Did Israel explode a small nuclear bomb in Syria? Spike in radiation report says…
Story by support@india.com (India.com News Desk), 25 Dec 24, https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/did-israel-explode-a-small-nuclear-bomb-in-syria-spike-in-radiation-report-says/ar-AA1wqXyT
In a step that has shocked the whole world, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) carried out an airstrike on the weapons depot in Tartus, Syria on 16 December 2024. Through the massive strike, Israel reportedly destroyed the Scud missile facility. However, reports are speculating that the damage caused by the strike was much more and a small nuclear weapon might have been used. Here are the details you need to note about the Israeli strike on Syria.
As a result of the attack, an earthquake of magnitude 3 also occurred along with the massive explosion. The earthquake was so huge that it was felt up to Iznik in Turkey, 820 km away. Moreover, Russian media organization Sputnik had then said that Israel had targeted it with a new missile from a warship. However, some reports also claim that the B61 nuclear bomb developed by America was used here.
Reports have also added that the European Union’s Radioactive Environmental Monitoring surprisingly found that the amount of radiation increased in Turkey and Cyprus 20 hours after the intense blast, pointing towards a small nuclear attack.
Israeli army in the Golan Heights after UN extends peacekeeping mission between Syria, Israel
Israeli forces continued to operate along the Syria-Israel ceasefire line in the Golan Heights on Sunday (December 22) after the United Nations Security Council on Friday (December 20) extended a long-running peacekeeping mission between the two countries.
The UN mission was extended for six months and the security council expressed concern that military activities in the area could escalate tensions.
Ouster of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
Since a lightning rebel offensive ousted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad earlier this month, Israeli troops have moved into the demilitarized zone – created after the 1973 Arab-Israeli war – that is patrolled by the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF).
Israeli officials have described the move as a limited and temporary measure to ensure the security of Israel’s borders but have given no indication of when the troops might be withdrawn. Armed forces from Israel and Syria are not allowed in the demilitarized zone – a 400-square-km (155-square-mile) “Area of Separation” – under the ceasefire arrangement.
(With inputs from agencies)
Radioactive sea spray is dosing communities
by beyondnuclearinternational, By Tim Deere-Jones https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2019/02/17/radioactive-sea-spray-is-dosing-communities/
Governments want to cover it up
I am taking a walk along the path at Manorbier on the south Pembrokeshire coast in Wales. The tomb of King’s Quoit is still in its midwinter shadow. It gets no direct sunlight for 28 days either side of the solstice. And yet the first daffodils and pink campions are already in bloom.
A visit to the tomb on the first day when light returns is a truly amazing sight. It is perched by fresh running water, on the edge of cliffs, just above the sea. You can smell the salt in the air, and feel the mist of sea spray blown in by the prevailing onshore winds.
And yet in some coastal areas such a moment may not be as idyllic as it seems.
It is clear from the available empirical data that coastal populations impacted by prevailing onshore winds and living next to sea areas contaminated with liquid radioactive effluents from nuclear sites, are annually exposed to dietary and inhalation doses of man-made marine radioactivity.
Effluents discharged to the sea by nuclear power stations, fuel fabrication sites and reprocessing facilities are transferred from sea to land in airborne sea spray and marine aerosols (micro-droplets). They come in also during episodes of coastal flooding.
This problem has been particularly pronounced around the UK Sellafield reprocessing and plutonium production site in Cumbria. In 1988, independent empirical research commissioned by a west Wales local authority reported that Sellafield-derived, sea-discharged cesium had been found in pasture grass up to 10 miles inland of the Ceredigion coast.
Clearly, this contributes to human dietary doses via the dairy and beef food chain. The research also implies the inevitability of further dietary doses via arable and horticultural crops. Given that airborne radioactivity is driven at least 10 miles inland, it should be assumed that coastal populations are exposed, on a repeated annual basis, to inhalation doses.
Independent, empirical field research by a team of doctors (general practitioners) in the Hebrides off the Scottish coast, has shown broadly similar, but more detailed results and demonstrated that island and coastal environments are saturated with sea-borne cesium from distant sources.
The GP’s research demonstrated that those who ate more “local” terrestrial produce had higher doses of Sellafield sea discharged cesium-137 than those who ate “non-local” produce.
Some island residents received higher doses of Sellafield derived, sea discharged cesium, from their locally grown terrestrial produce, than from sea foods. The same residents received higher doses from their terrestrial produce than some sea food-eating populations living adjacent to nuclear pipelines discharging liquid waste to the sea.
Given the available evidence of the West Wales study, it is logical to propose that the same would apply in that case.
Early research on this in the UK was initiated by the nuclear industry and pro-nuclear governments, acting through the UK Atomic Energy Agency (UKAEA). In the late 1970s and early ‘80s the agency researched the sea to land transfer of the alpha emitting plutoniums (Pu) 238, 239, and 240 and americium (Am) 241, and the beta emitting cesiums (Cs) 134 and 137, across the Cumbrian coast near Sellafield.
The UKAEA work confirmed that all five radionuclides studied transferred readily from the sea to the land in onshore winds. In wind speeds of less than 10 metres per sec (22 mph) cesium was enriched in spray and marine aerosols with enrichment factors (EFs) of around 2.
However, the alpha emitting plutonium and americium were shown to have EFs, relative to filtered ambient seawater, of up to 800. The alpha emitters were found to be associated (by Ad-sorbtion) with micro particles of sedimentary and organic material suspended in the marine water column and ejected into the atmosphere, as aerosols, by bursting bubbles at sea and at the surf line.
