In China, there is alarm over the nuclear plant’s water but its seafood ban isn’t rooted in science.

  • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thank you. I appreciate the response and data. I wonder what the difference in the WHO limit would be if, instead of being for drinking water, which enters and leaves your body the same day, it was for people to live 24/7 in a pool of water, as fish do. I imagine it would be a significantly lower number, but you’ve still done a lot to convince me this is safer than it sounds. Cheers!

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even if living in it 24/7 sucks for the fish, the exposure for a human that eats the fish is still transient - the tritium in the fish enters and leaves much like the water you’d drink does.

      Glad to be providing helpful information. It’s easy for fears to magnify and spread, humans have a bias towards paying attention to danger because that’s really helpful in evolutionary terms when there could be a hungry leopard hiding in any bush.