Strange TV interview with pro-nuclear professor on study finding increased infant mortality in US after Fukushima (VIDEO)

Published: January 25th, 2012 at 8:08 am ET
By ENENews
Email Article Email Article
Digg This
Submit to StumbleUpon
Save on Delicious

Title: UI nuclear engineering professor disects report of infant mortality and radiation
Source: Fox9 Boise
Author: Mac King
Date: Jan 24, 2012

Professor Akira Tokuhiro, professor of mechanical and nuclear engineering at the University of Idaho:

Transcript Summary

  • Some things are interesting here and worth looking into
  • But complete? Science is never complete
  • It remains to be seen
  • There are a lot of things that we don’t know
  • The radiation did come over from Fukushima to the Pacific northwest… That is certain, a scientific fact
  • Is there a direct link between infant mortality? I’m not sure science can answer that
  • I don’t see convincing argument that it’s directly connected to Fukushima [likely because study authors do not argue that it is directly connected]
  • Scientifically it’s interesting… but do we have the money to do a longterm study?

See also:

Digg This
Submit to StumbleUpon
Save on Delicious
Email Article Email Article

Related Posts

  1. Idaho TV: “Data showed a large spike in deaths — particularly infant deaths — in the 14 weeks following the Fukushima meltdown” -Report (VIDEO) January 25, 2012
  2. FOX affiliate in Seattle: Northwest sees 35% infant mortality spike post-Fukushima June 19, 2011
  3. “Huge spike” in US infant mortality in the four months after Chernobyl vs. Is “dramatic increase” in US baby deaths a result of Fukushima Fallout? (VIDEO) June 15, 2011
  4. MD: Infant deaths also up in B.C., Canada after Fukushima — Corroborates U.S. study (VIDEO) December 22, 2011
  5. B.C. Canada sees spike in number of sudden infant deaths — “Why so many of those have come up this year, we don’t know” July 6, 2011

18 comments to Strange TV interview with pro-nuclear professor on study finding increased infant mortality in US after Fukushima (VIDEO)

  • Studies showed infant mortality and cancers increased from Chernobyl so it stands to reason it would with Fukushima radiation and be more so on amounts released and he knows this !

    Heck of a dance around the bush !

    Report Comment

  • oscar419 oscar419

    whatever this guy is on I only want half….. Amazing, I wonder who sent a nice gift box to his home.

    Count the “ums” and “uhs”…..

    Report Comment

  • James2

    This video is hilarious.

    You remember that exercise where you had to debate an argument that you don’t really believe?

    This guy is doing everything he can to obfuscate without losing his dignity, and in the process accomplishes neither.

    He knows exactly what’s going on. He’s obviously trying defend nuclear – I don’t know – but he doesn’t do a very good job of it here.

    Report Comment

  • Dr. Awesome Dr. Awesome

    The recent studies reporting US deaths linked to Fukushima have been a bit misinterpreted.
    First, we all know in our hearts the truth about how Fukushima radionuclides have spread worldwide and are killing our brothers and sisters and will continue to contribute to a plethora of death, illness, and suffering.
    The fact is science cannot point directly to radioactivity as the “cause”. This is the absolute horror about the situation. This is truly a mad scientist attack on humanity.
    Second, the studies released are correlational studies. Correlations can only show relationships among the variables (direct ‘like the referenced study’, indirect, or no relationship). Correlations cannot show cause and effect. They can show “strong” relationships if the data is accurate, calculated properly, analyzed, presented properly, and reviewed by a large variety of experts without any “conflicts of interest” or “bias” (which is difficult).
    I have my own personal criticisms of the study but I like the fact that the “ball is rolling” and the “gears are turning” with regard to Fukushima studies. I’d like to see more young students getting involved in the scientific investigation process.
    Finally, a necessary and critical part of science is to be skeptical of every study. Always ask…What are the sources of error? How can this study be better? More accurate? Are the results repeatable?

    Just wanted to add some “nature of science” thoughts.
    Thank you all for providing this forum. I enjoy everyone’s input and welcome all comments.
    Much love goes out to all. Peace.

    Report Comment

  • pure water

    This is exactly the kind of scientific talk, which discredits all the scientists! If he has not the passion to know, why should he do this?! Talking about how complex things are is for everyone outside, and his job is to search for data and explanations. Bandazhevski kept animals in his private apartment for his experiments, and this “scientist” talks about costs of the researches!

    Report Comment

  • Dogleg Dogleg

    I tell you what! This jerk-off is lucky I made a pledge to be as kind, loving and forgivefull throughout this disaster! UI isnt far from here and just happens to be on my way to ND. Would love to see his face when I walk in his office and let him know that people like him are Fing baby killers! And how he is going to pay for relocating my family? Fing parasite!

    Report Comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    Lies, damned, lies, & government talking heads -

    Lying for a living’s tough but somebody’s gotta do it. Upside is that it does pay well. Plenty of money for coke & kink.

    The book, LOW LEVEL RADIATION, HIGH LEVEL COVER-UP does a good job of documenting the dangers of low level radiation – jumps in neonatal mortality following events like TMI – also carefully documents deliberate falsification of published statistics (by comparing monthly reports to doctored annual reports as I recall).

    I have some questions-that maybe have been answered or at least discussed because I haven’t read all the comments every day here.

    Since we do have some very smart people with scientific minds here on – these are the brains I love to pick & I’m wondering…

    Any EDUCATED GUESSES on just how bad this is/will be in terms of mortality? (One tends to think in all-or-nothing terms, the term ELE making one think of all higher life forms dying off.)

    Also are there places on the planet that will get off easy in terms of the radionuclide dousing? Are there areas of ocean that will remain relatively untouched/uncontaminated?

    HOWEVER – any analysis would need to take into account other problems, such as Monsanto’s GMO putsch. Jeffrey Smith has written good books on that, & has a website too. Some of the GMO stuff actually changes the genes of animals (incl. us) that eat it. (I was listening to J.S. on rense radio last night.)

    And there ARE still other problems most having to do with the trashing/destruction of the biosphere.

    I feel like I know the answer to my own question, which is that it is going to be very very very bad but probably all life will not be destroyed. However I’d like others’ views on it.

    This is a bit like ‘fiddling while Rome burns’ (figure of speech, I guess violin hadn’t even been invented back then) – spending ones’ remaining days immersed in the fascinating intellectual activity of analysing one’s terminal illness.

    Report Comment

    • StillJill StillJill

      Yes blades,…. “analyzing one’s terminal illness”, is what most of us will be left doing. Living inside one’s belly button, as it were.
      It is a waiting to die. Waiting for the ‘real bad stuff’ to start.

      Still unprecedented—no way we can know about bio-accumulation or multiplication of ‘daughter decay products’, not to mention how they interact with each other,……WHOLE new field of study just got born.

      Report Comment

    • Bobby1

      You can’t give a realistic lower bound on the number of deaths until they stop the Fuku NPP from emitting radionuclides.

      But you can say, “If they fixed the plant completely today”… then you can reason…

      Chernobyl killed 1 million. The ECRR estimates it will have killed 1.4 million by 2030. If Fuku is 100 Chernobyls, that is 140 million dead…

      Or, the nuclear bomb test era was 50-60 Chernobyls. It killed 60 million. But the world population has doubled since then. One BTE (radiation from bomb-test-era) is now equal to 120 million deaths.

      So you start talking at 120 million… if Fuku is 400 Chernobyls, that is 560 million.

      Now Japan & the US combined have 430 million population…that would kill everyone in both countries, and still have a lot left over.

      Of course, Fuku is still going on, with no end in sight.

      Report Comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    typo – should be no comma after dammed, lies

    Wow that was one nervous guy. He must have drawn the short straw.

    Should be a demo tape – “How to talk for over 5 minutes and deliver no content.”

    Report Comment

  • Alice Alice

    He already knew in May that radioactive particles hitched a ride on the jet stream to the Northwest coast but neglected to sound the alarm.

    I suspect while this interview was going on, he was thinking, “I hope our funding doesn’t get cut off. Man, I should have chosen another major.”

    Report Comment

  • rebelgroove

    Mr Professor, you are a fool.

    It is fine to say that you don’t know, but to pit science against what should be your common sense is abominable.

    I wonder what your argument will sound like when one of your children comes down with cancer?

    Report Comment

  • many moons

    Gee um uh um I wonder if ah um he would um find this report to be INTERESTING um ah if his son of um ah daughter suddenly died, um ah perhaps he would change is um initial reaction to um disturbing and not find it um interesting yeah um uh ah…..he gives a bad name to humans.

    Report Comment

  • bleep_hits_blades

    We can certainly wonder what they held over that fellow’s head to force him to do that obviously exceedingly painful interview. You couldn’t help but feel sorry for the guy. Reminded me of a cartoon character sweating bullets.

    Recall that govt./big business are organized crime; and we have learned that the nuke industry is organized crime on steroids. You get in their way, they have no problem fire-bombing your car or contaminating you and your family with plutonium, or paying to have you run down on the street.

    It’s kinda hard to earn a living in a ‘clean’ way when you live in a dirty world. After all, these ‘gangstas in pinstripe suits’ are to a very large extent ‘the only game in town.’

    Not making excuses for anyone, but the realities are there and our options have become increasingly limited.

    The least in-denial group I have found are the inde contractors. (building, construction, remodelers, etc. – the small ones not the big ones). I worked with them for a while in a job that had me talking to a lot of them, and was favorably impressed with their smarts and common sense. They knew the way the world works SO much better than the university educated professionals who are stuck on themselves(inflated egos) and have been subject to extra years of brainwashing (called getting a graduate degree) and have perks and privileges to protect, and are way way way into DENIAL. These professionals – lawyers, doctors, etc. – are the hardest nuts to crack because of their big egos and magnificent ego defense structures. (I know there ARE exceptions and my hat is off to them because it takes moxie to give up all the perks and step off into the danger zone.)

    Frankly, most of them make me a little ill. I mean – smart enough to know better. They can’t plead the ‘I am just stupid’ defense.

    Report Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.