What is going on with all this radioactive shrimp?(consumerreports.org)
consumerreports.org
What is going on with all this radioactive shrimp?
https://www.consumerreports.org/health/food-safety/radioactive-shrimp-explained-a5493175857/
33 comments
> Radiation scans revealed at least 22 plants in the industrial zone were contaminated. The Indonesian taskforce did not name the 21 other production facilities, but said they would immediately undergo decontamination procedures conducted by Indonesia’s nuclear agency.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/09/radioactive-sh...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/09/radioactive-sh...
> “easiest explanation” is that a medical or industrial device containing cesium-137 was inadvertently reprocessed as scrap metal. The radioactive material could have become gaseous after entering the PMT furnace and then been released from the facility’s smokestack
Which is highly concerning in itself. A ban on any steel imports from that country should happen immediately and strict requirements on preprocess detection and post process radiation levels should be put in place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciudad_Ju%C3%A1rez_cobalt-60_c...
Is the classic example of what happens when you don't do rad checking at the foundry. You can end up with a highly radiated piece that ends up right beside someone for half their life giving them cancer the entire time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciudad_Ju%C3%A1rez_cobalt-60_c...
Is the classic example of what happens when you don't do rad checking at the foundry. You can end up with a highly radiated piece that ends up right beside someone for half their life giving them cancer the entire time.
What kind of hyperbolic alarmism is this? You don't need to ban anything. Just scan it for radioactivity. Radiation is a lot easier to detect than any other contamination because it pretty much announces itself.
The radiation levels we're talking about here are so low that you could make a bed frame out of it and it'd be fine.
The radiation levels we're talking about here are so low that you could make a bed frame out of it and it'd be fine.
amy_petrik(1)
Half life tracking presumably would give a "birthday" for the cesium-137 source. Given they suspect scrap contamination in a recycling smelter, its at best informing to root cause. That, and the length of the tail yet to come as it passes down the ladder.
“Half life tracking” isn’t really a thing — decay is a memory-less process (by definition), so there’s no distinction in decay rate between a lot of old Cesium 137, and a bit of young Cesium 137. The way to put an age on the contamination is by looking at the ratio of Cesium 137 and Barium 137, which presumedly someone has done…
> "by looking at the ratio of Cesium 137 and Barium 137, which presumedly someone has done…"
That's impractical; the decay product Ba-137 is stable and already present in much larger amounts, compared against which the Cs-137 decay products are undetectable.
That's impractical; the decay product Ba-137 is stable and already present in much larger amounts, compared against which the Cs-137 decay products are undetectable.
Thank you for clarifying. My intent was where you get to, badly understood and expressed.
(Decay isn’t memory-less by definition, but we’ve empirically observed that it’s memory-less, and our current theories model it as memory-less. This is the opposite of “by definition”—“by observation” or “empirically”.)
For similar reasons, Carbon Dating is relatively low precision.
I don't think it's the same situation, since there's a rough baseline rate of carbon-14 in nature (relative to carbon-12) which is continually replenished while alive. When it dies, there's no more carbon-14 added to the system, so we can determine how much is "left" from the ratio of carbon-14 to carbon-12. But there was no fixed % of ceaseium-137 to start with here, so we can't use the current % to determine age.
Protectionist regimes and opaque supply chains that aim to maximize profits above all else aren't motivated to provide honest answers, only a least-damaging public relations narrative.
Wikipedia page doesn't have any estimates on when the contamination event might have started (so products processed before that would be safe). It only tells that the food recall in the US started 2 months ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_radioactive_shrimp_recall
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_radioactive_shrimp_recall
See also: Prachin Buri radiation incident. It's unclear what, if any, link there is between the two incidents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prachin_Buri_radiation_inciden...
https://qz.com/thailand-radioactive-cylinder-found-foundry-1...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prachin_Buri_radiation_inciden...
https://qz.com/thailand-radioactive-cylinder-found-foundry-1...
[deleted]
So, as an aside, I think consumer reports could do so much to embrace the digital era and access new generations of consumers.
My parents read it regularly, and I subscribed for a year or two about a decade ago and felt so strongly how it hadn’t seemed to change since I was a kid in 1990s. And as I’m deep in tech, I feel the lack of content and communication.
My parents read it regularly, and I subscribed for a year or two about a decade ago and felt so strongly how it hadn’t seemed to change since I was a kid in 1990s. And as I’m deep in tech, I feel the lack of content and communication.
Fun, short podcast covering the topic last time it was in the news...
https://www.riskyornot.co/episodes/815-radioactive-shrimp
> Risky or Not? Radioactive Shrimp
> Dr. Don and Professor Ben talk about the risks of eating shrimp impacted by the recent recall.
https://www.riskyornot.co/episodes/815-radioactive-shrimp
> Risky or Not? Radioactive Shrimp
> Dr. Don and Professor Ben talk about the risks of eating shrimp impacted by the recent recall.
Great, transparent investigation by the Indonesian authorities.
metalman(2)
This is a dupe from like, last week.
Actually, it's from HN's Second Chance Pool:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26998308
https://news.ycombinator.com/pool
Vs. you can click on the "(consumerreports.org)" link in the title, to quickly see if something is an actual duplicate submission.
Also notice how the "X [hours|days] ago" text changes, depending on context. Vs. the mouseover timestamp for that is always the original submission time.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26998308
https://news.ycombinator.com/pool
Vs. you can click on the "(consumerreports.org)" link in the title, to quickly see if something is an actual duplicate submission.
Also notice how the "X [hours|days] ago" text changes, depending on context. Vs. the mouseover timestamp for that is always the original submission time.
Hah, thanks for sharing this, TIL.
I just remembered the headline from a few days ago and (on mobile) could not find it again, coming to the incorrect conclusion. Mea culpa.
I just remembered the headline from a few days ago and (on mobile) could not find it again, coming to the incorrect conclusion. Mea culpa.
> "Some of the highest levels of contamination detected in the area were reportedly found in the company’s furnace, which is about 1.5 miles southwest of the BMS Foods facility where the shrimp was processed. Investigators think that radioactive dust was released into the environment after PMT inadvertently smelted scrap metal containing cesium-137. “Because it’s airborne, the contamination can be carried by wind,”..."