TEPCO Data Points To Out-Of-Control Fission Going On: After 5 Halflives, I-131 Higher Than Cs-134/137 Suggests Ongoing Criticalities

Summary

During full-power operation, numerous “fission products” are in approximate steady-state equilibrium, meaning roughly equal becquerel of I-131 and Cs-134, with a slow buildup of Cs-137. But they all cease to be created when the reactors are scrammed. Japanese regulators NISA and MEXT seem oblivious of the mysterious fact that I-131 Bq “reactor density” is still often reported double the Cs-134/137 Bq. The TEPCO data suggest that fission is ongoing despite the reactor shutdowns. This is bad news.

Analysis

It seemed very bad taste for April Fool’s jokes, but a few weeks ago there were some very bizarre indications of ongoing criticalities suggested by TEPCO’s own reporting of Cl-38 in “stagnant water” of a drywell, plus, a “neutron beam” again implausibly claimed by Kyodo news to be observed at 2-km distance. All those things seemed to defy the laws of physics and were highly suspect, but they led Arnie Gunderson, Arjun Makhijani, and Chris Martenson all to conclude that the evidence pointed to ongoing fission in the Units 1-4 scrammed reactors and their SNF pools in warm shutdown. Maybe so.

Everyone with just a very basic understanding of reactor safety should know that once a reactor is scrammed, U-235 is no longer fissioning, and I-131 has no parent which can be decaying to create it in an ongoing process. SNF pools contain the million-year halflife I-129 which is difficult to measure, but the water circulating in intact SNF pools should have absolutely no detectable I-131 in them.

Read moreTEPCO Data Points To Out-Of-Control Fission Going On: After 5 Halflives, I-131 Higher Than Cs-134/137 Suggests Ongoing Criticalities

TEPCO Admits Damage To Part Of Fukushima Reactor No. 4 Spent Nuclear Fuel Pool – Japan Government: ‘We Must Devise Some Ways’ To Reinforce The Quake Resistance Of The Buildings, Where Radiation Levels Are High

Related info:

Chief Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen: ‘Worst-Case Is the Unit 4 Fuel Pool, Which Has Enormous Amounts of Plutonium And Depleted Uranium’ ‘If That Catches Fire It Could Devastate A Large Area’

Japan Nuclear Safety Commissioner Admits Cover-Up: ‘If we immediately decided to label the situation as Level 7, we could have triggered a panicked reaction.’


TOKYO, April 13, Kyodo — Some of the spent nuclear fuel rods stored in the No. 4 reactor building of the crisis-hit Fukushima Daiichi power plant were confirmed to be damaged, but most of them are believed to be in sound condition, plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Wednesday.

The firm known as TEPCO said its analysis of a 400-milliliter water sample taken Tuesday from the No. 4 unit’s spent nuclear fuel pool revealed the damage to some fuel rods in such a pool for the first time, as it detected higher-than-usual levels of radioactive iodine-131, cesium-134 and cesium-137.

The No. 4 reactor, halted for a regular inspection before last month’s earthquake and tsunami disaster, had all of its fuel rods stored in the pool for the maintenance work and the fuel was feared to have sustained damage from overheating.

The roof and the upper walls of the No. 4 reactor building have been blown away by a hydrogen explosion and damaged by fires since the disaster struck the plant. The water level in the spent fuel pool is believed to have temporarily dropped.

Earlier in the day, the government’s nuclear regulatory agency ordered TEPCO to check the quake resistance of reactor buildings at the Fukushima plant, which have been rocked by strong aftershocks from the magnitude-9.0 earthquake that wrecked the site and triggered tsunami on March 11.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency told the utility to immediately examine the buildings and consider reinforcement work if they are judged as not sufficiently quakeproof.

In addition to the No. 4 unit, the Nos. 1 and 3 reactor buildings have also been severely damaged by hydrogen explosions in the early days of the crisis.

”As strong aftershocks occur almost daily, we have to consider what will happen to buildings already damaged by blasts,” said Hidehiko Nishiyama, a spokesman for the nuclear agency.

He acknowledged the difficulties involved in the work to reinforce the quake resistance of the buildings, where radiation levels are high, but said, ”We must devise some ways.” The agency urged TEPCO to report back to it on the matter as soon as possible.

