Gaol for French doctors who radiation overdosed patients
Doctors jailed in French radiation scandal The Australian, AAP
January 31, 2013 A FRENCH court has sentenced two doctors and a
radiophysicist to 18 months in prison each for their role in radiation
overdoses that killed at least 12 people and left dozens seriously
ill.
Overdoses were given to nearly 450 cancer patients at the Jean Monnet
hospital in Epinal in northeastern France between 2001 and 2006.
It is the most serious incident of its kind France has
known…..http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/doctors-jailed-in-french-radiation-scandal/story-fn3dxix6-1226565535205
Future deaths from Fukushima radiation – new research shows
“Serious concern” over long term health consequences from Fukushima disaster — New Study: 8 times more cancer deaths than predicted http://enenews.com/new-study-serious-concern-over-long-term-health-consequences-from-fukushima-disaster-8-times-more-cancer-deaths-than-predicted
January 25th, 2013
Title: Reassessing the health effects of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident
Source: Chemistry World
Author: Rebecca Brodie
Date: 25 January 2013
While the Japanese tsunami of March 2011 was devastating in its own right, the long term health consequences because of the damage to the nuclear reactor at Fukushima Daiichi are also of serious concern. […]
Jan Beyea, from the US expert consulting service Consulting in the Public Interest, together with fellow colleagues has been analysing previous calculations of the subsequent nuclear accident in Japan, and believes that the number of predicted future mortalities from cancer is higher than originally predicted. […] the mid-range, predicted number of future mortalities from cancer is closer to 1000 than the 125 figure calculated without considering long-term groundshine [gamma radiation emitted from radioactive materials deposited on the ground].’ […]
Lynn Anspaugh, from the University of Utah, US, who works in the field of radiology and reconstructing radiation doses and who analysed the Chernobyl accident, agrees that Beyea’s research points out several inaccuracies in the previous work. However, he feels that the real question this work raises regards the future of nuclear power itself. […]
Read the study’s abstract here
Hydraulic Fracking is a source of radiation pollution, too
“We’ve known for a long time that there is radiation coming back in the wastewater”
Among the radioactive material often found in drilling wastes is radium 226, which can cause cancer, anemia and cataracts, according to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
DEP backtracks on radiation issue Times online,January 25, 2013 By Rachel Morgan HARRISBURG — For months, the state Department of Environmental Protection denied that radiation in wastewater from natural gas drilling was an issue. On Thursday night, the state announced plans to study the effects of radiation in natural gas drilling wastewater.
After continued questioning by Shale Reporter regarding radioactivity in wastewater, Gov. Tom Corbett’s announcement of a 12-month DEP study of radioactive wastewater was a surprise. The DEP had consistently denied radiation was even an issue……. In the governor’s unexpected announcement Thursday evening, DEP officials said they will begin sampling and analyzing fracking flowback for radioactivity, testing everything from fracking wastewater, drill cuttings, treatment solids and sediments at well pads and wastewater treatment and disposal facilities.
They also plan to analyze radioactivity in pipes, well casings, storage tanks, treatment systems and trucks. http://www.timesonline.com/news/local_news/dep-backtracks-on-radiation-issue/article_9e5853a5-325b-5f9a-83ed-24aea5811db0.html
An Increase in Radiation Monitoring for Fracking, NYT, Jan 25 13 By JON HURDLE Pennsylvania will step up its monitoring of naturally occurring radiation levels in water, rock cuttings and drilling wastes associated with oil and gas development in a yearlong study that will be peer-reviewed, the state’s environmental agency reports.
The study will also assess radiation levels in the pipes, well casings, storage tanks, treatment systems and trucks used by the natural gas industry, which has drilled thousands of wells in the gas-rich Marcellus Shale over the last five years….
Hydraulic fracturing, which involves injecting chemicals and water under enormous pressure into underground shale formations to extract gas or oil, got under way in Pennsylvania in 2008.
In New York, state officials are currently weighing whether to allow the drilling process to begin. The state’s health commissioner is conducting a review of whether the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation has adequately addressed potential impacts on public health. Continue reading
Radiation concentrates in the foetus, more than in the mother
Tohoku university, “Radiocesium is more concentrated in the fetus than in the mother of Fukushima cattle” Fukushima Diary Posted by Mochizuki on January 24th, 2013 On 1/23/2013, researching group of the experts published the report about the internal exposure of cattle abandoned in evacuation zone.
