How do we know when something is not fit to drink, touch, eat or breathe?  What happens when that something is invisible to the eye.  We can not taste it, or smell it.  With radiation we know that, NO DOSE IS SAFE.  A panel of the US National Academy of Sciences recognized that there is no safe radiation dose.
http://www.nirs.org/radiation/radtech/nosafedose072005.pdf 
Not what you heard?  Yeah, I heard the PR people from the nuclear industry after Fukushima.  It was the don't worry dance, a little radiation isn't going to hurt you. Or we read that fear is the bigger danger in Japan than radiation. Then the experts bring out the numbers and then confusion rains upon the American populace because the world measures things in System Internationale (SI), derived from the metric system and in the US we do the conventional.  For example emitting radiation is measured in the US by the unit called curie (Ci) and in the SI system the unit is becquerel.  Measuring the unit dose absorbed by someone in the US is the rad and SI unit system is gray (Gy).  Biological risk is measured in the US by the unit rem and the SI unit is sievert (Sv).  Mighty easy to get confused trying to figure it out.  The CDC puts out a pdf that explains the system.  A good example is the measurement of exposure to radiation.  In the US one mammogram gives you a dose of 70 mrm (milli rem), in Japan that would be 0.7 mSv (milli sievert).  In the US one dental x-ray is 4-15 mrem in Japan that would be 0.04-0.15 mSv.  
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/pdf/measurement.pdf
Health effects to the body are dependent upon the dosage, and a person's age, and whether they are male or female.  We know that the most vulnerable to radiation exposure is the elderly, women, and children. Women who are pregnant and fetuses are particularly vulnerable.  Radiation increases our risk of cancers (blood and bone), cardiovascular disorders, immune deficiencies, birth defects, endocrine disorders-thyroid problems, and genetic mutations.  
"Childhood disease clusters have been found in many communities with nuclear facilities.  This list includes increases in childhood leukemia near reprocessing facilities in La Hague, France and at Sellafield in the British Isles and the Krummel nuclear reactor in Germany."  from "Radiation and Children:  The Ignored Victims" from Nuclear Information and Resource Service World Information Servie on Energy.
"In November 2009, Joseph Mangano of the Radiation and Public Health Project published a study of newborn hypothyroidism near the Indian Point nuclear reactors in Buchanan, New York...During the period 1997 to 2007, the rate of newborn hypothyroidism in the combined four-county (nearest Indian Point) population was 92.4% greater, or nearly double the U.S. rate."
from Global Research, "Uranium Weapons, Low-Level Radiation and Deformed Babies" by Paul Zimmerman
Birth defects produced by the Chernobyl accident (in a book by Alexey Yablokov of the Russian Academy of Sciences:  "cleft lip and/or palate, doubling of the kidneys, polydactyly (extra fingers or toes), anomalies in the development of nervous and blood systems, amelia (limb reduction defects), anencephaly (defective development of the brain), spina bifida (incomplete closure of the spinal column), Down's syndrome, abnormal openings in the esophagus and anus, and multiple malformations occurring simultaneously."
from Global Research, "Uranium Weapons, Low-Level Radiation and Deformed Babies" by Paul Zimmerman
According to the Say-Peace Project from the Asia-Pacific Journal, "Fetuses, babies, and young children are far more susceptible to the effects of radiation than adults.  It has been estimated that babies and infants are four times as vulnerable as adults in their 20's or 30's..." and, "In Belarus, where the effects of the Chernobyl nuclear accident were most severe, the rate of thyroid cancer among children increased rapidly 5 to 10 years after the accident."
http://www.japanfocus.org/-Say_Peace-Project/3549
The Say-Peace Project mentions that standards for radiation (Iodine-131) in tap water in Japan are higher than other countries.  US EPA standard is 0.111 Bq/L, Germany 0.5, Ukraine 2, Belarus 10, WHO 10 and Japan 300 (100 for infants).  They also state, 
"As for breast milk, we cannot simply generalize that mothers should avoid breastfeeding, considering nutritional (immunity) and safety benefits of breast milk, especially when babies less than three-months are concerned.  According to a survey by the Breast milk Survey and Mother-Child Support Network, there were cases in which no radioactivity was detected in breast milk of mothers living in hot spots, while radioactivity was detected in breast milk of a mother in Mitaka, which is not a hot spot."
In the book, Breastfeeding Matters by Maureen Minchin (Alma Publications, page 28), "In the baby who is being breastfed, the body content of strontium diminishes[the baby excretes more than he or she takes in] but the bottlefed infant has increased strontium in his bones, as cows' milk may contain six times as much strontium as breastmilk and the mineral balance of cows' milk ensures that it is deposited in baby's bones."
In the book, Milk, Money, an Madness by Naomi Baumslag and Dia Michels (Bergin & Garvey, page 97), "Information from Italy and Austria shows that breastmilk contained one/three-hundredth the amount of radioactive iodine and caesium that was found in cow's milk following the Chernobyl accident." (this was confirmed by Swedish studies) and, "Resulting shortages of both fresh milk and infant formula put all artificially fed babies at risk.  Additionally, the radiation levels in breastmilk were much lower than were the levels in the mother's body, leading researchers to conclude that some mechanism exists that reduces the radioactive materials in the milk as it is produced."
I wonder whether it is possible that the enzyme in breastmilk (and blood) called cholinesterase, is responsible for this reduction.  The US Army Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense have been studying a nerve agent bioscavenger, Human ButyrylCholinesterase (a genetically engineered compound created in the mammary gland of a goat and derivative of cholinesterase)
http://www.bionity.com/en/news/100868/
The decisions that have to be made by citizens after a nuclear accident are complex.  How does one make such decisions?  How do we fathom such a scary world?  Something we cannot see or smell can impact our lives now and into the future.  My childhood spent for a few years near a nuclear plant haunts me with questions.  Will I ever know whether my mother's breast cancer was caused by our closeness to a nuclear power plant?  And now I wonder about Fukushima?  Chernobyl's devastating health effects were covered up, will this also be covered up?  I suspect that it can't be, it's too huge an accident.
Copyright 2012 Valerie W. McClain
 
 
 
            
        
          
        
          
        

In an article published by EurActive dated April 2011, "The risks associated with iodine-131 contamination in Europe are no longer 'negligible,' according to CRIIRAD, a French research body on radioactivity.  The NGO is advising pregnant women and infants against 'risky behaviour,' such as consuming fresh milk or vegetables with large leaves." The article states, "Fresh milk and creamy cheeses, as well as meat from cattle that have been outside eating grass..."may have been indirectly contaminated.  I don't remember seeing any warning for Americans last year...maybe I missed the warnings.  The article also states, "In normal times, no trace of iodine-131 should be detectable in rainwater or milk."  (CRIIRAD had detected it in rainwater in south-eastern France and the French IRSN had detected it in milk)
"CRIIRAD notes that 'huge amounts of radioactive material have been released by the Fukushima Daiichi plant since Saturday 12 march 2011.  On Tuesday 5 April, 24 days after the accident, the releases continue.'"
While contamination of radioactive material is greatest in Japan, particularly around Fukushima;  this radioactive material is spreading around the globe through winds and sea (TEPCO of Japan has been dumping radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean).  Truly our world is a small one, because an accident that happens thousands of miles away can impact us in very frightening ways.
So for mothers in Japan or mothers in our global community concerned about radiation contamination of breast milk, what is the safest way to feed a baby after a nuclear accident?  I recently read a statement by a Japanese mother that said that while the government was saying it was safe to breastfeed, she did not trust what the government was saying and was bottlefeeding infant formula to her baby because she believed her own milk was too highly contaminated with radioactive materials.    What do we know?  
Copyright 2012 Valerie W. McClain
 
 
 
 
            
        
          
        
          
