Will you temporarily stop purchasing Japanese Greens?

[Chip]

The bottom line ... this topic is about tea.

...and radiation.

Of course. But my point is painfully obvious. Let's keep the focus here on how it directly relates to tea. Let's post findings here of radiation levels as it relates directly to tea. Let's not just post someone's rant blog over and over. A topic under Miscelleny would be more appropriate.

I don't think anyone on the forum trusts the gov or tepco. I am 100% certain however in this stage of the game that radiation levels in tea will be reported accurately. For every gov tester, there are likely 10 independent testers from various groups, and I am 100% certain that a cover up is no longer possible. The cat is soooo out of the bag, and you cannot get it back in.

To date I have heard zero reports of radiation contamination from fukushima in any teas in regions that affect us other than Shizuoka.

I believe for the most part members are taking a very prudent approach to Shizuoka tea, and by and large members feel sadness for everyone directly impacted. It is not a celebration that radiation was found anywhere, it is a somber reminder.

[Chip]

Somehow I missed your posts, Kevin. Thank you for sharing this information. I have not seen this one before.

Thanks mlfrank for the first hand reports. It is interesting that shops are bringing in Shizuoka tea, safe or not. It must be very hard to sell.

[lkj23]

My coworker has told me this morning that her friend who usually buy tea from japan on the net has bought a geiger counter and he has found radioactivity on 2 teas. I want to meet him and ask the name of teas and the webshop

[JBaymore]

My coworker has told me this morning that her friend who usually buy tea from japan on the net has bought a geiger counter and he has found radioactivity on 2 teas. I want to meet him and ask the name of teas and the webshop

Just becasue someone has the disposable money to purchase complex equipment like geiger counters and dosimeters and such does not mean that they are trained in how to calibrate and use them. Simply buying such a piece of equipment also does not tell us anything about the QUALITY of the instrument itself, hence the accuracy or reliability of any readings produced.

So using information that is not backed up with some "peer review" is not useful at all. It is purely anecdotal. It can be misleading. In this particular tea related case, it can cause economic damage to various parties where none should exist. It could be like yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, when no fire is there.

As a concrete example of this I am VERY familair with:

Potters buy pyrometers to measure the temperature in their kilns. A potter can buy a pyrometer that is accurate to 2.5% of the full scale reading or can buy a pyrometer that is accurate to plus or minus 0.1 degree Centigrade. Both potters can say, "I own a pyrometer and use it on my kiln and the temperature right now is 1250 degrees C." Sounds accurate. It is not.

As you might expect, the 2.5% pyrometer is WAY cheaper than the 0.1 C pyrometer. (BTW........ I own the 0.1 C type on my noborigama. About $1000 worth of very nice Omega Engineering hardware. I could own the 2.5% one for about $150..... but it'd be close to worthless.)

One of these potters knows to an accuracy of a tenth of a degree. The other know to only plus or minus the top value the meter is able to display. 2.5 percent of 1300 C is 32.5 degrees EITHER WAY! It is plus or minus. So that is a potential ERROR of 65 C from what that potter THINKS the temperature actually is. If they do not actually understand how this works... and just know they should own a pyrometer...... they are only one step better than a guess.

Additionally, the pyrometer only measures the temperature at the point the thremocouple probe is actually located in the kiln. It says nothing about elsewhere in the chamber. If the potter does not realize this, he/she THINKS that the temperature in the back of the kiln is the same as that where the probe is located in the front. A potential total mistake, because until the kiln has been "calibrated" as to temperature distribution at any given climbing and cooling point, the potter does not KNOW that the probe location and the other locations match up at all.

So again, just because someone has a piece of equipment, it does not necessarily make them a credible source of information.

best,

.............john

[lkj23]

He has bought one of the best geiger counter 1156$, he has a lot of money and can spend what he want. Those counter has a very good accuracy and are sold calibrated by manufacturer. You only has to see the accuracy of gamma scout, you can measure what you want.


It´s very easy use a geiger counter, anyone could do it. I was looking a lot of models 2 month ago.

[Xell]

He has bought one of the best geiger counter 1156$, he has a lot of money and can spend what he want. Those counter has a very good accuracy and are sold calibrated by manufacturer. You only has to see the accuracy of gamma scout, you can measure what you want.


It´s very easy use a geiger counter, anyone could do it. I was looking a lot of models 2 month ago.

If a device for only 1k $ could get proper reading about radiation in food, there would be no problem to locate dangerous products, no need for time consuming and expensive laboratory test.

