nuclear-news

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

Estimating the Chernobyl death toll from radiation – rubbishy opinions from “Pro Nuclear Environmentalists”

Chernobyl 1986Radiation harm deniers? Pro-nuclear environmentalists and the Chernobyl death toll Jim Green, The Ecologist, 7 April 2016,  With few if any exceptions, self-styled pro-nuclear environmentalists peddle flapdoodle and tommyrot regarding the Chernobyl death toll.

 Before considering their misinformation, a brief summary of credible positions and scientific studies regarding the Chernobyl cancer death toll (for detail see this earlier article in The Ecologist).

 Epidemiological studies are of course important but they’re of limited use in estimating the overall Chernobyl death toll. The effects of Chernobyl, however large or small, are largely lost in the statistical noise of widespread cancer incidence and mortality.

The most up-to-date scientific review is the TORCH-2016 report written by radiation biologist Dr Ian Fairlie. Dr Fairlie sifts through a vast number of scientific papers and points to studies indicative of Chernobyl impacts: an increased incidence of radiogenic thyroid cancers in Austria; an increased incidence of leukemia among sub-populations in ex-Soviet states (and possibly other countries ‒ more research needs to be done); increases in solid cancers, leukemia and thyroid cancer among clean-up workers; increased rates of cardiovascular disease and stroke that might be connected to Chernobyl (more research needs to be done); a large study revealing statistically significant increases in nervous system birth defects in highly contaminated areas in Russia, similar to the elevated rates observed in contaminated areas in Ukraine; and more.

Without for a moment dismissing the importance of the epidemiological record, let alone the importance of further research, suffice it here to note that there is no way that one could even begin to estimate the total Chernobyl death toll from the existing body of studies.

 Estimates of collective radiation exposure are available ‒ for example the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) estimates a total collective dose of 600,000 person-Sieverts over 50 years from Chernobyl fallout. And the collective radiation dose can be used to estimate the death toll using the Linear No Threshold (LNT) model.

 If we use the IAEA’s collective radiation dose estimate, and a risk estimate derived from LNT (0.1 cancer deaths per person-Sievert), we get an estimate of 60,000 cancer deaths. Sometimes a risk estimate of 0.05 is used to account for the possibility of decreased risks at low doses and/or low dose rates ‒ in other words, 0.05 is the risk estimate when applying a ‘dose and dose rate effectiveness factor’ or DDREF of two. That gives an estimate of 30,000 deaths.

 Any number of studies (including studies published in peer-reviewed scientific literature) use LNT ‒ or LNT with a DDREF ‒ to estimate the Chernobyl death toll. These studies produce estimates ranging from 9,000 cancer deaths (in the most contaminated parts of the former Soviet Union) to 93,000 cancer deaths (across Europe).

 Those are the credible estimates of the cancer death toll from Chernobyl. None of them are conclusive ‒ far from it ‒ but that’s the nature of the problem we’re dealing with. Moreover, LNT may underestimate risks. The 2006 report of the US National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation (BEIR) states: “The committee recognizes that its risk estimates become more uncertain when applied to very low doses. Departures from a linear model at low doses, however, could either increase or decrease the risk per unit dose.”

 So the true Chernobyl cancer death toll could be lower or higher than the LNT-derived estimate of 60,000 deaths ‒ a point that needs emphasis and constant repetition since the nuclear industry and its supporters frequently conflate an uncertain long-term death toll with a long-term death toll of zero.

 Another defensible position is that the long-term Chernobyl cancer death toll is unknown and unknowable because of the uncertainties associated with the science. The UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) states (p.64):

“The Committee has decided not to use models to project absolute numbers of effects in populations exposed to low radiation doses from the Chernobyl accident, because of unacceptable uncertainties in the predictions. It should be stressed that the approach outlined in no way contradicts the application of the LNT model for the purposes of radiation protection, where a cautious approach is conventionally and consciously applied.”

 Pro-nuclear environmentalists

 So there are two defensible positions regarding the Chernobyl cancer death toll ‒ estimates based on collective dose estimates (with or without a DDREF or a margin of error in either direction), and UNSCEAR’s position that the death toll is uncertain.

 A third position ‒ unqualified claims that the Chernobyl death toll was just 50 or so, comprising some emergency responders and a small percentage of those who later suffered from thyroid cancer ‒ should be rejected as dishonest or uninformed spin from the nuclear industry and some of its scientifically-illiterate supporters……..www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987515/radiation_harm_deniers_pronuclear_environmentalists_and_the_chernobyl_death_toll.html

April 8, 2016 Posted by | radiation, Reference, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Radioactivity in the Ocean: Diluted, But Far from Harmless

 Environment 360 7 April 2011  With contaminated water from Japan’s crippled Fukushima nuclear complex continuing to pour into the Pacific, scientists are concerned about how that radioactivity might affect marine life. Although the ocean’s capacity to dilute radiation is huge, signs are that nuclear isotopes are already moving up the local food chain. by Elizabeth Grossman Over the past half-century, the world has seen its share of incidents in which radioactive material has been dumped or discharged into the oceans. A British nuclear fuels plant has repeatedly released radioactive waste into the Irish Sea, a French nuclear reprocessing plant has discharged similar waste into the English Channel, and for decades the Soviets dumped large quantities of radioactive material into the Arctic Ocean, Kara Sea, and Barents Sea. That radioactive material included reactors from at least 16 Soviet nuclear-powered submarines and icebreakers, and large amounts of liquid and solid nuclear waste from USSR military bases and weapons plants.

Still, the world has never quite seen an event like the one unfolding now off the coast of eastern Japan, in which thousands of tons of radioactively contaminated water from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant are pouring directly into the ocean. And though the vastness of the ocean has the capacity to dilute nuclear contamination, signs of spreading radioactive material are being found off Japan, including the discovery of elevated concentrations of radioactive cesium and iodine in small fish several dozen miles south of Fukushima, and high levels of radioactivity in seawater 25 miles offshore.

How this continuing contamination will affect marine life, or humans, is still unclear. But scientists agree that the governments of Japan, the United States, and other nations on the Pacific Rim need to ramp up studies of how far this contamination might spread and in what concentrations.

“Given that the Fukushima nuclear power plant is on the ocean, and with leaks and runoff directly to the ocean, the impacts on the ocean will exceed those of Chernobyl, which was hundreds of miles from any sea,” said Ken Buesseler, senior scientist in marine chemistry at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. “My biggest concern is the lack of information. We still don’t know the whole range of radioactive compounds that have been released into the ocean, nor do we know their distribution. We have a few data points from the Japanese — all close to the coast — but to understand the full impact, including for fisheries, we need broader surveys and scientific study of the area.”

Buessler and other experts say this much is clear: Both short-lived radioactive elements, such as iodine-131, and longer-lived elements — such as cesium-137, with a half-life of 30 years — can be absorbed by phytoplankton, zooplankton, kelp, and other marine life and then be transmitted up the food chain, to fish, marine mammals, and humans. Other radioactive elements — including plutonium, which has been detected outside the Fukushima plant — also pose a threat to marine life. A key question is how concentrated will the radioactive contamination be. Japanese officials hope that a temporary fishing ban off the northeastern Japanese coast will be enough to avert any danger to human health until the flow of radioactive water into the sea can be stopped…….

The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has reported that seawater containing radioactive iodine-131 at 5 million times the legal limit has been detected near the plant. According to the Japanese news service, NHK, a recent sample also contained 1.1 million times the legal level of radioactive cesium-137.

Studies from previous releases of nuclear material in the Irish, Kara and Barents Seas, as well as in the Pacific Ocean, show that such radioactive material does travel with ocean currents, is deposited in marine sediment, and does climb the marine food web. In the Irish Sea — where the British Nuclear Fuels plant at Sellafield in the northwestern United Kingdom released radioactive material over many decades, beginning in the 1950s — studies have found radioactive cesium and plutonium concentrating significantly in seals and porpoises that ate contaminated fish. Other studies have shown that radioactive material from Sellafield and from the nuclear reprocessing plant at Cap de la Hague in France have been transported to the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. A study published in 2003 found that a substantial part of the world’s radioactive contamination is in the marine environment.

