UK’s “independent” research into nuclear veterans far from independent

The reason for this covert examination of body parts is exposed by Redfern ( p.90 ) as “mainly scientific research and potential damage claims .”

Dear Members of Parliament « Paul Langley’s Nuclear History Blog. 26 Nov 10, “…………The Minister for Veterans has admitted nuclear test veterans were exposed to radiation . It is a well known and documented scientific fact , not only by independent radiation sceintists but by mainstream establisment funded and controlled radiation experts that elevated cases of leukaemia manifest in persons exposed to radiation in the early years after exposure .Why , therefore were these elevated early deaths from leukaemia publicly and politically ignored ?

The Health Protection Agency ( formerly known as the NRPB ) , has been disingenuously stated by Ministers for many years as an being an ‘independent ‘ body.

This is a blatant lie . A lie that has enabled the Ministry of Defence to infer the 1980′s and 90′s series of health and mortality studies into the nuclear veterans were entirely unbiased . These studies were entirely statistical , they did not include any independent examination of surviving veterans blood , body tissue , parts or organs .They were therefore unable to detect genetic damage .The evidence we hold of genetic damage is being ignored .

The Redfern Inquiry Report – 16th November 2010

Whilst the so – called ‘independent ‘ statistical studies , without blood testing individual veterans for genetic damage , were being carried out by the NRPB in the 1980′s and 90′s this government funded body were covertly , without permission of living veterans or their families engaged in the unlawful and clandestine, secret removal of tisssue , body parts and organs from living as well as deceased nuclear veterans .

Experimentation Still Continued Today .

Medical Research Council – MR185 ” UK participants in the UK atmospheric nuclear weapons tests ” is the experimental programme still being used today on nuclear test veterans on death .Associate to the CVFI , nuclear veteran Dave Whyte , has uncovered this evidence through FOI . His body is ‘flagged ‘ for research after death . Why ?

The Redfern Report reveals this experImental programme covering in excess of 40 years on nuclear veterans has been unlawfully done with the collusion of doctors , coroners , pathologists , the NHS , the Medical Research Council and the Atomic Weapons Establishment .. This is coverrt institutional corruption on a massive scale carried out on former members of the armed forces . Why ? ..

The reason for this covert examination of body parts is exposed by Redfern ( p.90 ) as “mainly scientific research and potential damage claims .”

“Potential damage claims” indicates prior knowledge that nuclear veterans were exposed to ionising radiation and by the destruction , withholding and/or loss of radiation records and the destruction or loss of body parts the Ministry of Defence have deliberately set out to cover -up the truth . We have ample, detailed evidence to substantiate the withholding of information by the Ministry of Defence and other government bodies acting in collusion ….

Dear Members of Parliament « Paul Langley’s Nuclear History Blog

1 Comment »

Critically important information Christine, and I thank the nuclear veterans in England for forwarding it to me.

Once I have scanned in the pages, I will report on a recently victory in Australia won by a widow of a Maralinga veteran.

I have a feeling that as far as an Australian nuclear power reactoor goes, we are at 1 minute to midnight.

I cant really keep up with it all.

Paul

Comment by nuclearhistory | November 26, 2010 | Reply

1.This Month

PETITION

Free Julian Assange, before it’s too late. Sign to STOP the USA Extradition

United Nations: demasking the Torture of Julian Assange. Rico Brouwer and Nils Melzer

Three Mile Island (& Fukushima) Lies & Cover-Ups w/ Gundersen & Wasserman

Energy efficiency – theme for July 2019

Energy efficiency represents the single largest potential contributor to global emissions reduction, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA 2017). It should be a key part of the global energy strategy, for several reasons:

It could reduce global electric demand by more than 20 per cent, based on current rates in the U.S. power sector, while maintaining high levels of services such as heating and lighting.
It avoids the need for increased energy, capacity and grid services, making it the least expensive way to decarbonise at scale.
It can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by billions of tonnes.

A dramatic example of the power of energy efficiency is lighting. In 2017 the United States passed the milestone of 1 billion LED and CFL lights installed, avoiding 142 million tonnes a year of carbon dioxide emissions, at a cost of about $7 per ton of avoided carbon dioxide. In contrast, the cumulative installed capacity of rooftop solar reached 8,000 MW in 2017, saving 8 million tonnes a year of carbon dioxide, at a cost of $360 per ton. Lighting efficiency thus yielded almost 18 times the avoided carbon dioxide, at about 2 per cent the cost per ton of rooftop solar.

Google provides another example of the power of energy efficiency. Its data centers now use 50 per cent less energy than the average data center, according to the company. Google also developed an improved chip, the TPU, which performs 83 times better than standard CPUs. The new chip allowed Google to reduce power consumption at its data centers by a factor of 30—far exceeding the effect on Google’s carbon footprint of all of the company’s renewable energy purchases. ” – John Woolard, Eco Business, 10 June 2019

nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope