Tritium was not detected in the latest sample of two olive flounders caught Sept. 24, the Fisheries Agency said.

No detectable amount of tritium has been found in fish samples taken from waters near the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, where the discharge of treated radioactive water into the sea began a month ago, the government said Monday.

Tritium was not detected in the latest sample of two olive flounders caught Sunday, the Fisheries Agency said on its website. The agency has provided almost daily updates since the start of the water release, in a bid to dispel harmful rumors both domestically and internationally about its environmental impact.

The results of the first collected samples were published Aug. 9, before the discharge of treated water from the complex commenced on Aug. 24. The water had been used to cool melted nuclear fuel at the plant but has undergone a treatment process that removes most radionuclides except tritium.

  • halfempty@kbin.social
    628·
    1 year ago

    Sample size is critical to get a realistic result of the tritium toxicity. In this case, they sampled only 64 fish! That would not yield a statistically significant result!

    • osarusan@kbin.social
      283·
      1 year ago

      Samples of local fish have been collected at two points within a 5-km radius of the discharge outlet, except during rough weather conditions, with the agency announcing its analysis results on an almost daily basis since Aug. 26.

      No tritium was detected in 64 fish, which included flounder and six other species, collected since Aug. 8.

      I mean… you could have read the article.

      • voiceofchris @lemmy.worldEnglish
        106·
        1 year ago

        I mean, you are correct, it was not two fish. But is 64 fish some sort of good sample size?
        Follow up question: does this type of thing accumulate in small fish and then concentrate in larger and larger fish?

        • osarusan@kbin.social
          41·
          1 year ago

          I don’t know the answers to those questions, as I am not a nuclear scientist. But the nuclear scientists seem to think so.

          In any case, I think those are good questions. Those are the kind of good questions we get when people read the articles.

        • sethboy66@kbin.social
          112·
          1 year ago

          I mean, you are correct, it was not two fish. But is 64 fish some sort of good sample size?

          Given the results, it is significant.

          Follow up question: does this type of thing accumulate in small fish and then concentrate in larger and larger fish?

          No, tritium is treated by organisms just like normal H2O, bioaccumulation is no problem.

        • Alto@kbin.social
          61·
          1 year ago

          I love when people tell on themselves for not knowing a thing about statistics.

          Yes, it’s more than enough.