However, once the sea to land transfer of alpha emitters with massive enrichments was confirmed, such studies were rapidly abandoned and virtually no empirical field work on the extent of the inland penetration of spray and aerosols and human doses and exposure pathways has been completed by “official” sources.
Furthermore, of the 70 + radionuclides known to be discharged to sea from UK nuclear sites, only the five named radionuclides have ever been researched for their sea to land transfer potential.
I have no doubt that this is a global phenomenon and that the various mechanisms of sea to land transfer are not unique to the UK. However, I have observed that the scientific literature on the subject appears to be restricted to the output of UK official (pro-nuclear) and independent (non-aligned) researchers and that, to date, no other sources of such research have been identified.
The UK Government and a number of its departments and its environmental regulatory agencies are aware of the concerns discussed above, but appear to prefer a cover-up rather than an open discussion. The UK research itself was terminated within a few years of its inception and, coupled with the absence of any similar research in other “nuclear states”, it is my assumption that the international nuclear community has no interest in promoting such work and is happy to see the whole issue sidelined and downplayed.
Tim Deere-Jones was educated at the Cardiff University (Wales): Department of Maritime Studies, where his research dissertation was on the Sea to Land Transfer of Marine Pollutants. He has been working as a “non-aligned” marine pollution researcher and consultant since 1983 and has worked with major NGOs and campaign groups in the UK, Europe, the US and Australia. Tim has a particular field and research interest in the behavior and fate of anthropogenic radioactivity released/spilled into marine environments.
Read Tim’s full report with citations here.
Gender and radiation: New report shows girls most at-risk group
December 4, 2024,
https://beyondnuclear.org/gender-and-radiation-new-report-shows-girls-most-at-risk-group/
A new United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) report by Amanda M. Nichols — Postdoctoral Researcher, University of California, Santa Barbara and Mary Olson — Founder, Gender and Radiation Impact Project entitled Gender and Ionizing Radiation: Towards a New Research Agenda Addressing Disproportionate Harm examines recent research correlating harm from exposure to ionizing radiation and biological sex. The following is the executive summary:
“The detonation of a nuclear weapon in a populated area would cause devastating harm: it can kill thousands of people instantly, whether through the explosion itself, or through the intense heat and high levels of radiation. The mid- and long-term consequences from radiation exposure are less well understood, in part because they manifest differently for male and female survivors.
Robust evidence of differentiated health impacts emerged in 2006, when the US National Academy of Sciences published Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII which reported 60 years of data from the Life Span Study of atomic bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Nearly 20 years after the publication of that report, this report speaks to the extent to which new evidence has been published regarding the correlation between harm from exposure to ionizing radiation and biological sex.
This report concludes the following:
The post-2006 radiation research reviewed in this report provides clear evidence that radiation causes more cancer, heart disease, and stroke in women compared to men.
Several studies present evidence that supports the hypothesis that a higher percentage of reproductive tissue in the female body could be one contributing factor to the greater rate of harm from radiation exposure in females compared to males.
In addition to biological sex, some studies suggest that age at time of exposure may be an important factor in assessing radiation outcomes.
Girls (ages 0–5 years) are the most at risk post-birth lifecycle stage for developing cancer and non-cancer related health consequences over the course of the lifetime from exposure to ionizing radiation.
These findings are important for discussions about nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, given that sex-specific and gendered impacts of nuclear weapons are a prominent topic during the meetings of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
More research is needed, however, that takes seriously the ways that age and intergenerational impacts inform discussions about radiological harm. This report concludes with an outline of a future research agenda and suggests research questions applicable across a number of disciplines and lines of inquiry.
Relationship Between Urinary Uranium and Cardiac Geometry and Left Ventricular Function: The Strong Heart Study
Uranium is a potentially cardiotoxic, nonessential element commonly found
in drinking water throughout the United States. The purpose of this study
was to evaluate if urinary uranium concentrations were associated with
measures of cardiac geometry and function among American Indian young
adults from the Strong Heart Family Study.
Urinary uranium levels were
adversely associated with measures of cardiac geometry and LV function
among American Indian adults, including increases in pulse pressure and LV
hypertrophy.
These findings support the need to determine the potential
long-term subclinical and clinical cardiovascular effects of chronic
uranium exposure, and the need for future strategies to reduce exposure.
JACC Journals 3rd Dec 2024 https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacadv.2024.101408
Cancer mortality in the USA and atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout ratio. Identifying the principal origin of the global cancer epidemic
European Society of Medicine, Christopher Busby, Green Audit, Bideford, Devon, UK, Nov 29, 2024, https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/5859
Abstract
Recent advances in epidemiological analysis of the effects of radioactive contamination have raised questions over the security of current radiation risk models. One outstanding question relates to the effects of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests and the fallout which peaked in 1959-63.
Effects on cancer, a late genetic disease, are investigated here by employing a metric R which divides the rate in high fallout and low fallout States of the USA. An allocation of the two groups is based on rainfall and supported by measurements of Strontium-90 in baby teeth.
Results from comparing cancer mortality in Whites for High fallout States AR/KY/LA/MS and TN with low fallout States AZ/CA/ NM reveals a highly significant fallout cohort effect peaking in those born in 1955-1964 in all 10-year birth cohort age groups. The ratio was calculated for 10-year groups for deaths in 1969, 1979, 1989, 1999, 2009 and 2019.
Cancer mortality ratio effects increased with age. In the oldest 10-year group studied, 55-64, in 2019 the Excess Risk for those born in 1955-64 was 52% greater in the high fallout regions ERR =1.52; 95% CI 1.48, 1.57; p <0.00000000. For the 45-54 group in 2019 ERR = 1.42; 95% CI 1.35, 1.50; p < 0.00000000. For the 34-45 ERR = 1.27; 95% CI 1.15, 1.40; p<0.000001. Arguably the results identify the main cause of the cancer epidemic which began in the 1980s.
‘No plans’ for specific nuclear test veteran compensation
By George Allison, UK Defence Journal, December 1, 2024
Liz Saville Roberts MP (Plaid Cymru – Dwyfor Meirionnydd) recently
questioned the Ministry of Defence (MoD) about the possibility of
establishing a dedicated financial compensation scheme for nuclear test
veterans and their families.
These veterans were involved in the UK’s
nuclear testing programme from 1952 to 1967. Responding to the inquiry,
Luke Pollard, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence,
confirmed that “The Ministry of Defence has no current plans to develop a
specific compensation scheme for either Nuclear Test Veterans or their
families.”
However, Pollard highlighted that veterans who believe they
have been adversely affected by their service can apply to the War Pensions
Scheme. This “no-fault scheme provides compensation for Service personnel
who are disabled or die due to injury caused or made worse by service in
the UK Armed Forces before 6 April 2005.” He also noted the availability
of supplementary pensions and allowances for dependants through the same
programme.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-plans-for-specific-nuclear-test-veteran-compensation/
Gender and Ionizing Radiation: Towards a New Research Agenda Addressing Disproportionate Harm
20 November 2024 by Amanda Nichols and Mary Olsen.
Key takeaway: in2011 Mary Olson made a finding in data published by the US National Academy of Science (NAS) in 2006 that radiation exposure is more harmful to females
compared to males.
The new report confirms the finding in an additional 40+
peer-reviewed papers published after 2006.
The detonation of a nuclear weapon in a populated area would cause devastating harm. It can kill thousands of people instantly, whether through the explosion itself or
through the intense heat and high levels of radiation.
The mid- and long-term consequences from radiation exposure are less well understood, in
part because they manifest differently for male and female survivors. This
report provides an overview of recent research on the correlation between
harm from exposure to ionizing radiation and biological sex. Additionally,
it proposes questions for a future research agenda covering gender,
radiation impacts and radiological protection standards.
UNIDIR 20th Nov 2024,
https://unidir.org/publication/gender-and-ionizing-radiation-towards-a-new-research-agenda-addressing-disproportionate-harm/
Call to Action! Stop LANL Tritium Venting and Protect the Most Vulnerable
https://nuclearactive.org/call-to-action-stop-lanl-tritium-venting-and-protect-the-most-vulnerable/ November 21st, 2024
On Monday, Tewa Women United released two independent scientific reports about the harm that would be done to public health and the environment should Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) be allowed to vent radioactive tritium from four Flanged Tritium Waste Containers stored at LANL’s Area G radioactive and hazardous waste dump.
It is another important step taken by Tewa Women United to hold LANL and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accountable to the law.
The two new reports reveal that the proposed venting of tritium, a form of radioactive hydrogen, into the environment would not meet the current EPA or Department of Energy (DOE) regulations.
Tewa Women United collaborated with German scientist Bernd Franke, a Director of the Institute für Energie und Umweliforschung (IFEU), and Dr. Arjun Makhijani from the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. The first report, Review of LANL Radiation Dose Assessment for the Venting of Flanged Tritium Waste Containers (FTWC) at TA-54 at LANL, authored by Franke, contains results from computer models used to assess the possible range of radiation doses to the public across various weather scenarios.
Dr. Makhijani stated, “According to the EPA regulatory radiation standards, Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 61 Subpart H, require[s that] the radiation dose to ‘any member of the public’ should be less than 10 millirem per year.” Dr. Makhijani noted, “EPA allowed LANL to ignore children and infants in its dose calculations.”
Further, the second report, authored by Dr. Makhijani and titled Out of Order: An evaluation of the regulatory aspects of Los Alamos National Laboratory’s proposal to vent tritium from waste containers, similarly assessed LANL’s compliance with the Clean Air Act regulations and DOE Order 458.1 to keep public exposure to “as low as reasonably achieveable.”
Over the past four years DOE and EPA have ignored repeated requests from Tewa Women United to release their 53 alternatives to the proposed venting.
Kathy Wan Povi Sanchez, member of Pueblo de San Ildefonso and one of Tewa Women United’s co-founders, said, “Tritium makes water, our sacred source of life, radioactive. We were shocked to learn that LANL’s compliance calculations did not take infants and other children into account.
Talavi Cook, the Environmental Justice Program Manager at Tewa Women United, explained: “…Tewa Women United believes … radiation protection should extend to pregnant women due to fetuses comprising of 70% – 90% water; pregnant members of the public are not currently protected by the Clean Air Act or any other radiation protection regulation…. It is a matter of simple environmental justice for future generations.”
For more information, please visit https://tewawomenunited.org/2024/11/press-release-new-report-reveals-lanl-tritium-venting-could-have-triple-the-radiation-exposure-to-infants-compared-to-adults
NFLA submarine champion raises concerns over Clyde Tritium contamination
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have written to the Defence Secretary and the Head of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency over recent revelations that radioactive tritium discharges from nuclear subs operating in the Clyde are on the increase.
Investigative journalist Rob Edwards recently published the damning findings in award-winning paper The Ferret[i]. The latest data from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency’s Scottish Pollution Release Inventory[ii] shows that emissions of the radioactive gas, tritium, from military nuclear operations on the Clyde into the air and sea have more than doubled over the last six years.
His Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde in Scotland is home to the Royal Navy’s Submarine Service. When not at sea on patrol, the navy’s four Vanguard and five Astute nuclear powered submarines are berthed at Faslane. Whilst Astute are conventionally armed submarines, the Vanguards are each equipped with Trident missiles with nuclear warheads deployed on a rotational basis as a so-called ‘continuous-at-sea deterrent’.
Eight miles from Faslane across the Gare Loch at Coulport is the shore facility where the missiles and warheads are stored. These are fitted or removed from the submarines at an explosive handling jetty, with warheads being periodically and controversially taken by road convoys to and from Aldermaston for maintenance.
21st November 2024
NFLA sub champion raises concerns over Clyde Tritium contamination
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have written to the Defence Secretary and the Head of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency over recent revelations that radioactive tritium discharges from nuclear subs operating in the Clyde are on the increase.
Investigative journalist Rob Edwards recently published the damning findings in award-winning paper The Ferret[i]. The latest data from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency’s Scottish Pollution Release Inventory[ii] shows that emissions of the radioactive gas, tritium, from military nuclear operations on the Clyde into the air and sea have more than doubled over the last six years.
His Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde in Scotland is home to the Royal Navy’s Submarine Service. When not at sea on patrol, the navy’s four Vanguard and five Astute nuclear powered submarines are berthed at Faslane. Whilst Astute are conventionally armed submarines, the Vanguards are each equipped with Trident missiles with nuclear warheads deployed on a rotational basis as a so-called ‘continuous-at-sea deterrent’.
Eight miles from Faslane across the Gare Loch at Coulport is the shore facility where the missiles and warheads are stored. These are fitted or removed from the submarines at an explosive handling jetty, with warheads being periodically and controversially taken by road convoys to and from Aldermaston for maintenance.
Emissions of radioactive tritium from the associated Royal Naval Armaments Depot on Loch Long into the air have risen steadily from 1,770 megabequerels (MBq) in 2018 to 4,224 MBq in 2023, whilst the Faslane base discharged over 50,000 MBq of tritium contaminated effluents into the Clyde between 2018 and 2023; this peaked at 16,609 MBq in 2020.
The NFLAs have always been concerned about the long-term impact on human and marine animal health of exposure to radioactive contamination, and have repeatedly challenged the practice by military and civil nuclear authorities of discharges into the air, land and watercourses.
Discharges of tritium are an especial concern. Tritium has been found in sewage, waste and ballast water expelled by the submarines. It is also found in reactors and is an essential component of nuclear warheads. The Vanguard submarines are very old and their crews are being stretched by testing patrols which are getting longer. Old boats are more likely to leak and tired crews are more likely to make mistakes.
Dr Ian Fairlie, an expert on radioactivity in the environment, who has previously advised the UK government, told The Ferret that he found the emissions “worrying”. Dr Fairlie explained why: “First, they are large, more than four billion becquerels per year; second, they are steadily increasing; and third, they are of tritium – which is very hazardous when it’s inhaled or ingested” .
Whilst much of our recent attention has been focused on pushing back against the practices of discharges at Dounreay, Sellafield and Trawsfynydd, the NFLAs’ Spokesperson on Nuclear Submarine issues, Councillor Brian Goodall has used Rob’s revelations to write to Labour’s Defence Secretary, John Healey, and the Chief Executive of the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, Nicole Paterson with his questions and concerns.
Most specifically, Councillor Goodall is seeking clarification of the reasons for the increase in tritium discharges and also the steps being taken by the Ministry of Defence to reduce them and – given our previous criticism of the agency’s oversight at Dounreay – by the SEPA to monitor them.
New Book. The Scientists Who Alerted Us To The Dangers of Radiation.
The Scientists Who Alerted us to Radiation’s Dangers by Ian Fairlie, PhD
and Beyond Nuclear’s Cindy Folkers, MS, published by The Ethics Press, is
now available in paperback and ebook.
The book profiles 23 radiation scientists over the previous half-century or so, who revealed that radiation risks were higher than thought, but who were victimized by
governments and the nuclear establishments for doing so.
What this book reveals is that the harmful effects of radiation exposure especially from
the nuclear sector, and especially to children, are more pervasive and
worse than thought. These have been known for decades but suppressed by
politically-motivated censorship and overt disparagement/persecution. A big
problem is the exclusion of independent voices and members of the public.
The hegemony of the nuclear elite, backed by their governments, has kept
radiation’s dangers an “inside game”, leaving the public in the dark
and thereby violating their human rights, especially the rights of the
child. “It’s a timely and rewarding book. It’s timely because several
governments are pushing hard for more public exposures to radiation via
nuclear power.
And it’s rewarding as it explains radiation in
easy-to-grasp language which clarifies its dangers and risks. Anyone who
has ever wondered about radiation or its first cousin, radioactivity,
should read it.”
In addition to the profiles of radiation scientists, the
book includes hundreds of references, 14 scientific Appendices, 5 Annexes,
a glossary and an extensive bibliography. “This galaxy of information
will serve to help activists and students counter the misrepresentations,
incorrect assertions, and plain untruths about radiation often disseminated
by the nuclear establishments on both sides of the Atlantic. It will also
serve as a useful up-to-date reference book for academics on the dangers
and risks of radiation and radioactivity.
Ethics Press 19th Nov 2024
https://ethicspress.com/products/the-scientists-who-alerted-us-to-the-dangers-of-radiation
‘Starmer – meet us before it’s too late,’ nuclear test veterans say
Dominic Casciani, 18 Nov 24, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy4ng2873jro
When 18-year-old John Morris stood for the first time on the Pacific’s Christmas Island in 1956, he had no idea that the destructive forces of nature he would witness, harnessed for military power, would hang like a mushroom cloud over his life forever.
Now 86, Mr Morris is one of the last few of 22,000 personnel who witnessed the UK’s nuclear bomb tests – and those that are able to are still fighting to find out what it did their bodies.
A BBC film, to be broadcast this Wednesday, details their battles for what the dwindling band of men believe is a hidden truth: that the UK’s military knew at the time it was subjecting them to radiation that would damage them and their descendants forever.
Thousands of the men have suffered cancers and other conditions that other nuclear states have recognised as probably linked to the now-banned testing.
But not the UK. It has paid no compensation at all.
In Mr Morris’s case, as the film reveals, he believes the death of his first child, Steven, in 1962, was the result of the radiation damage he suffered during Operation Grapple – the name given to a series of British nuclear weapons tests.
Steven was four months old when he died in his cot. The coroner suspected the baby’s lung had not properly formed. Why? Nobody knows…………………………..
“I blame the Ministry of Defence and the experiments they did on us for Steven’s death – and I always will.”
John Morris’s story is one of many testimonies in the film, which also covers what happened to Indigenous communities who lived in the nuclear bomb test areas in Australia.
All of them believe they were lab rats, subjected to live human experimentation as the British raced to join the USA and Russia as a nuclear power.
And they are appealing to Sir Keir Starmer to meet them – to make good on what they believe was a pledge made by the Labour party.
The campaign for disclosure and damages for ill health began decades ago as the veterans linked health conditions, cancers and birth defects in children to the nuclear testing that began in 1952.
But in 2012, the Supreme Court ended the campaign for damages, saying the men could not prove the link – and they had also long run out of time.
The campaign, however, was relaunched last year thanks to potentially crucial new evidence discovered in what is known as the “Gledhill memo”.
The 1958 report from Christmas Island to the nuclear programme’s secret UK headquarters says that there were blood tests for Squadron Leader Terry Gledhill showing “gross irregularity”.
The memo, says the campaign, is proof that blood tests were being taken from personnel – and that there was a continuing but secret plan to monitor them.
The circumstantial evidence has grown since. This year, 4,000 pages of documents from the Atomic Weapons Establishment were declassified after a long Freedom of Information fight.
Those documents are still being analysed but the campaign says they show there were standing orders for repeated blood and urine tests of military personnel and Indigenous communities at the test sites.
The language in some of the documents is unambiguous. One, from 1957, says that “all personnel selected for duty at Maralinga [the Australian test site] may be exposed to radiation”.
Many of the men have obtained their personnel and medical files – but say they have gaps that correspond to when they were stationed on the operations.
John Morris’s military medical file, for instance, is missing regular blood tests from Christmas Island that he says were part of the regime.
Then the campaign discovered, again by chance, what could be an official order to destroy medical records.
The widow of one veteran who had died of multiple cancers obtained her late husband’s personnel records, hoping the medical records would help with her claim for a war pension.
The bundle she received included a slip of paper, dated 1959, which marks where officials had removed pages. That was when her husband had been part of the testing programme.
And the slip says the material had been removed under a “special directive regarding prompt disposal”, on the then orders of the ministerial office for the Royal Air Force.
What was that “special directive”? Nobody knows.
So was there a cover-up decades ago?
A 2008 government filing, in one part of the then legal battle, shows officials assured their in-house lawyers that “no individual monitoring of servicemen” had taken place during the tests.
But that does not make sense given the Gledhill memo shows personnel were being tested – and men remember it, too.
Another government document, from the 1990s, shows officials discussing their “concerns” that judges at the European Court of Human Rights had been told that there were no classified records concerning the monitoring of personnel.
The men say something stinks, and they have relaunched their legal fight, but time – and age – is against them.
The men’s lawyers believe they have a case for a failure to disclose medical records and, at worst, may have had glimpses of a cover-up locked in the bowels of military archives.
If they sue, the case could take years that the men do not have. So they have proposed an alternative time-limited one-off tribunal to find answers.
And that is why the men now want to meet Sir Keir Starmer – to get it done.
In 2019, the Labour Party, then led by Jeremy Corbyn, pledged £50,000 for each surviving British nuclear-test veteran.
Sir Keir met the veterans in 2021 but made no promises – and the 2019 offer was not in the 2024 manifesto.
But the prime minister has pledged to introduce the so-called “Hillsborough law” that places a duty on public officials to come completely clean when faced with an allegation of cover-up or misconduct.
That law could be in force within a year and it could help the men get answers, assuming they are there to be found.
“Keir Starmer, meet us,” says John Morris. “All I want is to meet him and get a pathway forward. They have let me down for 70 years.”
Ministers ‘looking hard’ at veterans concerns
A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said it recognised the “huge contribution” of the veterans and the government was committed to working with them and “listening to their concerns”.
“Ministers are looking hard at the issue – including the question of records,” said the spokesperson.
“They will continue to engage with the individuals and families affected and as part of this engagement, the Minister of Veterans Alistair Carns has already met with parliamentarians and a Nuclear Test Veteran campaign group to discuss their concerns further.”