Read moreTEPCO Admits Damage To Part Of Fukushima Reactor No. 4 Spent Nuclear Fuel Pool – Japan Government: ‘We Must Devise Some Ways’ To Reinforce The Quake Resistance Of The Buildings, Where Radiation Levels Are High

Japan Nuclear Safety Commissioner Admits Cover-Up: ‘If we immediately decided to label the situation as Level 7, we could have triggered a panicked reaction.’

From the New York Times:

Japanese Officials on Defensive as Nuclear Alert Level Rises:

Seiji Shiroya, a commissioner of Japan’s Nuclear Safety Commission, an independent government panel that oversees the country’s nuclear industry, said that the government had delayed issuing data on the extent of the radiation releases because of concern that the margins of error had been large in initial computer models. But he also suggested a public policy reason for having kept quiet.

“Some foreigners fled the country even when there appeared to be little risk,” he said. “If we immediately decided to label the situation as Level 7, we could have triggered a panicked reaction.”

Infinite Unknown readers knew that the Japan government has been informed that a (partial) meltdown was a going on from day one of the Fukushima nuclear disaster and I posted these videos on March 15:

Listen to the editor of the Japan Times if you haven’t done so (!!!):

Japan: Full Core Meltdown Will Send Radiation Over United States

Japan And US Try To Coverup Nuclear Catastrophe

Fukushima Radiation Taints US Milk Supplies At Levels 300% Higher Than EPA Maximums, Indicates Radioactive Contamination Of The Entire Food Supply

Comments from article author Jeff McMahon:

-EPA: New Radiation Highs in Little Rock Milk, Philadelphia Drinking Water (Forbes):

Yes, David, I know. Very complicated to explain. EPA lumps these gamma and beta emitters together under one collective MCL, so if you’re seeing cesium-137 in your milk or water, the MCL is 3.0 picocuries per liter; if you’re seeing iodine-131, the MCL is 3.0; if you’re seeing cesium-137 and iodine-131, the MCL is still 3.0.

Here’s a somewhat historic EPA document that speaks directly to that issue:

Although not having a 4 mrem per year equivalent level specified in the current drinking water regulations as do tritium and strontium-90, the compliance monitoring scheme indicates that an iodine-131 level of 3 pCi/L is the MCL compliance level (presumably derived from the NBS Handbook); the ANPRM indicates that 700 pCi/L is the 4 mrem/year equivalent.

via Drinking Water Criteria Document for Beta and Gamma Emitting Radionuclides

Be advised that document won’t open in older browsers.

And here’s a current EPA faq that repeats the same 3 pCi/L MCL for iodine-131:

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/japan-faqs.html#rainwater

If we lump together the three radionuclides in that Hilo, Hawaii reading, we get 61 pCi/L. Alarming? How about that recent Boise rainfall sample: 468 pCi/L.

The reason we shouldn’t be alarmed, EPA says, is that these are short-term, temporary exposures and the MCL assumes long-term exposure.

The EPA has another MCL that it takes more seriously, and that is, that people should not be exposed to more than 4 millirem per year. To make sense of that number we need to be able to express picocuries as millirems, but that’s what that legacy document does that I quoted above:“the compliance monitoring scheme indicates that an iodine-131 level of 3 pCi/L is the MCL compliance level; the ANPRM indicates that 700 pCi/L is the 4 mrem/year equivalent.”

What this all means to me is that if you’re a water company, EPA will insist you keep the gamma/beta emitters in your water below 3 pCi/L in pursuit of another aim, which is to keep your customers’ annual radiation exposure below 700, or, put another way, below 4mrem, over the course of a year.

If we should not be exposed to more than 700 pCi/L per year, then anyone who drinks two liters of Boise rainwater or 13 liters of Hilo milk is in trouble. Both those scenarios may be unlikely, but they’re beginning to get closer to likely than the reassurances we’ve been receiving would seem to indicate.