Use this calculator and check about 100-120 Bq, in a 100g was probably highest reading. Do you really think that device can pick up such a tiny radiation above background level?

[Nathaniel87]

I may have to purchase less than normal this year, but not because any personal nervousness surrounding radiation. Right now it seems that all of my tea orders from Japan have to get some sort of certification before each and every order is shipped here to Korea.

I didn't know that before I placed an order with Ippodo last month and the delivery went out about two weeks after I ordered. To their credit they threw in an extra bag of hojicha with my order, which was very nice of them.

Unfortunately, I found out upon placing my most recent order with them that they do indeed need to apply for new certification every time I order. I guess I will just have to place larger orders if possible or else focus more on Korean greens this year.

[lkj23]

He has bought one of the best geiger counter 1156$, he has a lot of money and can spend what he want. Those counter has a very good accuracy and are sold calibrated by manufacturer. You only has to see the accuracy of gamma scout, you can measure what you want.


It´s very easy use a geiger counter, anyone could do it. I was looking a lot of models 2 month ago.

If a device for only 1k $ could get proper reading about radiation in food, there would be no problem to locate dangerous products, no need for time consuming and expensive laboratory test.

Use this calculator and check about 100-120 Bq, in a 100g was probably highest reading. Do you really think that device can pick up such a tiny radiation above background level?

Maybe you are right and with cheap counters you can´t measure the radioactivity of the small quantities of food, making a false sense of security because it can be really contaminated but you can´t detect it and so think is safe.

But this guy has found radioactivity on 2 teas and I going to ask him about it and avoid this teas.

[a.serrao]

Maybe you are right and with cheap counters you can´t measure the radioactivity of the small quantities of food, making a false sense of security because it can be really contaminated but you can´t detect it and so think is safe.

But this guy has found radioactivity on 2 teas and I going to ask him about it and avoid this teas.

Actually radiation IS found on some japanese tea. The point is: is radiation well below the provisional safe limit?

Where these tea come from?

[Drax]

But this guy has found radioactivity on 2 teas and I going to ask him about it and avoid this teas.

This conversation brings us back to the fact that you get exposed to a 'lot' of radiation throughout an average day from everyday items.

It was said that he "found radiation." So a smarter question would be to ask:

1. How much? He used a geiger counter, so supposedly he should be able to quote numbers.
2. And how precise is the measurement? The machine should have an error associated with its measurement (ideally, it would be calibrated with a known source first).

You really need those two pieces of information before getting too concerned.

[a.serrao]

This conversation brings us back to the fact that you get exposed to a 'lot' of radiation throughout an average day from everyday items.

I would call it not "a lot", otherwise you would be dead within years.
The point is that statistically the radiation exposure cannot or should not exceed a threshold above which our repairing machine cannot cope with, so that point mutations and DNA mutations cannot be repaired in a timely manner.

The point is that, if a radiation source is AVOIDABLE, why cannot or should be not avoided?

[Drax]

This conversation brings us back to the fact that you get exposed to a 'lot' of radiation throughout an average day from everyday items.

I would call it not "a lot", otherwise you would be dead within years.
The point is that statistically the radiation exposure cannot or should not exceed a threshold above which our repairing machine cannot cope with, so that point mutations and DNA mutations cannot be repaired in a timely manner.

The point is that, if a radiation source is AVOIDABLE, why cannot or should be not avoided?

But that's exactly my point. He said he found radioactivity in the tea. He didn't say how much. It could be negligible, and it could be far under what you receive in an average day from everything else.

"A lot" is a relative term, which is why I put it in quotes. Maybe we can wait to hear some solid facts on numbers instead of leaping to conclusions?

[JBaymore]

I'll quote myself from above in this thread.

So again, just because someone has a piece of equipment, it does not necessarily make them a credible source of information.

So using information that is not backed up with some "peer review" is not useful at all. It is purely anecdotal. It can be misleading. In this particular tea related case, it can cause economic damage to various parties where none should exist. It could be like yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, when no fire is there.

best,

............john

[a.serrao]

It can be misleading. In this particular tea related case, it can cause economic damage to various parties where none should exist. It could be like yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, when no fire is there.

The fact that some japanese tea is radioactive (without disclosing how much) is a fact that cannot be confuted.
The point imho is another. It's the perceived danger that arise from drinking radioactive tea.

[entropyembrace]

All agricultural products grown in any part of the world are radioactive...and this has nothing to do with any kind of human activity.

This is why when you say tea is radioactive you really need to quantify how much and what type and which isotopes are the source?