The result shows radionuclides are more concentrated in children than mothers. It can happen to human beings too. The transfer of radionuclides from mother to fetus is one of the major concerns of exposure to internal radiation. …. http://fukushima-diary.com/2013/01/tohoku-university-radiocesium-is-more-concentrated-in-the-fetus-than-in-the-mother-of-fukushima-cattle/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FukushimaDiary+%28Fukushima+Diary%29
A personal story of nuclear submarine tragedy in the Kara Sea
The crew of 144 were poisoned – nine died of radiation sickness soon after the emergency, and the others were ill for years before their premature deaths
K-27 officers were later warned they should not have children for five years and were given regular check-ups, but there was no proper medical follow-up for the ordinary submariners, according to CWO Mazurenko. Many of them were declared “healthy” by military doctors, despite their illnesses, he added.
Eyewitness: Tragedy of Soviet nuclear submarine K-27BBC News, By Yaroslava Kiryukhina, 24 Jan 13 BBC Russian reporter The Russian authorities are investigating whether a sunken Soviet nuclear-powered submarine, the K-27, can be safely raised so that the uranium in its reactors may be removed.
At the height of the Cold War, in 1968, the K-27 met with disaster when radiation escaped from one of its reactors during a voyage in the Arctic.
Vyacheslav Mazurenko, then 22, was serving as a chief warrant officer (CWO) on the vessel, which now lies abandoned in the Arctic’s Kara Sea. Today he lives in Ukraine and he told BBC Russian what happened. Continue reading
USA increases “safe” radiation levels – protecting nuclear industry, not the people
In the wake of the continuing nuclear tragedy in Japan, the United States government is still moving quickly to increase the amounts of radiation the population can “safely” absorb by raising the safe zone for exposure to levels designed to protect the government and nuclear industry more than human life.”
The Radiation Warnings You Won’t Get from the Mainstream Propaganda Machine The Liberty Beacon January 22, 2013, The mainstream media and the federal government will soon have the blood of the world on it’s hands.
Radiation from the Fukushima Nuclear Plant disaster in Japan is now actively in the ecosystem all along the North American west coast… even the sea weed is now radiated. The Vancouver Sun reported one year ago that the seaweed tested from waters off the coast of British Columbia were 4 times the amount considered safe. No further test results were released after the initial report.
The governments of the United States and Canada are not conducting tests for radioactivity – at least not to the knowledge of the public. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has agreed to continue purchasing seafood from Japan, despite the fact that the food is not being tested for radioactive contamination. Last November, independent testing in Japan showed 65 per cent of the catches tested positive for cesium (a radioactive material). Instead of refusing to purchase the poisoned fish, food safety agencies in both the United States and Canada have simply raised the “acceptable level of radiation.” We can’t go offending the Japanese after promising to buy their tainted goods, now can we?
After the North American governments refused to fund testing, oceanographer Ken Buesseler, a senior scientist at the non-profit Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Woods Hole, Mass, along with Nicholas Fisher, a marine sciences professor at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, and other concerned scientists, managed to secure private funding for a Pacific research voyage. The results? Continue reading
First hand witness of radiation to soldiers in Pacific atomic bomb tests
The with holding of evidence -Dave Whyte. http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2013/01/23/the-with-holding-of-evidence-dave-whyte/ <dave.whyte@blueyonder.co.uk I doubt if we will ever be permitted to have a cytogenetic blood analysis carried out as the Authorities know what the results would be. Everything they do has a delaying action in the hope we will all be dead before they are forced to admit the truth. What irks me, is the fact all Servicemen were loyal to Queen and Country but loyalty has not been reciprocated by our respective Government’s.
It was the Ministry of Defence that kept informing me I should put in for a War Pension if I considered my medical problems were caused by nuclear testing. When I did apply they acknowledged my stomach problems were caused due to service and awarded me a 0% pension: They also admitted the Lymphadenopathy and again awarded a 0% pension; For my claim of infertility and other ailments I was informed I did not receive sufficient radiation to cause my ailments.