Fukushima radiation taints US milk supplies at levels 300% higher than EPA maximums


(NaturalNews) The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to release new data showing that various milk and water supply samples from across the US are testing increasingly high for radioactive elements such as Iodine-131, Cesium-134, and Cesium-137, all of which are being emitted from the ongoing Fukushima Daiichia nuclear fallout. As of April 10, 2011, 23 US water supplies have tested positive for radioactive Iodine-131 (http://opendata.socrata.com/w/4ig7-…), and worst of all, milk samples from at least three US locations have tested positive for Iodine-131 at levels exceeding EPA maximum containment levels (MCL) (http://opendata.socrata.com/w/pkfj-…).

As far as the water supplies are concerned, it is important to note that the EPA is only testing for radioactive Iodine-131. There are no readings or data available for cesium, uranium, or plutonium — all of which are being continuously emitted from Fukushima, as far as we know — even though these elements are all much more deadly than Iodine-131. Even so, the following water supplies have thus far tested positive for Iodine-131, with the dates they were collected in parenthesis to the right:

Los Angeles, Calif. – 0.39 pCi/l (4/4/11)
Philadelphia (Baxter), Penn. – 0.46 pCi/l (4/4/11)
Philadelphia (Belmont), Penn. – 1.3 pCi/l (4/4/11)
Philadelphia (Queen), Penn. – 2.2 pCi/l (4/4/11)
Muscle Shoals, Al. – 0.16 pCi/l (3/31/11)
Niagara Falls, NY – 0.14 pCi/l (3/31/11)
Denver, Colo. – 0.17 pCi/l (3/31/11)
Detroit, Mich. – 0.28 pCi/l (3/31/11)
East Liverpool, Oh. – 0.42 pCi/l (3/30/11)
Trenton, NJ – 0.38 pCi/l (3/29/11)
Painesville, Oh. – 0.43 pCi/l (3/29/11)
Columbia, Penn. – 0.20 pCi/l (3/29/11)
Oak Ridge (4442), Tenn. – 0.28 pCi/l (3/29/11)
Oak Ridge (772), Tenn. – 0.20 pCi/l (3/29/11)
Oak Ridge (360), Tenn. – 0.18 pCi/l (3/29/11)
Helena, Mont. – 0.18 pCi/l (3/28/11)
Waretown, NJ – 0.38 pCi/l (3/28/11)
Cincinnati, Oh. – 0.13 pCi/l (3/28/11)
Pittsburgh, Penn. – 0.36 pCi/l (3/28/11)
Oak Ridge (371), Tenn. – 0.63 pCi/l (3/28/11)
Chattanooga, Tenn. – 1.6 pCi/l (3/28/11)
Boise, Id. – 0.2 pCi/l (3/28/11)
Richland, Wash. – 0.23 pCi/l (3/28/11)

Again, these figures do not include the other radioactive elements being spread by Fukushima, so there is no telling what the actual cumulative radiation levels really were in these samples. The figures were also taken two weeks ago, and were only just recently reported. If current samples were taken at even more cities, and if the tests conducted included the many other radioactive elements besides Iodine-131, actual contamination levels would likely be frighteningly higher.

But in typical government fashion, the EPA still insists that everything is just fine, even though an increasing amount of US water supplies are turning up positive for even just the radioactive elements for which the agency is testing — and these levels seem to be increasing as a direct result of the situation at the Fukushima plant, which continues to worsen with no end in sight (http://www.naturalnews.com/032035_F…).

Water may be the least of our problems, however. New EPA data just released on Sunday shows that at least three different milk samples — all from different parts of the US — have tested positive for radioactive Iodine-131 at levels that exceed the EPA maximum thresholds for safety, which is currently set at 3.0 pico Curies per Liter (pCi/l).

In Phoenix, Ariz., a milk sample taken on March 28, 2011, tested at 3.2 pCi/l. In Little Rock, Ark., a milk sample taken on March 30, 2011, tested at 8.9 pCi/l, which is almost three times the EPA limit. And in Hilo, Hawaii, a milk sample collected on April 4, 2011, tested at 18 pCi/l, a level six times the EPA maximum safety threshold. The same Hawaii sample also tested at 19 pCi/l for Cesium-137, which has a half life of 30 years (http://www.naturalnews.com/031992_r…), and a shocking 24 pCi/l for Cesium-134, which has a half life of just over two years (http://opendata.socrata.com/w/pkfj-…).

Why is this milk contamination significant? Milk, of course, typically represents the overall condition of the food chain because cows consume grass and are exposed to the same elements as food crops and water supplies. In other words, when cows’ milk starts testing positive for high levels of radioactive elements, this is indicative of radioactive contamination of the entire food supply.

Read moreFukushima Radiation Taints US Milk Supplies At Levels 300% Higher Than EPA Maximums, Indicates Radioactive Contamination Of The Entire Food Supply

Strongest Radioactive Cloud Covers Vietnam, Uranium-238, Cesium-137, Cesium-134 Found In Pine Needles Among Other Isotopes

A radioactive cloud from the quake-damaged Fukushima reactor explosions in Japan was said to have reached Vietnam in late April 9.

According to the Ministry of Science and Technology (MoST), the cloud may exist in Southeast Asia within several days with radionuclide concentrations decreasing with every passing day.

The most powerful radioactive cloud, however, dispersed rapidly on April 9 and 10.

Earlier, MoST said even if the cloud covered Vietnam, the radiation level would increase by only 100 times from the previously-detected level.

By 15:00, April 9, apart from the recognition of the natural radioactive isotopes, the observation stations in Da Lat and Ninh Thuan also discovered radioactive I-131.

In Ho Chi Minh City, the radioactive isotopes I-131, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were recorded.

“The radioactive isotopes recorded at the three above-mentioned locations are at low level, and do not pose a threat to human health and the environment,” scientists said.

Cs-134 was found in the pine needle samples (which are often used to indicate radioactive pollution in the atmosphere and vegetation) in addition to the isotopes Be-7, K -40, U-238, Th-232 and Cs-137 but the level of Cs-134 was very low and does not affect human health.

Updated : 9:18 AM, 11/04/2011

Source: VOV NEWS

There is no safe level of radiation:

Dr. Peter Karamoskos: Don’t Be Fooled By A Never-Ending Cabal Of Paid Industry Scientific ”Consultants’ – Radiation Is Bad And Causes Cancer

Are There Safe Levels of Radiation? How Much Radiation Is Safe?

The Propaganda From The Government And The Nuclear Industry About Low-Level Radiation Is Absolute Rubbish


Radioactive Uranium-234 Detected In California, Hawaii And Washington State

PDF: EPA RadNet Air Filter And Air Cartridge Results (Last Updated on April 6, 2011)

(Click on images to enlarge.)

Read moreRadioactive Uranium-234 Detected In California, Hawaii And Washington State

US: EPA Finds Cesium-137 In Vermont Milk, Radiation Detected In Drinking Water In 13 More Cities

Don’t miss:

Are There Safe Levels of Radiation? How Much Radiation Is Safe?


Radiation from Japan has been detected in drinking water in 13 more American cities, and cesium-137 has been found in American milk—in Montpelier, Vermont—for the first time since the Japan nuclear disaster began, according to data released by the Environmental Protection Agency late Friday.

Milk samples from Phoenix and Los Angeles contained iodine-131 at levels roughly equal to the maximum contaminant level permitted by EPA, the data shows. The Phoenix sample contained 3.2 picoCuries per liter of iodine-131. The Los Angeles sample contained 2.9. The EPA maximum contaminant level is 3.0, but this is a conservative standard designed to minimize exposure over a lifetime, so EPA does not consider these levels to pose a health threat.

The cesium-137 found in milk in Vermont is the first cesium detected in milk since the Fukushima-Daichi nuclear accident occurred last month. The sample contained 1.9 picoCuries per liter of cesium-137, which falls under the same 3.0 standard.

Radioactive isotopes accumulate in milk after they spread through the atmosphere, fall to earth in rain or dust, and settle on vegetation, where they are ingested by grazing cattle. Iodine-131 is known to accumulate in the thyroid gland, where it can cause cancer and other thyroid diseases. Cesium-137 accumulates in the body’s soft tissues, where it increases risk of cancer, according to EPA.

Read moreUS: EPA Finds Cesium-137 In Vermont Milk, Radiation Detected In Drinking Water In 13 More Cities

Are There Safe Levels of Radiation? How Much Radiation Is Safe?

What They’re Covering Up at Fukushima: ‘You Get 3,500,000 The Normal Dose. You Call That Safe? And What Media Have Reported This? None!’

Radiation exposure is increased by a factor of a trillion. Inhaling even the tiniest particle, that’s the danger.

Yo: So making comparisons with X-rays and CT scans has no meaning. Because you can breathe in radioactive material.

Hirose: That’s right. When it enters your body, there’s no telling where it will go. The biggest danger is women, especially pregnant women, and little children. Now they’re talking about iodine and cesium, but that’s only part of it, they’re not using the proper detection instruments. What they call monitoring means only measuring the amount of radiation in the air. Their instruments don’t eat. What they measure has no connection with the amount of radioactive material.

Physicians for Social Responsibility: ‘There Is No Safe Level Of Radionuclide Exposure, Whether From Food, Water Or Other Sources. Period.’:

According to the National Academy of Sciences, there are no safe doses of radiation. Decades of research show clearly that any dose of radiation increases an individual’s risk for the development of cancer.

“There is no safe level of radionuclide exposure, whether from food, water or other sources. Period,” said Jeff Patterson, DO, immediate past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility. “Exposure to radionuclides, such as iodine-131 and cesium-137, increases the incidence of cancer. For this reason, every effort must be taken to minimize the radionuclide content in food and water.”

The Propaganda From The Government And The Nuclear Industry About Low-Level Radiation Is Absolute Rubbish:

Dr. Helen Caldicott (Co-founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility):

“Up to a million people have already died from Chernobyl, and people will continue to die from cancer for virtually the rest of time. What we should know is that a millionth of a gram of plutonium, or less, can induce cancer, or will induce cancer. Each reactor has 250 kilos, or 500 pounds, of plutonium in it. You know, there’s enough plutonium in these reactors to kill everyone on earth.
…..
You don’t understand internal emitters. I was commissioned to write an article for the New England Journal of Medicine about the dangers of nuclear power. I spent a year researching it. You’ve bought the propaganda from the nuclear industry. They say it’s low-level radiation. That’s absolute rubbish. If you inhale a millionth of a gram of plutonium, the surrounding cells receive a very, very high dose. Most die within that area, because it’s an alpha emitter. The cells on the periphery remain viable. They mutate, and the regulatory genes are damaged. Years later, that person develops cancer. Now, that’s true for radioactive iodine, that goes to the thyroid; cesium-137, that goes to the brain and muscles; strontium-90 goes to bone, causing bone cancer and leukemia. It’s imperative that you understand internal emitters and radiation, and it’s not low level to the cells that are exposed. Radiobiology is imperative to understand these days.”

About the plutonium found around the Fukushima nuclear plant we were told that those ‘tiny’ levels of plutonium  pose no ‘human health risk‘!!!

Think again:

“Plutonium is the deadliest substance on the planet since 1 molecule of Plutonium in your body guarantees the development of cancer, according to radiation medicine experts.”
– Dr. Rima Laibow

Read moreAre There Safe Levels of Radiation? How Much Radiation Is Safe?

Nuclear Engineering Department At UCB Finds Radioactive Iodine- 131, Cesium-134 and 137 In Organic Milk In San Francisco Bay Area

UCB Milk Sampling Results:

The following are results for milk samples obtained from a Bay Area organic dairy where the farmers are encouraged to feed their cows local grass. We have detected I-131, at 0.70 Becquerels per liter and lower, as well as Cs-134 and Cs-137.

Because the “best by” date on milk is approximately 17-19 days after the milk has been bottled, our milk sample with a date of 3/25 represents milk bottled on approximately 3/5. Since this is before the Fukushima crisis, we do not expect to see any fission product radioisotopes and do not see any within our sensitivity. Our first sample of milk showing any signs of radioisotopes has a date of 4/4, which means it was bottled around 3/18. This is approximately when the trace radioactive isotopes were first seen in the Bay Area.