Both Labour and Conservatives governments have maintained no records have been withheld from the veterans, including from the court cases.
The MoD says research has found no link between the nuclear tests, ill health and genetic defects in children. That’s contradicted by a respected study from New Zealand that showed its personnel suffered genetic damage from attending the British tests.
Whatever the government chooses to do, the impact of what the men witnessed will be with them forever.
When John Folkes was 19 years old, he was on board a plane ordered to fly through four atomic bomb mushroom clouds.
It was like being “microwaved”, he tells the BBC film, as his body was exposed to the raw power of a nuclear weapon. And he has suffered ever since from PTSD and a permanent tremble.
Some 14 months of his medical records are missing, despite him remembering radiation tests.
“It’s weighed heavily on my conscience,” the 89-year-old tells the BBC’s film.
“I’m a part of something that should never have happened.
“There exists within our society some dark forces that suppress the truth. I firmly believe that we’ve been betrayed. Shamefully betrayed.”
Britain’s Nuclear Bomb Scandal: Our Story airs on Wednesday 20 November at 21:00 on BBC Two and on iPlayer
Occupational exposure to radiation among health workers: Genome integrity and predictors of exposure
Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis
Volume 893, January 2024, Hayal Çobanoğlu, Akın Çayır
Highlights
- •Significant increase of genomic instability biomarkers reflecting long term disease risk
- •Significant association between radiation exposure and NPB, and NBUD frequencies
- •Work-related parameters have the potential to explain increase of genomic instability
- •Higher risk of exposure in plain radiography field
Abstract
The current study aimed to investigate genomic instabilities in healthcare workers who may experience varying levels of radiation exposure through various radiological procedures. It also sought to determine if factors related to the work environment and dosimeter reading could effectively explain the observed genomic instabilities. Utilizing the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN) on peripheral blood lymphocytes, we assessed a spectrum of genomic aberrations, including nucleoplasmic bridge (NPB), nuclear budding (NBUD), micronucleus (MN) formation, and total DNA damage (TDD). The study uncovered a statistically significant increase in the occurrence of distinct DNA anomalies among radiology workers (with a significance level of P < 0.0001 for all measurements). Notably, parameters such as total working hours, average work duration, and time spent in projection radiography exhibited significant correlations with MN and TDD levels in these workers. The dosimeter readings demonstrated a positive correlation with the frequency of NPB and NBUD, indicating a substantial association between radiation exposure and these two genomic anomalies. Our multivariable models identified the time spent in projection radiography as a promising parameter for explaining the overall genomic instability observed in these professionals. Thus, while dosimeters alone may not fully explain elevated total DNA damage, intrinsic work environment factors hold potential in indicating exposure levels for these individuals, providing a complementary approach to monitoring.
Introduction
Ionizing and non-ionizing radiation constitute inevitable forms of environmental exposure, to which a substantial portion of the global population remains consistently subjected. Among those at heightened risk are individuals employed in radiology, who utilize radiation sources for both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. More than 30 million medical radiology workers are exposed to low level of radiation worldwide [1], [2], which provides the opportunity to understand the health risks of chronic exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation (IR) [3].
It has been observed that there are increased risks for many cancer types, including skin, leukemia, breast, and thyroid, in medical radiology workers who started working before the 1950 s [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. These results probably reflect higher occupational radiation exposure of medical radiology workers [5], [9]. Today, even if radiation exposure is less than in the past owing to technological advances and radiation safety measures [9], recent studies show that long-term exposure to low-dose IR may still be a significant health risk [10], [11], [12].
Introduction
Ionizing and non-ionizing radiation constitute inevitable forms of environmental exposure, to which a substantial portion of the global population remains consistently subjected. Among those at heightened risk are individuals employed in radiology, who utilize radiation sources for both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. More than 30 million medical radiology workers are exposed to low level of radiation worldwide [1], [2], which provides the opportunity to understand the health risks of chronic exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation (IR) [3]. It has been observed that there are increased risks for many cancer types, including skin, leukemia, breast, and thyroid, in medical radiology workers who started working before the 1950 s [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. These results probably reflect higher occupational radiation exposure of medical radiology workers [5], [9]. Today, even if radiation exposure is less than in the past owing to technological advances and radiation safety measures [9], recent studies show that long-term exposure to low-dose IR may still be a significant health risk [10], [11], [12].
Despite the efforts to minimize radiation exposure, radiation-exposed health workers may frequently encounter low levels of ionizing radiation due to various occupational factors, including excessive work hours, inadequate shielding in their work environment, a high volume of daily imaging procedures, and failure to employ personal protective equipment during imaging activities. Although traditional methods such as physical dosimeters and blood-based clinical assessments are routinely used to monitor worker health, these approaches possess limitations when it comes to assessing the long-term effects of low-dose radiation exposure. Consequently, it is imperative to implement more robust biomarkers to routinely monitor radiology workers………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… more Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1383571824000020
Are Royal Navy nuclear deterrent submarines being re-supplied mid-patrol?
Navy Lookout 25th Oct 2024
A recent article in The Sun newspaper suggests that submariners were almost “starved’ while on an epic six-month patrol because the boat could not be resupplied with food as planned. Here, we briefly consider the implications of this report.
As we first reported, Vanguard-class submarines have been conducting increasingly lengthy Patrols with HMS Vigilant completing a record 195-day patrol in September 2023 and at least one other boat also came close to repeating the feat in 2024. This was due to a number of factors, including the delayed refit of HMS Vanguard and the unavailability of the shiplift in Faslane to conduct urgent maintenance.
