Far from over.
The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency made the change saying "the damaged facilities have been releasing a massive amount of radioactive substances, which are posing a threat to human health and the environment over a wide area."
If there was no difference between level 6 & 7, why would they have a level 7?
They did also say that the cumulative amount from the Fukushima plant is less than that from Chernobyl.
Whilst i agree the INES level is not the best way to benchmark these things.. my main point is that several outlets, the register included, have frequently been telling us how this is not as bad as three mile island.
It clearly is. The articles on this site in particular were written through rose tinted glasses.
The fact the plant has just been hit by another 7.1 quake is cause enough for concern.
Based on the independent data available, i would happily stay the hell away from Fukushima. Even the official data is being pulled to bits by the Japan's media, as being dis-jointed, inaccurate and misleading. Even the TEPCO employees have a tendency to break down in tears when they try to read official "its not that bad" statements.
Couple that with the EPA's new "safe" standards will result in a “nearly 1000-fold increase for exposure to strontium-90, a 3000 to 100,000-fold hike for exposure to iodine-131; and an almost 25,000 rise for exposure to radioactive nickel-63″ in drinking water.
Unfortunately - Far from over, and usually the quieter it gets, the worse the news is.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