I have now added Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) citing the stress involved in attempting to obtain information on the levels of radiation received including the fact that It took the Ministry of Defence over five years to supply me with information on the levels of radiation at ground zero after Pennant and Burgee after denying it existed. They are still refusing to divulge the levels of ‘Beta’ radiation at ground zero after detonation of the bombs, or the radiation levels at our living quarters in the forward area.
There were around 200 of us living at ‘B’ site (I have attached a map) which was situated 3 miles from the atomic bomb ground zero and 6 miles from the point of detonation of the hydrogen bombs Flagpole and Halliard. I saw members of the AWRE regularly checking the area for radiation (they were wearing protective clothing at the early stages). My attempts have failed to get a copy of the logs showing the levels of radiation. I should add, we were never given protective clothing or respirators we went around in shorts and flip-flops.
I believe this was the forerunner to Operation Lighthouse which was cancelled due to the moratorium. The tests were held in quick succession as proposed for Lighthouse: Pennant atomic bomb 22 August, Flagpole hydrogen bomb 2 September, Halliard hydrogen bomb 11 September and Burgee atomic bomb 23 September 1958. I have proof that the forward area was radioactive for nine days after Pennant and six days after Burgee. The authorities are denying there was any radiation in the forward area after the two hydrogen bombs!
I have attached a photograph showing the condition of our living quarters after Pennant.
It is only now I realise there must have been radioactive particles blown into our bedding and other belongings which we could have inhaled or ingested whilst sleeping.
I hope some of this may be of interest.
USA’s Dept of Energy’s plan for radioactive scrap metal into consumer goods
the DOE wants to deregulate and actually sell 14,000 tons of radioactive scrap metal (both volumetrically and topically contaminated) from the nuclear war system — uranium enrichment, plutonium extraction, etc. — and “recycle” the waste to the commercial clean scrap metal industry. From there, according to the watchdog group Nuclear Information and Resource Service, the radioactive stuff “could be turned into anything from your next pants zipper to baby toys.”
The DOE has never officially acknowledged — in spite of the National Academy of Sciences’ 2006 findings — that the same radiation dose does far more harm to women than to men. The drastically increased vulnerability of fetuses and infants is well known, but the whole population is nevertheless treated as the same big, young, Caucasian male (“reference man”) in most radiation risk assessments.
You can tell the DOE to continue to keep its radioactive metal out of the commercial metal supply, commerce, and our personal items. You can demand a full environmental impact statement. Comment deadline is Feb. 9, 2013. Email to: scrap_PEAcomments@hq.doe.gov (with an underscore after “scrap_”). Snail mail to: Jane Summerson / DOE NNSA / PO Box 5400, Bldg. 401K. AFB East / Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185
The Energy Department’s Crazy Plan for Radioactive Scrap Nuclear Weapons Waste in Your Water Bottle, Hip Replacement, Baby’s Toys, Jungle Gym? http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/23/nuclear-weapons-waste-in-your-water-bottle-hip-replacement-babys-toys-jungle-gym/ by JOHN LaFORGE
Even the deregulation-happy Wall St. Journal sounded shocked: “The Department of Energy is proposing to allow the sale of tons of scrap metal from government nuclear sites — an attempt to reduce waste that critics say could lead to radiation-tainted belt buckles, surgical implants and other consumer products.” Continue reading
USA: Be wary of radiation tainted foods
The Radiation Warnings You Won’t Get from the Mainstream Propaganda Machine The Liberty Beacon January 22, 2013,”……..How can we protect ourselves? First, be aware of what items are likely to be highly tainted
1.) SEAFOOD: Question the origin of ALL seafood. Fish and crustaceans from the Pacific Ocean should all be considered to be poisoned with radiation.
2.) WATER: The rainfall and snowfall are all radiated. Do not drink any water that has not been filtered. The tap water that flows from your faucet has NOT been treated to rid it of radioactive particles. A recent report from the NY Times stated, “A rooftop water monitoring program managed by UC Berkeley’s Department of Nuclear Engineering detected substantial spikes in rain-borne iodine-131 during torrential downpours …
3.) DAIRY PRODUCTS: Milk and milk products from the West Coast states currently have the highest levels of radiation in North America.
4.) PRODUCE: Leafy Vegetables, Wines, Tomatoes, Strawberries….all produce from California or any other West Coast State are also likely to be tainted.
