Categories

Login

Lynas Issue by Dr. HW Looi >>>

“La Rochelle, the ‘Lynas of France’

From the New Straits Times Press, Ahmad Ibrahim, Fellow of Academy of Sciences, Malaysia Quote:

“La Rochelle, the ‘Lynas of France’

Many would be surprised that La Rochelle has for decades been hosting a rare earths processing plant, similar to the one planned in Malaysia.

The La Rochelle facility, which belongs to France’s Rhodia Group, has for years been operating like Lynas. Forty years to be exact. And there has been no adverse health and safety report in the tourist town.

The Rhodia company is an active player in the rare earths business. It is a leading processor of rare earths. In fact, it’s the only fully integrated industrial player to have manufacturing operations and raw material supply both within and outside China.

The plant in La Rochelle has been in operation for more than 50 years.

In the early years, the plant processed rare earths ore concentrates from Australia and China just like Lynas would. For 40 years, the plant was operated in this manner, producing cerium for the world market.

The radioactive thorium residues have been stored within the plant’s 40ha site for the past 50 years. During storage, the residues are regularly monitored by the country’s regulatory authority, the equivalent of our Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB).

They believe the stored thorium salts will become a fuel of the future.

What is clear is that the rare earths processing facility in La Rochelle has been operating for more than five decades without harming the population. Instead, La Rochelle has thrived over the years as an attractive tourist destination not only for the French but also for holiday-makers from other European countries and even as far away as the United States.

Through the deployment of stringent health and safety standards, the chemical plant has been of no consequence to the local community.

Instead, it has contributed to the local economy not only in terms of job opportunities but also tax revenues.

After visiting La Rochelle, it beats me why there are still people who are so hung up on Lynas.”Unquote

Quote: AELB (Atomic Energy Licensing Board, Malaysia):

Malaysia was the world’s no. 1 producer of tin. Along with tin, there’s always Thorium and Uranium and therefore this is not Malaysia’s first facility, AELB is has experience to handle this, to overcome this and AELB is prepared.

THERE ARE MORE THAN 10 FACILITIES THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO LYNAS.

SOME OF THEM ARE PRODUCING HIGHER RESIDUES, HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF URANIUM AND THORIUM.

AELB has been able to regulate and control these factories, so it is based on AELB experience and the experience of the industry abroad.” Unquote

QUESTION: WHY IS IT THAT THERE ARE NO DEMONSTRATIONS BY
THE ANTI-LYNAS FOOT-SOLDIERS AGAINST THESE 10 CHEMICAL
PLANTS ALREADY IN MALAYSIA THAT ARE PRODUCING “WASTES
WITH HIGHER CONCENTRATIONS OF URANIUM AND THORIUM”?

ANSWER: 100% PURE POLITICS FROM TOXIC RADIOACTIVE POLITICIANS !

Warmest regards,

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

The nkkhoo.com comment board with Facebook account.
looihw88 says:

*
*
Quote Ariel: “However much scientific data cannot erase the painful memories of the Bukit Merah incident.” Unquote

COMMENT:

Pictures of a children with cerebral palsy, mental retardation as well as many other pictures with congenital defects and leukaemia from the Bukit Merah area has been used repeatedly to instil fear into the unsuspecting naive population of Malaysia in a very sick attempt to link Lynas to these terrible illnesses.

THE LINK BEWEEN CONGENITAL DEFECTS, CEREBRAL PALSY AND RADIATION IN BUKIT MERAH ARE MISINFORMATIONS MALICIOUSLY CREATED BY THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS !

In a unique study by scientists at the John Hopkins University, published in 1988 by American Journal of Epidemiology, researchers investigated the association of parental occupational exposure to low-level external whole-body penetrating ionizing radiation and risk of congenital malformations in their offspring.

THE UNIQUE FEATURE OF THIS STUDY WAS THE LINKING OF QUANTITATIVE INDIVIDUAL MEASUREMENTS OF EXTERNAL WHOLE-BODY PENETRATING IONIZING RADIATION EXPOSURE OF EMPLOYEES AT THE HANDFORD SITE IN WASHINGTON STATE, USING PERSONAL DOSIMETERS AND THE DISEASE OUTCOME i.e. CONGENITAL MALFORMATIONS.

The study population included 672 malformation cases and 977 matched controls from births occurring from 1957 through 1980.

Twelve specific malformation types were analyzed for evidence of association with employment of the parents at Hanford and with occupational exposure to ionizing radiation.

Two defects, congenital dislocation of the hip and tracheoesophageal fistula, showed statistically significant associations with employment of the parents at Hanford, BUT NOT WITH PARENTAL RADIATION EXPOSURE.

Neural tube defects like spina bifida showed a slightly significant association with parental preconception exposure, but the number of cases is too small to be conclusive of a definite co-relation.

Eleven other defects, INCLUDING DOWN SYNDROME AND CEREBRAL PALSY showed no evidence of such an association.

When all malformations were analyzed as a group, there was no evidence of an association with employment of the parents at Hanford.

Given the number of statistical tests conducted, some or all of the observed positive correlations are likely to represent false positive findings.

In view of strong contradictory evidence in this well conducted study and the fact that there is NO CONGENITAL DEFECTS DEMONSTRATED IN STUDIES ON THE ATOMIC BOMB SURVIVORS IN HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI,

THE CONCLUSION IS THAT “IT IS UNLIKELY THAT LOW DOSE RADIATION CAN CAUSE CONGENITAL DEFECTS.”

After analysing thousands of well conducted studies, even UNSCEAR has now admitted THAT THEY WERE WRONG TO IMPLY THAT THERE IS NO SAFE LEVEL OF RADIATION !

There IS a safe level and that is,

RADIATION DOSES LESS THAN ABOUT 10 rem (100 mSv ) per year ARE SAFE.

(Note: 100 mSv = 5,OO0,000 % Lynas worst case scenario)

*
Have a look at this article recommended by Nick Tsurikov, the International Radiation Safety Expert and Co-author of the IAEA Radiation Safety Report.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/01/11/like-weve-been-saying-radiation-is-not-a-big-deal/

Excerpts of Article in Forbes:

“UNSCEAR (THE UNITED NATIONS SCENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC RADIATION) HAS FINALLY ADMITTED THAT WE CAN’T USE THE LNT HYPOTHESIS TO PREDICT CANCER FROM LOW DOSES OF RADIATION.”

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

ariel says:

However much scientific data cannot erase the painful memories of the Bukit Merah incident, therefore people object to Lynas.

looihw88l says:

Dear NK Khoo,

In the article dated:
09/10/2012 at 2:13 AM “Which is more radioactive, Potassium-40 prescribed by your doctor or Thorium-232 in the environment ?”

I found that I have accidentally posted the draft copy of the article which contains some errors.

The following is the final corrected copy:

Warmest regards,

Looi

” RADIOACTIVITY IN THE LIFE SAVING MEDICALLY PRESCRIBED POTASSIUM.

The potassium chloride salt that is prescribed by dieticians as an adjunct for high blood pressure therapy as well as the potassium chloride used by the medical profession, is radioactive with a radioactivity of 32 Bq/gm.
(1 Becquerel or Bq is 1 nuclear decay per second.)

It is a real surprise that the vast majority of doctors, including senior consultants, professors and university lecturers do not know this.

The radioactivity comes from Potassium-40 (K-40) which is a naturally-occurring radioactive material or NORM.

Wherever there is potassium, there is potassium-40. It constitutes 0.0117% of natural potassium.

Potassium-40 is a beta (87.3%), gamma (10.67%) and
positron (~2.0%) emitter and contributes to both internal and external doses.

The other 2 isotopes of potassium are K-39 and K-41 and both of these are considered to be non-radioactive.

The total internal dose to a typical member of the population from internal radionuclides is about 0.42mSv/yr and approximately 0.29 mSv/yr is due to the K-40 in the body. The rest of the dosage is from C-14.

According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and its international counterpart, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the recommendations for the maximum permissible dose (MPD) of radiation =

General Public annual MPD by both NCRP and ICRP is 1 mSv.

For Radiation Workers, the annual MPD is 50 mSv (NCRP) and 20 mSv (ICRP), with a cumulative MPD of 10 mSv x Age.

MPD during pregnancy is 5 mSv (NCRP) and 2 mSv (ICRP).

However, experts including Professor Wade Allison of Oxford University argue that the dose limit can safely be raised to 100 millisieverts, based on current health statistics.

Data

K-40 Half-life: 1.28 x 10^9 years

K-40 Decay Mode:

Potassium-40 in our diet produces the highly dangerous gamma and beta rays from all the 3 types of beta decay, i.e. electron emission, electron capture and positron emission.

Gamma Rays: 1.461 MeV (10.7%)

Beta maximum energy is 1.31 MeV

Potassium-40 is a beta and gamma emitter and contributes to both internal and external doses.

About 89.28% of the time, it decays to calcium-40 with emission of a beta particle (β−, an electron) with a maximum energy of 1.33 MeV and an antineutrino.

About 10.72% of the time it decays to argon-40 by electron capture, with the emission of a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino.

Very rarely (0.001% of the time) it will decay to 40Ar by emitting a positron (β+) and a neutrino.

Daily intake of potassium element: 3.3 grams

Amount of potassium element in body: 140 g to 250 g (about 4,400 Bq)

There is a very tight homeostatic control over potassium levels in the human body. This means that the consumption of foods containing large amounts of potassium will not increase the body’s potassium content

“Which is more radioactive, Potassium-40 prescribed by your doctor or Thorium-232 in the environment ?”

In fact, a professor and an international radiation specialist claimed that potassium-40 is far LESS radioactive than Thorium-232 and they cited the EPA (environment protection agency of American) and the WHO UNSCEAR as proof of their statements!

One of my friends who stated that K-40 is about 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232 was severely criticized.

Well, that depends on what we are talking about.

1. I think what my friend was thinking about is radioactivity in terms of Bq i.e. activity rather than biological effect (Sv) when he said potassium-40 is 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232.

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram
Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Therefore potassium-40 has about 62X more Bq than Thorium-232

*** Even in terms of biological effect, 1 gram of pure potassium-40 will still have a greater biological effect when compared with 1 gram of pure Thorium-232.

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram

Quote: 1 Becquerel per gram of K-40 in the soil (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) results in an increase in gamma-levels by ~0.042 microSieverts per hour (WHO UNSCEAR). Unquote

Therefore 254,000 Bq = 10,668 microSieverts/hour
(from 1 gram of pure potassium-40 i.e. not mixed with K-39 and K-41)

*** Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Quote “Each becquerel per gram of Th-232 (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) increases this level by ~0.604 microSv/hour.”

Therefore 4,080 Bq = 2,464 microSieverts/hour

10,668 microSv/hr divided by 2,464 microSv/hr = 4.33

or the biological effect of radiation from pure Potassium-40 is actually 4.33 times more than that of pure Thorium-232.

2. If we are talking about 1 gram of naturally occurring Potassium which contains only 0.0118% of K-40, then it is perfectly correct to say that Thorium-232 is more radioactive biologically than Potassium as the naturally occurring potassium has only 32 Bq per gram as compared to K-40 which has 254,000 Bq per gram.

So 32 Bq of K = 1.344 microSieverts/hr while 4080 Bq of Thorium-232 = 2,464 microSieverts/hr which is far more biologically radioactive than Potassium.

(But kindly refer to Dr Gary Kramer argument below because if you take his figure of 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40 and the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is only 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA), then K-40 is actually 12.8 times more radioactive as an external threat than Th-232, rather than Th-232 being 14 times more radioactive than K-40.)

3. If we compare radioactivity in terms of becquerel (number of atoms decaying per second), 1 Bq of course is equal to 1 Bq in terms of activity.

But in terms of PER Bq (radioactivity from only one nuclear decay) the biological effect, according to IAEA, Potassium-40 and natural potassium is less radioactive biologically than Thorium-232 (but remember that 1 gm potassium-40 has 254,000 atomic decay per sec while 1 gm of Thorium-232 has only 4.080 atomic decay per second ).

SO, BEFORE YOU CRITICIZE ANYONE FOR SAYING THAT POTASSIUM-4O IS MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN THORIUM-232 OR VICE VERSA, MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

It all depends on whether you are comparing activity (Bq) or biological effect (Sv), whether you are talking about pure potassium-40 or natural potassium which is composed of only 0.0118% highly radioactive K-40 and whether you are comparing Bq per gram of potassium-40 or Bq per gram of soil.

Moreover, we have to state that the Thorium-232 is NOT that of pure Thorium-232 as freshly isolated pure Thorium-232 do not produce any gamma rays and as such has practically no external biological effect (the 0.09 MeV of gamma rays in freshly isolated Thorium-232 actually comes from Radium-228 that comes from Thorium-228 which is cannot be chemically isolated from Thorium-232).

The same arguments apply to the comparison of the cancer coefficients of potassium-40 and Thorium-232.

In fact, the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is actually 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA). The figure given by UNSCEAR of 0.69 microSv/hr/Bq/ per gram of soil is for an infinite plain.

Quote: Dr. Gary H. Kramer, who is the Head of the National Internal Radiation Assessment Section at Health Canada and is a world authority in radioactivity in Potassium salts. The coefficient of 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40 is probably obtained by actual field measurement of the pile of Potassium chloride:

Quote: “Potassium chloride can be found in large quantities in stores selling materials for water treatment. The potassium content is about 500 g kg-

Typically, the material is sold in 20 kg bags so each bag contains ~600 kBq of 40K giving a concentration of 30 Bq g-1. This is well above the exclusion level yet the material is handled as non-radioactive.

The external dose rate in close proximity to a typical display in these types of shops would be about 150 microSv hr-1.

A worker would only need to be near the pile for about 7 hours to exceed the public dose limit of 1 mSv.” Unquote.

From the above statement from Dr Gary Kramer, who is a world authority in radioactivity in the Potash mines of Canada, and who also has a bone to pick with the IAEA report, the biological dose from a large pile of KCl is 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40.

Since, the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is only 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA).

As an external threat, the biological dose from a large pile of KCl is 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40, so in terms of per Bq, K-40 is still far more biologically active than Th-232..

However, as an internal threat to the Lynas workers or people of Kuantan if Thorium-232 managed to get into the tissues (which is not possible for the reasons stated above) it may be a completely different picture.

Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

looihw88l says:

*
Quote SMSL :” You weren’t even present and you reported based on your delusional views and hatred for those in Kuantan who do NOT want the LAMP!” Unquote.

Answer to SMSL,

You do not need to be in an active septic tank to know that it STINKS !

IF, AS IS GLOATED WITH GLEE BY ONE OF THE ANTI-LYNAS ZEALOTS Jade Lee, the poor old scientists from China who were our foreign guests were “CRITICISED AND BOOED OUT OF TOWN IN SHAME,”

THIS STATEMENT IN ITSELF IS GOOD ENOUGH TO SHOW THAT THOSE PEOPLE WERE BEHAVING LIKE THE DEMONIC RED GUARDS WHO HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RESPECT, COMPASSION OR FEELINGS FOR OUR FOREIGN GUESTS AND AS SUCH SHOULD BE CONDEMNED BY ALL DECENT MALAYSIANS OF WHATEVER RACE OR POLITICAL LEANINGS.

IT IS A DISGUSTING, BRAINLESS AND HUMILIATING WAY TO TREAT OUR GUESTS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY SO GRACIOUSLY AGREED TO COME ALL THE WAY FROM CHINA TO SHARE WITH US THEIR VALUABLE EXPERTISE IN THE FIELD OF RARE EARTHS.

As far as the video is concerned, all it shows are the MINING of the rare earths in China which was conducted under very poor conditions AND IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE REFINING OF REE IN THE MOST MODERN, STATE OF ART AND MOST ADVANCED REE PLANT IN THE WORLD.

IF YOU LOT CANNOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS TWO,
EVEN OUR GOOD LORD MAY NOT BE ABLE TO HELP YOU LOT !

May the Good Lord Bless This Beautiful Country.

Dr Looi.
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjT1kUAy_08&feature=player_detailpage

looihw88l says:

*
QUOTE Anti-Lynas Jade Lee: “When a few so claimed rare earth scientists came to Kuantan to speak about the safe rare earth processing, they were criticised and BOOED OUT OF TOWN IN SHAME” Unquote.

Answer:

THE THREE RARE EARTH SPECIALISTS FROM CHINA WHO WERE INVITED BY A FEW OF THE LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS TO ENLIGHTEN THE PEOPLE OF KUANTAN WERE RUDELY AND CRUDELY HARASSED BY THE SMSL LEADER AND HIS RED GUARDS IN A SHAMELESS AND DESPICABLE WAY.

THESE INNOCENT FOREIGN GUESTS WERE BEING BOOED, SHOUTED AT, JEERED, MOCKED, CRITICIZED, TERRORIZED AND DEGRADED BY THESE
DESPICABLE, UNCOUTH COMMON T^^GS WHO UNWITTINGLY DISPLAYED THEIR ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY FOR ALL TO SEE.

THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR BRINGS SHAME TO ALL MALAYSIANS AND SHOULD BE STRONGLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY CONDEMNED.

THESE THREE POOR OLD CHINESE SCIENTISTS, TWO OF WHOM WERE IN THEIR 70’S, WITH YEARS OF VALUABLE EXPERIENCE, WERE FLABBERGASTED BY SUCH STUPID, CHILDISH, DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR.

THE USE OF SUCH THUGGERY UNEQUIVOCALLY CATEGORIZES THE USERS INTO THE LOWEST RUNG OF SOCIETY AND REFLECTS BADLY ON THEIR CHARACTER, INTELLIGENCE AND UPBRINGING !

BECAUSE OF THEIR BULLYING TACTIC, VERY FEW PEOPLE DARE TO SPEAK UP, AND ALL THOSE WHO DARE TO DO SO ARE BEING INTIMIDATED, HARASSED AND BOYCOTTED BY THESE ZOMBIES

May Our Good Lord Have Mercy on Their Souls.

Dr Looi.
*
*
http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

looihw88l says:

*
THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS ARE SO WORRIED ABOUT THE LONG HALF LIFE OF THORIUM-232 THAT LEADER OF ONE OF THE ANTI-LYNAS GROUP REPEATEDLY SAID THAT BECAUSE OF THE LONG HALF LIFE OF 14 BILLION YEARS, OUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE SUBJECTED TO RADIATION FOR THE NEXT 14 BILLION YEARS.

THIS IS A REAL BIG JOKE BECAUSE THE SUN WILL EXPAND AND BECOME A RED GIANT AND SWALLOW UP THE PLANET EARTH IN ABOUT 5 BILLION YEARS.

EVEN LONG BEFORE THAT, IN ABOUT 1 BILLION YEARS FROM NOW OUR DESCENDANTS WILL ALL BE BARBEQUED AND INCINERATED BY THE EVER INCREASING RADIATION OF THE RED GIANT SUN.

SO WHY WORRY YOURSELF SICK ABOUT THE THORIUM-232’s LONG HALF LIFE OF 14 BILLION YEARS WHEN YOUR DESCENDANTS WOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN BARBEQUED IN ABOUT 1 BILLION YEARS!

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjT1kUAy_08&feature=player_detailpage

nkkhoo says:

I do not see human race can survive after 50 or 100 million years from now, let forget about 14 billion half-life. Dinosaur extinct after ruling the earth for 100 million years.

These anti-Lynas people are like BN politicians using lies to draw more supporters.

delia says:

if we keep bn in office, we will be doomed within next five years.

looihw88l says:

ROY PCK ASKS:
*
*
Quote Roy Pck: ” http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-11/lynas-slumps-after-court-ruling-delays-output-sydney-mover share is falling over 15%..any good news?” Unquote.

TO ROY PCK……………………THERE WILL NOT BE ANY GOOD NEWS IF THE STAFF AND SHAREHOLDERS OF LYNAS CONTINUE TO ACT LIKE CIVILIZED GENTLEMEN !

THE ANTI LYNAS RED GUARDS HAVE DEPLOYED AN ARMY OF CYBER HARASSERS AND CYBER THUGS IN ALL THE MALAYSIAN BLOGS AND OTHER NEWS MEDIA TO INTIMIDATE ANYONE WHO OPPOSE THEM AND THEY ARE VERY SUCCESSFUL SO FAR.

VERY FEW PEOPLE DARE TO SPEAK UP, AND ALL THOSE WHO DARE TO DO SO ARE BEING INTIMIDATED, HARASSED AND BOYCOTTED BY THE BRAINWASHED ZOMBIES.

THE MAIN AIM OF THESE CYBER THUGS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GETTING RID OF LYNAS, OR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HELPING CHINA MAINTAIN THEIR GRIP ON THE REE MARKET, BUT THEY ARE USING THIS GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO BRAINWASH AND INSTILL HATRED FOR THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT, THUS ENABLING THEM TO WIN THE COMING GENERAL ELECTION.

SO, THERE WILL BE NO GOOD NEWS UNLESS THE PRESENT STAFF AND SHAREHOLDERS OF LYNAS WAKE UP FROM THEIR DEEP SLUMBER AND FIGHT FOR THEIR RIGHTS !

Kindly note: I am not Pro or Anti Lynas or Pro or Anti Government BUT JUST AN ORDINARY CITIZEN OF MALAYSIA WHO IS NAUSEATED BY ALL THE LIES THAT ARE BEING PROPAGATED AND RADIATED BY THESE ANTI-LYNAS THUGS.

I AM REALLY NAUSEATED AND SAD THAT THERE ARE
HUMANS OR RATHER JUST OVERZEALOUS ZOMBIES IN THIS WORLD WHO WOULD RUN DOWN THEIR OWN COUNTRY BY CREATING A SCAPEGOAT IN AN ULTRA-MODERN CHEMICAL PLANT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF ENABLING THEIR MASTER BRAINWASHER TO GAIN A FEW EXTRA FILTHY VOTES IN THE COMING GENERAL ELECTION.

DO THEY CARE 2 HOOTS ABOUT THE 1,750 PEOPLE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY EMPLOYED BY LYNAS AND WHOSE SALARIES OR INCOME ARE NEEDED TO PUT FOOD ON THE TABLES FOR THEIR FAMILIES TO SURVIVE?

DO THEY CARE WHETHER THESE POOR HARD WORKING INNOCENT FELLOW HUMANS HAVE A JOB AND A HOME AND FOOD FOR THEIR CHILDREN ?

ALL THEY THINK ABOUT IS TO DESTROY LYNAS AND STOP THE CONSTRUCTION ANY NEW PROJECTS WHICH PROVIDE JOBS, SHELTER, FOOD AND A DECENT LIFE FOR THE POOR PEOPLE……….WHILE THEY THEMSELVES HAVE A COZY JOB, SHELTER AND PLENTY OF FOOD FOR THEIR CHILDREN.

IF THESE BRAINWASHED ZOMBIES ARE SO CARING, WHY DON’T THEY PROVIDE THE JOBS AND PROVIDE THE FOOD AND SHELTER FOR THE POOR PEOPLE INSTEAD OF JUST EMPTY TALK !

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

looihw88l says:

“Which is more radioactive, Potassium-40 prescribed by your doctor or Thorium-232 in the environment ?”

In fact, a professor and an international radiation specialist claimed that potassium-40 is far LESS radioactive than Thorium-232 and they cited the EPA (environment protection agency of American) and the WHO UNSCEAR as proof of their statements!

One of my friends who stated that K-40 is about 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232 was severely criticized.

Well, that depends on what we are talking about.

1. I think what my friend was thinking about is radioactivity in terms of Bq i.e. activity rather than biological effect (Sv) when he said potassium-40 is 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232.

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram
Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Therefore potassium-40 has about 62X more Bq than Thorium-232

*** Even in terms of biological effect, 1 gram of pure potassium-40 will still have a greater biological effect when compared with 1 gram of pure Thorium-232.

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram

Quote: 1 Becquerel per gram of K-40 in the soil (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) results in an increase in gamma-levels by ~0.042 microSieverts per hour (WHO UNSCEAR). Unquote

Therefore 254,000 Bq = 10,668 microSieverts/hour
(from 1 gram of pure potassium-40 i.e. not mixed with K-39 and K-41)

*** Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Quote “Each becquerel per gram of Th-232 (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) increases this level by ~0.604 microSv/hour.”

Therefore 4,080 Bq = 2,464 microSieverts/hour

10,668 microSv/hr divided by 2,464 microSv/hr = 4.33

or the biological effect of radiation from pure Potassium-40 is actually 4.33 times more than that of pure Thorium-232.

Note: Please do not make the blunder of saying that Potassium chloride has only 16.4 Bq/G, (Atomic weight of K = 40 and Cl = 35.5) which is correct if ALL the atoms in KCl is K-40.

In the normal Potassium Chloride we get from the shop, only a minute number of the atoms of potassium is K-40. The vast majority are
non-radioactive K-39 and K-41.

Each gram of KCl has 32 Bq of radiation. You do not multiply it with the factor 40/(40+35.5) in order to get the weight of K in the KCl. This is correct only if ALL the atoms in KCl are K-40.

K-40 constitute only 0.0118% of a pile of pure KCl and as such the K-40 should be considered to be analogous to the 6 Bq of Thorium-232 in the Lynas ore. Only a very tiny part of the K is K-40. The main part of the pile of KCl should be seen as “the soil” in the Lynas ore.

In the case of Thorium dioxide it is of course valid to say that 1 gm of ThO2 has 232/(232+32) x 4080 Bq = 3585 Bq because every atom of Thorium in ThO2 is the radioactive Th-232.

2. If we are talking about 1 gram of naturally occurring Potassium which contains only 0.0118% of K-40, then it is perfectly correct to say that Thorium-232 is more radioactive biologically than Potassium as the naturally occurring potassium has only 32 Bq per gram as compared to K-40 which has 254,000 Bq per gram.

So 32 Bq of K = 1.344 microSieverts/hr while 4080 Bq of Thorium-232 = 2,464 microSieverts/hr which is far more biologically radioactive than Potassium.

(But kindly refer to Dr Gary Kramer argument below because if you take his figure of 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40 and the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is only 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA), then K-40 is actually 12.8 times more radioactive as an external threat than Th-232, rather than Th-232 being 14 times more radioactive than K-40.)

3. If we compare radioactivity in terms of becquerel (number of atoms decaying per second), 1 Bq of course is equal to 1 Bq in terms of activity.

But in terms of PER Bq (radioactivity from only one nuclear decay) the biological effect, according to IAEA, Potassium-40 and natural potassium is less radioactive biologically than Thorium-232 (but remember that 1 gm potassium-40 has 254,000 atomic decay per sec while 1 gm of Thorium-232 has only 4.080 atomic decay per second ).

SO, BEFORE YOU CRITICIZE ANYONE FOR SAYING THAT POTASSIUM-4O IS MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN THORIUM-232 OR VICE VERSA, MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

It all depends on whether you are comparing activity (Bq) or biological effect (Sv), whether you are talking about pure potassium-40 or natural potassium which is composed of only 0.0118% highly radioactive K-40 and whether you are comparing Bq per gram of potassium-40 or Bq per gram of soil.

Moreover, we have to state that the Thorium-232 is NOT that of pure Thorium-232 as freshly isolated pure Thorium-232 do not produce any gamma rays and as such has practically no external biological effect (the 0.09 MeV of gamma rays in freshly isolated Thorium-232 actually comes from Radium-228 that comes from Thorium-228 which is cannot be chemically isolated from Thorium-232).

The same arguments apply to the comparison of the cancer coefficients of potassium-40 and Thorium-232.

In fact, the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is actually 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA). The figure given by UNSCEAR of 0.69 microSv/hr/Bq/ per gram of soil is for an infinite plain.

Quote: Dr. Gary H. Kramer, who is the Head of the National Internal Radiation Assessment Section at Health Canada and is a world authority in radioactivity in Potassium salts. The coefficient of 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40 is probably obtained by actual field measurement of the pile of Potassium chloride:

Quote: “Potassium chloride can be found in large quantities in stores selling materials for water treatment. The potassium content is about 500 g kg-

Typically, the material is sold in 20 kg bags so each bag contains ~600 kBq of 40K giving a concentration of 30 Bq g-1. This is well above the exclusion level yet the material is handled as non-radioactive.

The external dose rate in close proximity to a typical display in these types of shops would be about 150 microSv hr-1.

A worker would only need to be near the pile for about 7 hours to exceed the public dose limit of 1 mSv.” Unquote.

From the above statement from Dr Gary Kramer, who is a world authority in radioactivity in the Potash mines of Canada, and who also has a bone to pick with the IAEA report, the biological dose from a large pile of KCl is 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40.

Since, the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is only 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA).

As an external threat, the biological dose from a large pile of KCl is 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40, so in terms of per Bq, K-40 is still far more biologically active than Th-232..

However, as an internal threat to the Lynas workers or people of Kuantan if Thorium-232 managed to get into the tissues (which is not possible for the reasons stated above) it may be a completely different picture.

Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

*
Dated 04.10.12
*
QUOTE MARK HARDER: ” Thanks for a very informative and balanced article. I want to point out what I think is one aberrant use of the fact that a common isotope of Thorium produces alpha particles with an average energy of 5.5 MeV which is deposited over a maximum distance of 50 microns in cellular contents. This is all true, but the comparison with potassium-40, for which the same kinds of data were not mentioned in the article, is incomplete. The modes of decay of K-40 yield beta particles with an average energy of about 1.3 and 1.5 Mev, less than 1/3rd of Th alpha-particles. Furthermore, the path over which these beta particles is longer than that of the Th alpha radiation. During their long travel through what is mostly water the beta particles lose part of their energy to their environment, whereas the higher-energy alpha particles lose all of their energy in a shorter distance. This deposition of energy into their environment is more intense and therefore more damaging to that environment.”

Dear Mark Harder,

Thank you very much for your kind comments, but there are a couple of points I would like to clarify:

1. The average energy of the alpha particle that is emitted by Thorium-232 is about 4.0 MeV and it can travel less than 27.8 microns in body fluids.

2. Potassium is always in the body and is strictly homeostatically controlled at about 140 to 250 g.

Whereas, Thorium-232 is never in the body in significant amounts.

In fact the average level of Thorium-232 in an average body has been estimated to be less than 30 micrograms per person.

3. Thorium-232 in clay soil cannot enter the body by ingestion as it is very strongly adsorbed by clay. In the crystalline or soluble form in the absence of clay, it is estimated only 0.02 to 0.05% is absorbed.

4. Inhalation of Thorium-232 only occurs if there are particles of less than 5 microns in the air, most effective are particles that are about 1 to 2 microns.

These particles are found only in the Uranium or Thorium mines or where there is combustion. The ore used by Lynas is moist and the whole process do not involve any dry powder at any stage. So inhalation is not a problem in the ultra-modern, state of the art Lynas plant.

Definite evidence that crystalline silica (Sand, Sio2) is associated with an increased rate of lung cancer led the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to conclude in 1997 that crystalline silica is a known human carcinogen). Because of this, we cannot conclude that it is dangerous to play with sand in our sea shores.

Since Thorium-232 cannot get into the human body or even into the cells of plants by ingestion, inhalation or absorption in significant amounts, and the alpha particles that it produce is not an external threat, it is not a significant environmental threat.

For instance you can do all the calculations to show that a 10 ton bomb is far more dangerous than a 1 ton bomb and if you have no means of delivering the 10 ton bomb to the enemy at the other end of the world, but you have the means to deliver only the 1 ton bomb to the enemy, as far as the enemy is concerned the 1 ton bomb is far more dangerous than the 10 ton bomb.

Pure freshly separated Thorium-232 has only a slight alpha activity. There is no beta radiation and only a slight amount of gamma radiation (from the 0.09-MeV gamma rays which emanate from Th-228 decay).

However, the activity from the Th-228 side of the chain is quickly re-established. A first equilibrium state is reached in about 36 days (10 half-lives of Ra-224).

Activity then declines, as Th-228 decays faster than it is replenished by decaying Ac-228. About 3 years after separation, the activity is lower than at any other time except just after isolation.

Activity then increases until the second equilibrium state is reached in about 60 years or so.

Thorium-232 decay chain with its daughter radionuclides

Total alpha energy = 36.2 MeV per nuclear decay
Total Gamma energy = 3.40 MeV per nuclear decay
Total Beta energy = 5.95 MeV per nuclear decay

(Note, the average gamma energy of most abundant emission is only 0.059 MeV).

Since the Lynas waste has 6 Bq/gm of activity, 1 KILOGRAM would have 6,000 Bq and that will produce 20,400 MeV of gamma ray energy from all the daughter radionuclides at equilibrium.

20,400 MeV from 1 kg of Lynas waste = 0.0000000007808 calories or 0.000000003268 joules.

This amount of gamma ray energy from 1 KILOGRAM of Lynas waste is not enough to tickle the backside of even a tiny little newborn caterpillar!

The total alpha energy is much larger i.e. 36.2 MeV but since alpha radiation does not pose an external threat and Thorium in clay soil is not absorbed, and since inhalation only affects miners, it is not a problem either for the Kuantan folks. But it may be a problem for those poor Australian miners in Mount Weld in Western Australia.

Perhaps this article may help:

RADIOACTIVITY IN THE LIFE SAVING MEDICALLY PRESCRIBED POTASSIUM.

The potassium chloride salt that is prescribed by dieticians as an adjunct for high blood pressure therapy as well as the potassium chloride used by the medical profession, is radioactive with a radioactivity of 32 Bq/gm.
(1 Becquerel or Bq is 1 nuclear decay per second.)

It is a real surprise that the vast majority of doctors, including senior consultants, professors and university lecturers do not know this.

The radioactivity comes from Potassium-40 (K-40) which is a naturally-occurring radioactive material or NORM.

Wherever there is potassium, there is potassium-40. It constitutes 0.0117% of natural potassium.

Potassium-40 is a beta (87.3%), gamma (10.67%) and
positron (~2.0%) emitter and contributes to both internal and external doses.

The other 2 isotopes of potassium are K-39 and K-41 and both of these are considered to be non-radioactive.

The total internal dose to a typical member of the population from internal radionuclides is about 0.42mSv/yr and approximately 0.29 mSv/yr is due to the K-40 in the body. The rest of the dosage is from C-14.

According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and its international counterpart, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the recommendations for the maximum permissible dose (MPD) of radiation =

General Public annual MPD by both NCRP and ICRP is 1 mSv.

For Radiation Workers, the annual MPD is 50 mSv (NCRP) and 20 mSv (ICRP), with a cumulative MPD of 10 mSv x Age.

MPD during pregnancy is 5 mSv (NCRP) and 2 mSv (ICRP).

However, experts including Professor Wade Allison of Oxford University argue that the dose limit can safely be raised to 100 millisieverts, based on current health statistics.

Data

K-40 Half-life: 1.28 x 10^9 years

K-40 Decay Mode:

Potassium-40 in our diet produces the highly dangerous gamma and beta rays from all the 3 types of beta decay, i.e. electron emission, electron capture and positron emission.

Gamma Rays: 1.461 MeV (10.7%)

Beta maximum energy is 1.31 MeV

Potassium-40 is a beta and gamma emitter and contributes to both internal and external doses.

About 89.28% of the time, it decays to calcium-40 with emission of a beta particle (β−, an electron) with a maximum energy of 1.33 MeV and an antineutrino.

About 10.72% of the time it decays to argon-40 by electron capture, with the emission of a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino.

Very rarely (0.001% of the time) it will decay to 40Ar by emitting a positron (β+) and a neutrino.