The Sun may be dismissed by many as mostly disreputable rag but the journalists who wrote this piece have a good track record and this is a credible story. Under the superb headline “The Hunt for Bread October”, the tabloid reports that the boat ran so low on food that the crew were forced to ration meals. Personal supplies of sweets and nutty were handed in to be shared equally and the small tuckshop on board ran out of supplies and was closed. Of deeper concern, the report says medics on board feared a serious loss of life from fatigue and concentration lapses, although the RN denies there was any danger of starvation. The report does not reveal the kind of quality and frequency of meals being served towards the end of the patrol but does raise questions about the true endurance of nuclear boats.
Able to produce their own power, make freshwater, produce oxygen and remove excess CO2, nuclear submarine endurance is theoretically almost indefinite, only subject to machinery reliability. The limiting factor is the mental endurance of the people on board and their food supply. Even modern AIP conventional submarines will eventually have to return to port to take on diesel fuel so their chain of command do not have the option to extend patrols in the same way……………………………………………………………………..
The Vanguards were originally designed to conduct patrols of around three months, possibly extended to around four months at a push. The storerooms and freezers may have been subsequently modified to support even longer patrols but space is at a premium, even on a large SSBN. There is also the issue of waste disposal, SSBNs are not supposed to eject gash as it potentially could provide a clue to their presence. Imagine how much waste is generated by 130 people during six months at sea. There is also the mundane but important issue of toilet paper. Finding room for an adequate supply of bulky loo rolls can be a problem even on more spacious surface ships. It is difficult to believe that a Vanguard boat can stay at sea unsupported for 6 months, even if it began the patrol with extra food crammed into absolutely every available space.
The most critical line in the Sun article is that “plans to resupply at sea were scrapped”. It is speculation, but it would appear that in order to stay at sea for 6-months, the expectation is that the boats will be resupplied by a ship mid-patrol. This would mean surfacing somewhere and rapidly taking on food and offloading gash. This would need to be done as discreetly as possible, probably at night and in a sheltered location where the resupply can be done quickly and safely. The vessel involved may have been specially equipped for the task as coming alongside a submarine in open water is not easy. Alternatively, a helicopter could VERTREP supplies onto the casing. Either way, if this is the case, it would break a key principle of the nuclear deterrent that is never supposed to surface, potentially exposing it to detection.
With three boats back in the patrol cycle it is hoped that patrol lengths will fall slightly and these epic patrols can be avoided in future. The First Sea Lord, government ministers and His Majesty the King have all been to Faslane/Coulport in recent months to say a personal “thank you” to the crews of these boats who have clearly gone above and beyond in making personal sacrifices to maintain the continuous at-sea deterrent. The ‘super patrols’ might be tolerable on a couple of occasions but cannot be sustainable as it puts undue mental stress on people and risk the credibility and safety of the deterrent force. https://www.navylookout.com/are-royal-navy-nuclear-deterrent-submarines-being-re-supplied-mid-patrol/
Crew members on Royal Navy nuclear submarine left with ‘low supplies’ and suffering fatigue
Medics reportedly feared for a ‘serious loss of life’ after plans to resupply the vessel failed to materialise
Holly Evans, 25 Oct 24,
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/nuclear-submarine-royal-navy-uk-b2635513.html
Medics on a Royal Navy nuclear submarine were reportedly left fearing a “serious loss of life” after crew members were forced to share food when supplies ran low.
During a six-month patrol, crew began to suffer from fatigue with mistakes caused by concentration lapses, while the vessel closed its honesty shop over fears of hoarding.
Navy chiefs reportedly asked the crew to hand in any supplies of chocolate or sweets and off-duty sailors were instructed to sleep to conserve calories and limit their movements.
A source told The Sun: “It was miserable. If you weren’t on watch your movements were limited to conserve energy and encouraged to sleep to burn less calories.”
They added: “Medical staff raised concerns about a serious loss of life due to fatigue and people either not concentrating or falling asleep on critical duties.”
The Vanguard-class vessel, which has not been named for security reasons, had been due to resupply at sea but had been unable to do so.
A former submarine captain said the conditions onboard the vessel were “horrific”.
Due to the shortage of available submarines, patrols have been extended for six-months rather than the usual customary 80 days.
One submarine, which forms part of the UK’s nuclear deterrent force, is always on patrol with their location remaining top secret, with sailors only allowed to receive one 40-word message each week that is censored for bad news.
The Royal Navy has emphasised that robust practices and procedures are always in place to ensure the safety of its crew on operations.
It comes three weeks after the head of the Royal Navy apologised after an investigation found “misogyny, bullying and other unacceptable behaviours” in the submarine service.
There was at least one report of rape, and women suffered lewd comments and sexual gestures, an official report has revealed.
Nuclear weapons and children
The main perpetrators of violence against children are states armed with nuclear weapons, writes Tim Wright.
Nuclear weapons are designed to destroy cities; to kill and maim whole populations, children among them.
In a nuclear attack, children are more likely than adults to die or suffer severe injuries, given their greater vulnerability to the effects of nuclear weapons: heat, blast and radiation. The fact that children depend on adults for their survival also places them at higher risk of death and hardship in the aftermath of a nuclear attack, with support systems destroyed.
Tens of thousands of children were killed when the United States detonated two relatively small nuclear weapons (by today’s standard) over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
Many were instantly reduced to ash and vapour. Others died in agony minutes, hours, days or weeks after the attacks from burn and blast injuries or acute radiation sickness. Countless more died years or even decades later from radiation-related cancers and other illnesses. Leukaemia – cancer of the blood – was especially prevalent among the young.
In Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the scenes of devastation were apocalyptic: Playgrounds scattered with the dead bodies of young girls and boys. Mothers cradling their lifeless babies. Children with their intestines hanging out of their bellies and strips of skin dangling from their limbs.
At some of the schools close to ground zero, the entire student population of several hundred perished in an instant. At others, there were but a few survivors. In Hiroshima, thousands of school students were working outside to create firebreaks on the morning of the attack. Approximately 6,300 of them were killed.
Those children who, by chance, escaped death carried with them severe physical and psychological scars throughout their lifetimes. What they witnessed and experienced on 6 August and 9 August 1945 and in the days that followed was permanently seared into their memories.
Thousands of children lost one or both parents, as well as siblings. Some “A-bomb orphans” were left to roam the streets, with orphanages exceeding capacity.
Many of the babies who were in their mothers’ wombs at the time of the atomic bombings were also harmed as a result of their exposure to ionising radiation. They had a greater risk of dying soon after birth or suffering from congenital abnormalities such as brain damage and microcephaly, as well as cancers and other illnesses later in life.
Pregnant women in Hiroshima and Nagasaki also experienced higher rates of spontaneous abortions and stillbirths.
In communities around the world exposed to fallout from nuclear testing, children have experienced similar harm from radiation.
Since 1945, nuclear-armed states have conducted more than two thousand nuclear test explosions at dozens of locations, dispersing radioactive material far and wide
Among the general population, children and infants have been the most severely affected, due to their higher vulnerability to the effects of ionising radiation. Young children are three to five times more susceptible to cancer in the long term than adults from a given dose of radiation, and girls are particularly vulnerable.
In the Marshall Islands, where the United States conducted 67 nuclear tests, children played in the radioactive ash that fell from the sky, unaware of the danger. They called it “Bikini snow” – a reference to the atoll where many of the explosions took place. It burned their skin and eyes, and they quickly developed symptoms of acute radiation sickness.
For decades after the tests, women in the Marshall Islands gave birth to severely deformed babies at unusually high rates. Those born alive rarely survived more than a few days. Some had translucent skin and no discernible bones. They would refer to them as “jellyfish babies”, for they could scarcely be recognised as human beings.
Similar stories have been told by people living downwind or downstream of nuclear test sites in the United States, Kazakhstan, Ma’ohi Nui, Algeria, Kiribati, China, Australia and elsewhere.
We have a collective moral duty to honour the memories of the thousands of children killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as those harmed by the development and testing of nuclear weapons globally. And we must pursue the goal of a nuclear-weapon-free world with determination and urgency, lest there be any more victims, young or old.
Under international humanitarian law and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, governments have a legal obligation to protect children against harm in armed conflict. To fulfil this obligation, it is imperative that they work together now to eliminate the scourge of nuclear weapons from the world.
In this report, we describe how nuclear weapons are uniquely harmful to children, based on the experiences of children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and those living near nuclear test sites. We share their first-hand testimonies and depictions of the toll of nuclear weapons on their lives. And we explain how the ever-present fear of nuclear war – the possibility that entire cities might be destroyed at any given moment – causes psychological harm to children everywhere.
Finally, we make an urgent appeal to all governments to protect current and future generations of children by eliminating nuclear weapons, via the landmark UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which entered into force in 2021.
Key Findings
So long as nuclear weapons exist in the world, there is a very real risk that they will be used again, and that risk at present appears to be increasing.
In the event of their use, it is all but certain that many thousands of children – perhaps hundreds of thousands or more – would be counted among the dead and injured, and they would suffer in unique ways and out of proportion to the rest of the population.
In a nuclear attack, children would be more likely than adults:
To die from burn injuries, as their skin is thinner and more delicate and burns deeper, more quickly and at a lower temperature;- To die from blast injuries, given the relative frailty of their smaller bodies;
- To die from acute radiation sickness, as they have more cells that are growing and dividing rapidly and are significantly more vulnerable to radiation effects;
- To be unable to free themselves from collapsed and burning buildings or take other steps in the aftermath that would increase their chances of survival;
- To suffer from leukaemia, solid cancers, strokes, heart attacks and other illnesses years later as a result of the delayed effects of radiation damage to their cells; and
- To suffer privation in the aftermath of the attacks, as well as psychological trauma leading to mental disorders and suicide.
Furthermore, babies who were in their mothers’ wombs at the time of the attack would be at greater risk of:
Death soon after birth or in early childhood;- Microcephaly, accompanied by intellectual disability, given the higher vulnerability of the developing brain to radiation damage;
- Other developmental abnormalities;
- Growth impairment due to the reduced functioning of the thyroid; and
- Cancers and other radiation-related illnesses during childhood or later in life.
These horrifying realities should have profound implications for policy-making in countries that currently possess nuclear weapons or those that support their retention as part of military alliances.
They should also prompt organisations dedicated to the protection of children and the promotion of their rights to work to address the grave global threat posed by nuclear weapons.
While children played no part in developing these doomsday devices, it is children who would suffer the most in the event of their future use – one of the myriad reasons why such weapons must be urgently eliminated.
Tim Wright is Treaty Coordinator of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.
This is the Executive Summary from the longer report, The Impact of Nuclear Weapons on Children, by Tim Wright and published by ICAN, which can be found in full on the ICAN website. It is republished with permission of the author.
1 This Month
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (346)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
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 