5.) MEAT: If a animal eats any leafy vegetable all along the West Coast, that animal has consumed radiation, and is poisoned. This is any animal from cows, pigs, goats, sheep to wild deer and other game.
If you eat the above foods from areas with high radiation levels, you are eating radiation and feeding it to your children. Slowly the radiation levels within your body will build up. This is PERMANENT.
Infant mortality rates across the United States have increased by more than 35% since the nuclear disaster, according to a court statement by Dr. with independent scientist Leuren Moret, MA, PhD. A study published in The International Journal of Medicine indicates that more than 20,000 deaths right here in North America can be directly attributed to the release of radioactive material from Fukushima.
Radioactive isotopes of the type released from Fukushima have a half life of 30,000 years. This means that we must permanently change the way we prepare our food.
- Wash your food with soap and rinse it in filtered water.
- Be aware of the origins of your vegetables, fish, game and seafood.
- Keep abreast of radiation levels to help monitor where your food is acquired.
- Use only filtered water for drinking, cooking and ice.
Read original here: http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/the-radiation-warnings-you-wont-get-from-the-mainstream-propaganda-machine_04022012
Blood tests, with no radiation hazard, may replace mammograms
Mammogram problems A recent study in the British Medical Journal suggested mammograms may actually increase the risk of breast cancer in young women with a mutated BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene due to the radiation exposure. False positives (where the test incorrectly shows breast cancer) and false negatives (where it fails to detect breast cancer) are also not uncommon
Blood tests may replace mammograms Telegraph (Sydney) Leanne Hudson January 19, 2013
SCIENTISTS are investigating a more accurate, less invasive test for breast cancer. Baring your breasts in front of strangers and having your flesh uncomfortably pressed between two pieces of plastic – a procedure commonly known as a mammogram – is the standard test for breast cancer In future, all you may need to do is have a simple blood test. Continue reading
Japanese professors remind public of the story of hibakusha
The next few years will be crucial in collecting oral
histories from hibakusha. I feel a sense of responsibility as the last
generation that can learn directly from the victims.
INTERVIEW: Scholars call for greater cooperation between Hiroshima,
Nagasaki in anti-nuclear push January 20, 2013 THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
Two scholars who have spent their careers collating first-hand
accounts of atomic victims from Hiroshima and Nagasaki and using those
experiences to push for nuclear disarmament sat down with The Asahi
Shimbun to talk about their research into the 1945 attacks.
Taeko Kiriya, 32, is an assistant professor at the Hiroshima Peace
Institute of Hiroshima City University while Keiko Nakamura, 40, is an
associate professor at the Research Center for Nuclear Weapons
Abolition (RECNA) at Nagasaki University.
Excerpts of the interviews follow:…… Continue reading
Good news: “backscatter” ionising radiation airport scanners to go
Bye-Bye to the Rapiscan Backscatter Machines The Atlantic, James Fallows, JAN 18 2013, Good news from our friends at TSA: they are getting rid of the hated (by me) Rapiscan “backscatter” screening machines like the one shown at right. These are the scanners in which you stand between two big, opaque boxes, raise your hands, and have X-rays shot at your body. The systems measure the “backscatter” radiation that reflects back from hard and soft surfaces on your body and clothing. Radiation in such backscatter systems is much weaker than medical X-rays, which are of course meant to go right through your body. Still, it is ionizing radiation, which is guilty until proven innocent in terms of possible health effects.
Even very low level “background” radiation is harmful
Recent evidence on the risks of very low-level radiation, Dr Ian Fairlie, January 17, 2013“…….I’ve previously shown that a great deal of evidence supports the LNT hypothesis and indicates radiation effects well below 100 mSv.
But in recent months, a flurry of epidemiological studies go further than merely refuting ill-informed articles. They indicate adverse effects to people exposed to very low doses from medical CT scans and other clinical procedures; to infants living near nuclear power stations; and to Chernobyl clean-up workers. They even reveal adverse effects from background radiation to which all of us are exposed.
Together they reveal a pattern of higher-than-expected risks from very low exposures to radiation.