Daily intake of potassium element: 3.3 grams

Amount of potassium element in body: 140 g to 250 g (about 4,400 Bq)

There is a very tight homeostatic control over potassium levels in the human body. This means that the consumption of foods containing large amounts of potassium will not increase the body’s potassium content

Cont.

looihw88l says:

Dear Faud,

*
*
Quote Fuad: “Thorium from Lynas is TENORM and a radioactive waste which has serious health risks. Lynas and AELB have made the TENORM sound like low level waste by merely diluting the waste until it conforms with IAEA regulations. Diluting does not make the radiation ‘go away’.” Unquote.

Answer:

The use of the term “TENORM” has gone out of fashion for quite a number of years but it looks like the Anti-Lynas folks have reintroduced it just recently.

TENORM has been defined as ” Technically ENHANCED Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material.”

Now:
ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT = 1,600 ppm of Thorium

TWO MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS “WASTE” = 12 ppm of Thorium

3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium

AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

Since the concentration of Thorium-232 is not ENHANCED or concentrated and the concentration of the ‘waste” is less than the original ore, IT IS RATHER SILLY TO CALL THE LYNAS “WASTE” A TENORM.
DILUTING A SUBSTANCE WILL NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY, BUT YOU MUST REMEMBER THAT IT IS AN INTERNATIONALLY LEGITIMATE AND ACCEPTED WAY FOR REDUCING ANY RADIONUCLIDE’S IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.

For instance, STRYCHNINE IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS POISON AND YET WHEN PROPERLY DILUTED IT HAS BEEN USED FOR DECADES AS A TONIC !

CHORINE WHICH IS ALSO AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS POISON, WHEN WELL DILUTED IN WATER IS PERFECTLY SAFE AND IS DRUNK BY ALL THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLK IN THE FORM OF TAP WATER!

Perhaps this clarification by Nick Tsurikov will help.

QUOTE: “The funny bit about NORM/TENORM – as I’ve said many times before: the term ‘TENORM’ is meaningless and it’s use is discouraged internationally.

The example that I gave before, I think:

(a) I buy a truckload of sand mixed with gravel, but need to separate the two.

(b) Sand has 3 parts per million thorium, gravel – 30 parts per million; overall average = 10 ppm

(c) So I grab a shovel and throw the stuff through the metal mesh – sand goes through, gravel stays on my side.

So…

BY THE DEFINITION OF TENORM – I am ‘technical enhancing NORM’ and therefore, I am ‘generating’ horribly deadly TENORM – as the concentration of radioactivity in the final product (gravel) is THREE TIMES HIGHER than the background.

So – I need to be strictly controlled and cannot even buy the sand/gravel mix, until I’ll get licensed by the AELB and a dozen of other departments…

The point that I am trying to make is: it is completely irrelevant what we call the substance, we need to look what level of hazard is associated with it and how this level of ‘whatever it may be’ compares with national and international standards.

Basically, the definition of NORM, as I have in my course slides is mostly from the IAEA Safety Glossary:

Radioactive material containing no significant amounts of radionuclides other than naturally occurring radionuclides and designated in national law or by a regulatory body as being subject to regulatory control because of its radioactivity.

So it is actually up to the national regulators to decide what to regulate – IAEA suggests 1 Bq/gram of thorium and/or uranium, some countries have 0.5 Bq/g, others – for different materials – up to 10 Bq/g.

A point on the ‘waste’. If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports

– you will clearly see that two most ‘voluminous’ residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium

– and the average Malaysian soil – 20 parts per million of thorium.

That is the point.

Of course, the third ‘residue stream’ will have about 1500 ppm of thorium and will need to be managed appropriately.
UNQUOTE.

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RPOGzrqu1Vg

Fuad says:

Thorium from Lynas is TENORM and a radioactive waste which has serious health risks. Lynas and AELB have made the TENORM sound like low level waste by merely diluting the waste until it conforms with IAEA regulations. Diluting does not make the radiation ‘go away’, and if the diluting liquid evaporates, you will again have concentrated radioactive material very harmful to people. The uranium and thorium will not evaporate with time.

looihw88l says:

*
*
Quote MistyClarity • 1 week ago : ” There are other pollutants from the process that are equally harmful and disconcerting such as the acid fumes and lead poisoning – oh yes LEAD POISONING. One of the problems that was found from bukit merah rare-earth was the lead poisoning of young children and adults living in the vicinity of the factory.

LEAD IS THE FINAL END PRODUCT OF THE RADIOACTIVE DECAY.
Unquote.

Answer:

It will take 14 Billion years for half of the Thorium-232 to decay into Lead.

BUT YOU MUST REMEMBER THAT THE EARTH WILL BE SWALLOWED UP BY THE EXPANDING RED GIANT SUN IN ONLY ABOUT 5 BILLION YEARS !

EVEN LONG BEFORE THAT, IN ABOUT 1 BILLION YEARS FROM NOW YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL ALL BE BARBEQUED AND INCINERATED BY THE EVER INCREASING RADIATION OF THE RED GIANT SUN !

SO THERE IS NO NEED TO WORRY YOURSELF SICK ABOUT THE THORIUM-232 TURNING INTO LEAD AND POISON THE PEOPLE OF MALAYSIA AND YOUR CHILDREN !

EVERY LIVING THING INCLUDING YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE DEAD AND GONE LONG BEFORE THAT !

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RPOGzrqu1Vg

looihw88l says:

REPLY TO RONNY ON “TENORM”

*
*
Dear Ronny,

Quote Ronny: ” In conclusion, thorium from Lynas is Tenorm and a radioactive waste which has serious health risks..”
(TENORM = Technically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material)

ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT = 1,600 ppm (parts per million) of Thorium

TWO MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS “WASTE” = 12 ppm of Thorium

3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium

AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

Since the concentration of Thorium-232 is not enhanced or concentrated, HOW CAN YOU CALL THE LYNAS “WASTE” A TENORM ?

Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert: ” THE MAJORITY OF THIS LYNAS “WASTE” WILL HAVE ONLY HALF THE THORIUM THAN IN NORMAL MALAYSIAN SOIL.
So, in fact MOST OF THE LYNAS RESIDUES ARE ONLY HALF AS RADIOACTIVE AS THE SAND THE KIDS ALL OVER MALAYSIA PLAY IN THE KINDERGARTENS.” (Note: Sand or crystalline SiO2 is also classified as a group 1 Carcinogen by IARC).
If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports – you will clearly see that two most ‘voluminous’ residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium – and the average Malaysian soil – 20 parts per million of thorium. Of course, the third ‘residue stream’ will have about 1500 ppm of thorium and will need to be managed appropriately

COMPARISON OF RADIOACTIVITY IN Bq (Specific activity.. number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

Quote: AELB (Atomic Energy Licensing Board, Malaysia):

Malaysia was the world’s no. 1 producer of tin. Along with tin, there’s always Thorium and Uranium and therefore this is not Malaysia’s first facility, AELB is has experience to handle this, to overcome this and AELB is prepared.

THERE ARE MORE THAN 10 FACILITIES THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO LYNAS.

SOME OF THEM ARE PRODUCING HIGHER RESIDUES, HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF URANIUM AND THORIUM.

AELB has been able to regulate and control these factories, so it is based on AELB experience and the experience of the industry abroad.” Unquote

QUESTION: WHY IS IT THAT THERE ARE NO DEMONSTRATIONS BY
THE ANTI-LYNAS FOOT-SOLDIERS AGAINST THESE 10 CHEMICAL
PLANTS ALREADY IN MALAYSIA THAT ARE PRODUCING “WASTES
WITH HIGHER CONCENTRATIONS OF URANIUM AND THORIUM”?

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjT1kUAy_08&feature=player_detailpage

looihw88l says:

Dear KH Kong,

Please read all those notes on Thorium-232 which I have provided before, as well as the articles on Thorotrast.

QUOTE KH Kong: ” Thorium accumulates in the body. According to the “Radiological and Chemical Fact Sheets to Support Health Risk Analyses for Contamination”, about 0.02% to 0.05% of ingested thorium is dissolved in the bloodstream, and subsequently deposited mainly in the bones where the radioactive source becomes embedded within the bone tissue for a few decades. We are unsure exactly how much the body retains thorium from inhalation, but we know that “thorium is taken up in the body much more readily if inhaled rather than ingested”. UNQUOTE.

Answer:

The writer said 0.02% to 0.05% of ingested thorium is absorbed and gets into the blood stream.

Absorption studies were done on animals for obvious reasons, and in the vast majority of these, the thorium was not mixed with clay, which binds very strongly to the clay particles i.e. adsorbed.

Thorium-232 is strongly bound (adsorbed) by soil especially clay soil. The thorium concentration in the clay particles is about 500,000% higher than in the water between the clay particles (the interstitial spaces of the clay particles). So, it cannot be leached out by water or intestinal juice.

When ingested, there is insignificant absorption of the thorium because of this strong bond between clay particles and thorium. Practically all the thorium will be excreted in the faeces with the clay.

So the actual amount of thorium that is absorbed into the blood stream when mixed with clay soil as in the case of the Lynas waste is much, much less than 0.02%.

Since Lynas waste contains 1,650 parts of thorium per million and even if we take the inflated rate of 0.02% absorption, it would mean that to get 0.33g of thorium into the blood stream, we have to swallow 1,000kg (1 tonne) of Lynas waste!

Practically all the data on the carcinogenic effects of thorium-232 was obtained retrospectively from the intravenous use of a massive dose of thorium dioxide called Thorotrast (a 25cc vial of a 25% colloidal suspension of thorium dioxide) in investigative radiological studies.

Studies appear to show that a small number out of the 4 million patients who were given this massive dose of 1 or 2 vials (containing 5.58g to 11.7g of thorium) of Thorotrast, developed cancer especially of the liver 20 to 30 years later in their old age.

So in order to get 5.58g of thorium-232 (equivalent to 1 vial of Thorotrast), we have to swallow an incredible 17,000kg or 17 tonnes of Lynas waste!

I do not think anybody in Kuantan will be able to swallow 17 tonnes of Lynas waste … and that is assuming that the thorium-232 is not strongly adsorbed to clay particles.

With respect to the inhalation of thorium-232, all studies were conducted on workers in the uranium or thorium mining or refining industry and not on populations in towns like Kuantan, and therefore do not apply to the present issue.

The Australians are the ones getting the wrong side of the deal !
Dust particles can get deep into the lungs only if they are very small i.e. much less than 10 micron. The particles that are less than 5 microns are the ones which can get deep into the alveoli of the lungs. Larger ones are trapped by the mucus in the nose and upper respiratory tract and are coughed out or sneezed out.

Particles of less than 5 microns can only be found in the Thorium and Uranium mines where powerful machines are used or where there is combustion.

MOREOVER, KUANTAN PEOPLE ARE NOT RARE EARTH OR THORIUM MINERS!

The rare earth miners in the case of the Lynas Rare Earth Plant are still in a place called Mount Weld in Western Australia!

If there is any long term lung problem, the Australians are the ones who will be getting those problems and not the Kuantan people.

Most of the human data for thorium exposure comes from diagnostic studies. A massive dose of 1 to 2 vials of 25 ml of 25% Colloidal thorium-232 dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into patients as a radiographic contrast medium between 1928 and 1955.

Thorium dioxide in Thorotrast is insoluble and in a colloidal form i.e. in the form of particles. ALL INSOLUBLE PARTICLES ARE TAKEN UP BY THE MACROPHAGES AND OTHER CELLS OF THE RETICULO-ENDOTHELIAL (RE) SYSTEM and deposited into the tissues of the RE system i.e. the liver, spleen, lymph nodes, bone marrow and parts of the small intestines AND NOT JUST THE BONES !

In humans, WHERE WILL the SOLUBLE AND NON-PARTICULATE FORM OF THORIUM SALTS BE DEPOSITED and what is the renal clearance and hence their biological half life ? Nobody really knows because, for obvious reasons, all studies done on Thorium are conducted on animals. The results are only applicable to rats, rabbits, cats and dogs !

Dr Looi