My Fukushima cattle story continued: In March, on the Toki boot time Blog, 2012-03-26 08:00:10 NO-108, Naoto Matsumura is shown in a photo. He is working with Dr. Hasegawa and Dr. Yamashita (JAXA) Institute of Space and Astronautical Sci
ence. The blog goes on to say that because “I want to save the cattle in the disaster area, we want to save them. This study that the Japan Atomic Energy Organization has announced is the study of volume reduction of radioactivity using cattle. This study was conceived because Naoto Matsumura and the others are confident of the study’s results.” Naoto Matsumura asks everyone to support this research effort that will be using cattle.
It always starts out that they want to use the cattle by JUST examining the urine, blood, or “cow paddies”. The justification is HOW can this hurt the cattle. But, they do not fill in the rest of the information. They do not tell you about the animals that have to die for the start of a study, during the study, and at the end of the study.
This is from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries. The only good that has come from this site is that they really can’t lie. They can omit information, but what they do write, cannot be a blatant lie.
Basically, it is saying to get a true measurement of the amount of contamination that a cow has been subject, the cow has to be slaughtered. You cannot get a true reading by just the blood, since cesium is incorporated into all the tissues of a cow’s body. To do this, the cow has to be slaughtered outside of the Fukushima contamination zone so that it does not become “further” contaminated and provide “false” readings.
Q15. On the degree of internal exposure were examined, a low dose livestock, it is outside the warning area and bring up Why can not.
A15. There needs to be measured on the slaughter, to find out the amount of radioactive material have been incorporated into the body, could do this with livestock in the warning area is difficult.
THE ACTUAL HARM IS THAT IT JUSTIFIES USING ANIMALS FOR STUDIES by SAYING THAT IT IS HARMLESS. NO STUDY that USES ANIMALS is HARMLESS; by continuing this PRACTICE, it continues the justification for USING ANIMALS for ANY TYPE OF Research study.