1. Background Radiation
Perhaps the most eye-opening of the recent studies concern background radiation. Most people think that background radiation levels (typically 2 to 3 mSv per year) are very low and are of little concern. But recent authoritative studies clearly indicate that background radiation is not harmless. Continue reading
Leukemias near Nuclear Power Stations – new evidence
Taken together, the new studies indicate that our current understandings about radiation risks, especially in infants and children, may be incorrect and they may need to be revised upwards. In particular, the current adult (absolute) ICRP risk for fatal cancer of 5% per Sv and the ICRP’s use of a dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor (DDREF) look increasingly out of date.
The new studies also mean that our public radiation limits and constraints may need to be revised.
Recent evidence on the risks of very low-level radiation, Dr Ian Fairlie, January 17, 2013
“…… 4. Leukemias near Nuclear Power Stations The final area is exposures from nuclear power stations.
Readers will be aware of my lectures showing that about 40 studies worldwide indicate increased leukemia risks among children within 5 km of nuclear power plants (NPPs). In particular, the important 2008 KiKK case-control study (discussed in Fairlie, 2009), which was commissioned by the German Government, found large increases in the risks of child leukemias and embryonal cancers near all German NPPs. This authoritative report led to geographical studies sponsored by the governments of France, UK, Switzerland and Germany. These have now been published and all four had similar findings, ie 30% to 40% increases in child leukemias near NPPs – see table from Körblein and Fairlie (2012) which contains the references to these four government studies.
Table: Studies of observed (O) and expected (E) childhood leukemias (under 5 year olds) within 5 km of NPPs
| Dataset | O | E | SIR=O/E | 90% CI | one-sided p-value |
| Germany | 34 | 24.1 | 1.41 | 1.04-1.88 | 0.0328 |
| Great Britain | 20 | 15.4 | 1.30 | 0.86-1.89 | 0.1464 |
| France | 14 | 10.2 | 1.37 | 0.83-2.15 | 0.1506 |
| Switzerland | 11 | 7.9 | 1.40 | 0.78-2.31 | 0.1711 |
| Pooled | 79 | 57.6 | 1.37 | 1.13-1.66 | 0.0042 |
The important point here is that most scientists think that radiation exposures to local residents from NPPs are extremely small. Indeed, many nuclear scientists remain in denial about the relationship between proximity to NPPs and child leukemias despite the bountiful clear evidence which exists. Yet the evidence of child leukemias near NPPs fits well with the evidence emerging from background radiation and medical radiation. Continue reading
Medical radiation
Recent evidence on the risks of very low-level radiation, Dr Ian Fairlie, January 17, 2013 “…...2. Medical Exposures
Most exposures from medical diagnostic procedures are relatively low, and although their collective doses are increasing in most developed countries, in almost all cases they are justified by their clinical benefits. Nevertheless there have been a score or so of articles in scientific journals in recent years expressing concern about the risks of increased doses from CT scans, especially to children. Even the WHO has issued a draft report expressing the need for more vigilance.
In order to investigate these concerns, Pearce et al (2012) conducted a massive UK retrospective cohort study of computed tomography (CT) scans among 178,000 patients. The team estimated absorbed brain and red bone marrow doses per CT scan and assessed the excess incidence of leukaemia and brain tumours cancer with Poisson relative risk models. They observed a positive association between radiation dose from CT scans and leukaemia (excess relative risk [ERR] per mGy = 0·036, 95% CI 0·005–0·120; p=0·0097); and a positive association with brain tumours (0·023, 0·010–0·049; p<0·0001). They found CT scans caused statistically significant increases in cancer risks in under three-year olds: three head scans tripled their risk of brain cancer and five to ten scans tripled their risk of leukemia. Although the authors did not comment on these risks, there is no doubt that these are large risk increases from relatively small doses.
I shall be writing more on this matter in due course.
In Canada, similar risk increases were observed by Eisenberg et al (2011) after low-dose exposures from cardiac imaging in adult patients with acute myocardial infarction. For every 10 mSv from cardiac imaging, a 3% increase in cancer risk (RR= 1.03 per 10 mSv, 95% CI = 1.02–1.04) was observed. The authors stated “These results call into question whether our current enthusiasm for imaging and therapeutic procedures after acute myocardial infarction should be tempered.”…….http://www.ianfairlie.org/news/recent-evidence-on-the-risks-of-very-low-level-radiation/
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (288)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 