Please share far and wide!

Search This Blog

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Breaking the Code: Radiation is Not Evenly Distributed, So Damage to Nearby Areas Can be Greater Than Predicted by "Calculation"

From Codeshutdown

I noticed a poster on your site said we should prove bioaccumulation by testing  some chitin. But uneven distribution means the average rad level may not tell the story.  Also, last week we visited the morphogenesis regulators.  Field gradients are key. Both chemical and electrical.  Ionic and voltage gradients will definitely warp the bioelectric field.  This is a non genetic type of deformation would perhaps be called epigenetic. Or more to the point bioelectric morphogenesis. Check out this site

“We’ve found that cells communicate, even across long distances in the embryo, using bioelectrical signals, and they use this information to know where to form a brain and how big that brain should be,” says the paper’s corresponding author Michael Levin, Ph.D

Galvanotactic control of collective cell migration in epithelial monolayers

Radionuclides are not evenly distributed. The usual measurements of radiation wont show these point sources and the average radiation dose may seem low level.

A lobster claw showing point source distribution of radioactive calcium and strontium.


uneven distribution of nuclear fallout in trees shown by autoradiographs. Point source ionic and voltage fields disturb the bioelectric field which is a regulator of morphogenesis. Measuring bulk becquerels and using the ICRP sievert system will not show this


Scientists are blinded by nuclear science! Theyve all been hoodwinked by the ICRP model! Its as simple as that.

Radiation testing wont reveal death and illness due to fallout.
Radioactive iodine has damaged thyroids but is no longer detectable.
Other short lived isotopes have also done their damage and are no longer detectable. Cesium has been shown to be dangerous 50 bq/kg, even 10 bq/kg and this will be totally dismissed by science as one hundredth the level of concern.

Radiographs show that nuclear fallout forms point sources in living beings. High 'specific activity' radioisotopes dont remain evenly dispersed, and are not diluted at the atomic or nanoparticle level. Thus radioactivity measurements averaged over any significant quantity of tissue may be misleading.

photo showing natural compositional sorting…in this case magnetite.

radiographs showing point source radionuclide deposition and biological sorting

strontium lung scan

This is a good paper to show to marine scientists who are blinded by the ICRP model. Chiyo Nohara died doing research, showing an LD50 for a butterfly larva of 2 becquerels

The biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue butterfly Atsuki Hiyama, Chiyo Nohara deterioration is due to artificial radionuclides from Fukushima

point source bioaccumulation and a possible link to the photoelectron theory by Busby and Schmug Chris Busby of the Institute of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science (IPNSS) in Braunschweig, Germany, and the University of Ulster, UK, and Ewald Schnug, director of the IPNSS, claim that uranium atoms in the body could act as "radiation antennas". They argue that uranium atoms could be capturing photons of background gamma radiation and then re-emitting their energy as fast-moving electrons that act on the surrounding tissue in the same way as beta radiation. This "phantom radiation" could be over 1000 times more damaging than the alpha particles released by depleted uranium's slow nuclear decay, according to their preliminary calculations.

Their theory invokes a well-known process called the photoelectric effect. This is the main mechanism by which gamma photons with energies of about 100 kiloelectronvolts (keV) or less are blocked by matter: the photon transfers its energy to an electron in the atom's electron cloud, which is ejected into the surroundings.

An atom's ability to stop photons by this mechanism depends on the fourth power of its atomic number - the number of protons in its nucleus


  1. Busby ECRR is a sham propaganda organization. They have no legitimacy from the EU. Clever use of acronyms doesn't change the fact that ICRP is the recognized international body for professional work. There is a reason the ICRP model has been used and refined over the years. It is highly predictive for future outcomes and conservative. 60 million Mr Busby is not credible. No validation. We don't live in a petri dish. It's called an immune system for a reason.

  2. You are right for once, they have been using it (ICRP) for a reason. It IS conservative... of the Nuclear Cartel lies.

  3. Point sources are not what gets you. It's the aggregate dose. Didn't you take basic radiation effects in school? Apparently not.

  4. Point sources are not what gets you. It's the aggregate dose. Didn't you take basic radiation effects in school? Apparently not.

    1. Thanks for explaining another of the main precepts, lies of nuclear.

      What you learned and what you promote are lies. Wakey


Insightful and Relevant if Irreverent Comments