But what impact this radioactive contamination has on marine life and humans is still unclear. Even the mass dumping of nuclear material by the Soviets in the Arctic has not been definitively shown to have caused widespread harm to marine life. That may be because containment vessels around some of the dumped reactors are preventing the escape of radiation. A lack of comprehensive studies by the Russians in the areas where nuclear waste was dumped also has hampered understanding. Two events in the early 1990s — a die-off of seals in the Barents Sea and White Sea from blood cancer, and the deaths of millions of starfish, shellfish, seals and porpoises in the White Sea — have been variously attributed by Russian scientists to pollution or nuclear contamination.

How the radioactive materials released from the Fukushima plants will behave in the ocean will depend on their chemical properties and reactivity, explained Ted Poston, a ecotoxicologist with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, a U.S. government facility in Richland, Washington. If the radionuclides are in soluble form, they will behave differently than if they are absorbed into particles, said Poston. Soluble iodine, for example, will disperse rather rapidly. But if a radionuclide reacts with other molecules or gets deposited on existing particulates — bits of minerals, for example — they can be suspended in the water or, if larger, may drop to the sea floor.

“If particulates in the water column are very small they will move with the current,” he explained. “If bigger or denser, they can settle in sediment.”…….http://e360.yale.edu/feature/radioactivity_in_the_ocean_diluted_but_far_from_harmless/2391/

March 23, 2016 Posted by | oceans, radiation | 1 Comment

Japanese Government Takes Grave Risks with Radiation Exposure

radiation-warningflag-japanHow Much Is Too Much? Japanese Government Takes Grave Risks with Radiation Exposure  http://www.stuarthsmith.com/how-much-is-too-much-japanese-government-takes-grave-risks-with-radiation-exposure/  28 Feb 16 Japan’s nuclear crisis isn’t going away – and long-term health impacts from the radiation are now a grave concern as the situation continues to escalate. Dozens of repair workers at the reeling Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant have already been exposed to radiation levels well beyond the country’s legal yearly dose limit. So far, the highest specific exposures reported are from two workers who received – on one day alone – radiation doses of more than three times the internationally recognized annual occupational exposure limit. Reports say the workers had severe rashes on the parts of their bodies exposed to radioactive water. Those troubling revelations prompted an even more troubling response from the Japanese government. In a move that is certain to stunt workers’ lives and potentially plague future generations with increased cancer rates, Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare has lifted the internationally recognized 50-millisievert (mSv) yearly cap on occupational exposure. That specific 50-mSv limit is recognized as the lowest dose that can trigger cancer in adults. It is most definitely not an arbitrary number to be manipulated by short-sighted governments – not even during times of crisis.

Japan’s decision to abolish the cap is just the latest bombshell in a series of potentially devastating policy changes made in recent weeks, coming on the heels of government officials upping the yearly legal limit of 100 mSv in “emergency situations” to 250 mSv for workers at the Fukushima plant. To put that in perspective,

Continue reading →

February 29, 2016 Posted by | Japan, radiation, Reference | Leave a comment

Leukaemia risk increased in exposure even to low dose radiation – World Health Organisation

logo WHOEven low doses of radiation increase risk of dying from leukaemia in nuclear workers, says IARC  http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2015/pdfs/pr235_E.pdf  Lyon, France, 22 June 2015 – A study coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization, shows that protracted exposure to low doses of ionizing radiation can cause leukaemia. The study, published today in The Lancet Haematology, shows that the risk of death from leukaemia increases linearly with the radiation dose.

 “To date, this study provides the most precise evaluation of the risk of developing leukaemia linked to the protracted low doses of radiation received by nuclear workers throughout their careers,” says IARC researcher Dr Ausrele Kesminiene, a study co-author. “It shows that the nuclear workers we studied have a small increase in the risk of dying from leukaemia as their exposure to radiation increases.”
 Low-dose exposures are typical of environmental or occupational exposures, such as exposure of nuclear workers at their workplace, but also of medical exposures, such as patients undergoing multiple computed tomography (CT) scans through medical diagnostic procedures. The study Based on the strongest evidence currently available, the International Nuclear Workers Study (INWORKS), a collaboration1 among international partners, evaluated the exposures of more than 300 000 nuclear workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the USA over a period of time between 1943 and 2005. The study assessed the risk of developing certain cancers, such as leukaemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma.
The results 
The study results highlight strong evidence for a positive association between exposure to ionizing radiation and risk of death from leukaemia and show that the risk of leukaemia increases linearly with radiation dose. 