I131 I132 Cs134 Cs137 Te132 Data
Best By Date Bq/L (liters**) Bq/L (liters**) Bq/L (liters**) Bq/L (liters**) Bq/L (liters**)
Estimated Minimum Detectable Activity (MDA) for samples ending 4/4 0.14 0.23 0.14 0.18 0.10
3/25/2011 less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
data
4/4/2011 0.70 ± 0.27 (3,800) less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
data
Estimated Minimum Detectable Activity (MDA) for samples starting 4/8 0.04 0.05 0.03
4/8/2011 less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
data
4/11/2011 0.14 ± 0.08 (18,900) less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
less than
MDA
data
4/14/2011 0.10 ± 0.04 (26,300) less than
MDA
0.11 ± 0.04 (22,100) less than
MDA
less than
MDA
data
4/16/2011 0.22 ± 0.04 (12,200) less than
MDA
0.10 ± 0.04 (24,000) 0.22 ± 0.08 (12,000) less than
MDA
data

** The number in parentheses is the number of liters of milk that one would need to consume to equal the radiation exposure of a single round trip flight from San Francisco to Washington D.C. (0.05 mSv). To see how we calculate these numbers, please visit our explanation of the equivalent dose calculation.

And again the general public is fed scientific bullshit, because like the MSM the University of California, Berkeley compares mice with elephants in the room!

You can’t compare radiation exposure with inhalation or ingestion of radioactive particles!

How come the Department of Nuclear Engineering at the UCB does not know these facts???

What They’re Covering Up at Fukushima: ‘You Get 3,500,000 The Normal Dose. You Call That Safe? And What Media Have Reported This? None!’

Radiation exposure is increased by a factor of a trillion.  Inhaling even the tiniest particle, that’s the danger.

Yo: So making comparisons with X-rays and CT scans has no meaning.  Because you can breathe in radioactive material.

Hirose:  That’s right.  When it enters your body, there’s no telling where it will go.  The biggest danger is women, especially pregnant women, and little children.  Now they’re talking about iodine and cesium, but that’s only part of it, they’re not using the proper detection instruments.  What they call monitoring means only measuring the amount of radiation in the air.  Their instruments don’t eat.  What they measure has no connection with the amount of radioactive material.

Physicians for Social Responsibility: ‘There Is No Safe Level Of Radionuclide Exposure, Whether From Food, Water Or Other Sources. Period.’:

According to the National Academy of Sciences, there are no safe doses of radiation. Decades of research show clearly that any dose of radiation increases an individual’s risk for the development of cancer.

“There is no safe level of radionuclide exposure, whether from food, water or other sources.  Period,” said Jeff Patterson, DO, immediate past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility.  “Exposure to radionuclides, such as iodine-131 and cesium-137, increases the incidence of cancer. For this reason, every effort must be taken to minimize the radionuclide content in food and water.”

Updating Japan’s Nuclear Disaster:

“Nuclear radiation is forever,” she added. It doesn’t dissipate or disappear. Jeff Patterson, former Physicians for Social Responsibility president said, “There is no safe level of radionuclide exposure, whether from food, water or other sources. Period.” In 1953, Nobel laureate George Wald agreed saying “no amount of radiation is safe. Every dose is an overdose.”

About plutonium found around the Fukushima nuclear plant we were told that those ‘tiny’ levels of plutonium  pose no ‘human health risk‘!!!

Think again:

“Plutonium is the deadliest substance on the planet since 1 molecule of Plutonium in your body guarantees the development of cancer, according to radiation medicine experts.”
– Dr. Rima Laibow

Response of the US government to the Fukushima nuclear crisis:

US Government Responds to Fukushima by Trying to Raise Radiation Limits, EPA Pulls 8 Of 18 Radiation Monitors Out Of CA, OR And WA

US Gov Has Still Not Published Any Official Data On Japan Disaster

Europe seems to have the same disaster plan:

EU Erhöht Grenzwerte Drastisch! EU Raises ‘Safe Level’ of Cesium in Japanese Food By 20 Times!

EU Drastically Raises Radiation Limits For Food! – EU Erhöht Drastisch Die Strahlungs-Grenzwerte Für Lebensmittel!

In Canada:

Just In Time: Canada Suspends Mobile Radiation Measurements

Canada Refuses To Test Milk For Radiation

“Nuclear radiation is forever,” she added. It doesn’t dissipate or disappear. Jeff Patterson, former Physicians for Social Responsibility president said, “There is no safe level of radionuclide exposure, whether from food, water or other sources. Period.” In 1953, Nobel laureate George Wald agreed saying “no amount of radiation is safe. Every dose is an overdose.”