        
"Shares in Nestle were up 1 per cent to 55 francs at the start of Zurich trading Thursday (February 16, 2012)"
--"Nestle Profit Up But Tough Year Ahead"--ninemsn website in Finance
According to this article, "the 2011 net profits for Nestle rose by 8% to 9.5 billion Swiss francs."  
Meanwhile in India in January 2011 the India Resource Center writes about, "Nestle in Secret Pact with Public Universities on Nutrition."  The article states, "Four public-funded national universities have entered into a 'confidential' pact with Nestle, one of the biggest baby food and commercial food companies, for nutrition awareness programmes for adolescent school-going girls in government-run village schools."
http://indiaresource.org/news/2011/1001.html 
In February of 2011,  "Nestle helps University of York students to be a 'class' act."  According to the article by the University of York, "The company [Nestle] has been associated with York Students in Schools, which places nearly 600 students a year in 60 schools, since it started in 1994."  The program has York University students volunteering as classroom assistants in schools in the city of York, UK. 
In 2007 Indiana University Kelly School of Business in the USA, received $750,000 gift from Nestle.  It was a "Gift to endow faculty chair, fellowship and support school's Center for Brand Leadership.  "The Nestle gift is a recipe for future success in both the corporation and for the Kelley School.  Alford [a Kelly alumni and in 2006 CEO and chairman of Nestle, USA] says that Nestle knows that the benefit of investing in the school is, ultimately, creating graduates who will be promising recruits."
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/6040.html 
At the IMD, a business school Nestle offers a scholarship for women to help women obtain their MBA.  The American Academy of Pediatrics pre-conference Symposium in October of 2011, was entitled, "Ending Childhood Obesity Within a Generation-Innovations in Practice," was supported by Nestle Nutrition Institute, Aetna Foundation, and Sanford Help Group.  In October 2010, Nestle presented its "landmark" data on "Feeding Infants and Toddlers Study (FITS) to the American Academy of Pediatrics Annual Conference.  In a Gerber (now owned by Nestle) News Release they discuss the HALF Project, which is an AAP initiative.   The funding and the research support is provided by Nestle.  "The project was created after a comprehensive needs assessment of AAP members found the need for pediatric-focused tools and resources to successfully support pediatricians in communicating family-centered obesity prevention and care."
In the USA, Nestle has partnered with Reading is Fundamental, a nonprofit children's literacy organization.  It's Nestle's ongoing commitment to education.  Nestle will donate up to $250,000 to Reading is Fundamental when consumers collect the promotion codes from candy (Wonka, Nestle Crunch, Butterfinger, Babe Ruth, etc...all trademarked products from Nestle)  This promotion ran from June of 2010-December 2011.  Rather ironical wouldn't you say?  Nestle being on this stop obesity in kids and at the same time enticing kids and adults to eat more candy to support a reading program?  I guess we can call it, corporate world benevolence.  
One of the more interesting stories of Nestle and academia is the one of Dr. Jose Saavedra, who is the medical and scientific director of Nestle Nutrition Division.  He also is a professor in the department of pediatrics, Division of Gastroenterology and Nutrition at John Hopkins University.  Dr.  Saavedra has had his research published in various medical journals regarding the positive effects of beneficial bacteria, probiotics.  Of course one of the ironies of irony, is that the company he works for markets a product that competes with a substance that naturally contains beneficial bacteria, breastfeeding.  Oh yes, I forgot, infant formula companies are now putting probiotics in their infant formulas.  I haven't yet figured out how one puts live beneficial bacteria into a substance that needs to be sterile for the safety of infants, but heck I'm not a scientist.  I guess genetic engineering can do about anything, particularly when funding comes from some very wealthy corporations.  I find it hard to understand how this academic merging with corporations is beneficial to students at the university level.  Do Saavedra's students know his relationship to Nestle?  Obviously John Hopkins doesn't care about this merging of interests.   But I think one must question the independence of thought regarding nutrition at John Hopkins, when such relationships are supported.
The tyranny in our society is one in which the infant formula industry has enormous influence in academics as well as in medical/pediatric societies.  It isn't just Nestle who is using their profits to influence academics.  Our society has been and is being "candied" into believing that breastfeeding is only a lifestyle choice.  Academia is forever grateful in a tanked economy to accept the funding that infant formula companies provide.  That gratefulness results in knowledge about the risks of infant formula being kept from consumers.  
Copyright 2012 Valerie W. McClain