy, US agribusiness has argued for years that US consumers would be safer if slaughterhouses were allowed to intentionally irradiate the hell out of the shit- and bacteria-tainted meat they sell to Americans.

Science has only a vague idea of the long-term health consequences of all the cesium being dumped into the Pacific. Some will undoubtedly find its way into the bones of the fish we’ll eat—persisting for decades to come, given the long half-life of the radioactive element. There is little to no data to guide us during this unprecedented disaster. Based upon the little we know—from the testing of atomic bombs, Hanford, and Chernobyl—the risks should be lower than those we already expose ourselves to from the chemical pollutants dumped into the same oceans.

Science has a question for you: Why are people so much more concerned about the radioactive elements, while so sanguine about the chemical toxins? Science thinks your fury should be broadened.

Antagonistically Yours,

Science

Send your science questions to
dearscience@thestranger.com.