Continue reading →

February 19, 2016 Posted by | 2 WORLD, radiation, Reference | Leave a comment

Official Canadian report reveals Fukushima radioactive iodine in rain reached West Coast of America

Official Report: West Coast hit with 220,000,000 atoms per liter of Iodine-129 in rain after Fukushima — 15 Million year half-life — Detected in aquifer that supplies drinking water to large number of people — “Transported rapidly” to Canada and US — Elevated levels continued for many months http://enenews.com/official-report-west-coast-hit-220000000-atoms-liter-iodine-129-rain-after-fukushima-15-million-year-half-life-detected-groundwater-transported-rapidly-japan-west-coast-canada-elevated-lev


Matt Herod, Univ, of Ottawa Ph.D Candidate, Dec 21, 2015 (emphasis added): A recently published paper (by myself and colleagues from uOttawa and Environment Canada) investigates… [Iodine-129] which was released by the Fukushima-Daichii [sic] Nuclear Accident… Within 6 days of the FDNA 129I concentrations in Vancouver precipitation increased 5-15 times… sampling of groundwater revealed slight increases in 129I… The results in rain show an increase in 129I concentrations of up to 220 million atoms/L… 129I anomalies [in groundwater wells], which occurred exactly when the recharge age predicted they would, suggests that some of the 129I deposited by Fukushima was reaching the wells… [P]ulses of elevated 129I occurred for another several months. Elevated 129I concentrations were measured in two wells… indicating that 129I from Fukushima can be traced into groundwater… [M]odeling has shown that 129I can be rapidly transported to the water table…

Scientists from Univ. of Ottawa’s Dept. of Earth Science and Environment Canada (Government of Canada), Dec 2015: The atmospheric transport of iodine-129 from Fukushima to British Columbia, Canada and its deposition and transport into groundwater

  • The Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear accident (FDNA) released iodine-129 (15.7 million year half-life)… The mean pre-accident 129I concentration in rain was [31,000,000 atoms/L]… following the FDNA, 129I values increased to [211,000,000 atoms/L]… [P]ulses ofelevated 129I continued for several months…
  • The 129I in shallow… groundwater showed measurable variability through March 2013 with an average of [3,200,000 atoms/L]… coincident with modeled travel times…
  • Radionuclides released from the FDNA have been detected across the globe… [R]eleases of 129I and 131I… travel great distances…
  • The Abbotsford-Sumas Aquifer… spans the Canada–U.S. border between [B.C., Canada and Washington, US] and supplies ∼120,000 people with drinking water…
  • A pulse of 129I in precipitation with maximum concentrations of [211,000,000 atoms/L] in Vancouver and [221,000,000 atoms/L] at Saturna Island was observed 6 days following the FDNA. A value of [311,000,000 atoms/L] was also measured during the first week of July…
  • The high 129I concentrations while the FDNA was ongoing are attributed to the rapid trans-Pacific transport of 129I from Fukushima… This response in 129I concentrations shows that radionuclides from Fukushima were transported rapidly from Japan to the west coast of Canada and the US… [Sampling from Washington State], which is a composite of rainfall events spanning 15 March 2011 to 16 April 2011shows a significantly elevated 129I concentration of [95,000,000 atoms/L]…
  • There was a spike in 129I concentration observed in the precipitation sample from the period of 1 July 2011 to 8 July 2011 [which] rose to [311,000,000 atoms/L]… a substantially higher concentration than any other sample… As monitoring at Fukushima detected no pulse of 129I in precipitation in July… this spike is likely due to a… nuclear fuel reprocessing facility. Modeling of the air parcel back trajectories… for the sampling period shows air mass trajectories from Hawaii, north Japan, and Russia…
  • The initial increase in 129I concentration at the water table appeared within ∼95 days, with a maximum concentration of [10,500,000 atoms/L]…
  • In the model cases, 129I reached the water table very rapidly…
  • Groundwater 129I concentrations in two nearby wells showed minor anomalies over the sampling period which could be due to rapid infiltration of the FDNA atmospheric 129Isignal… [M]odeling shows that it was possible for a component of the 129I deposited by the FDNA to be conducted rapidly from the ground surface to the water table… We conclude that it is possible that a fraction of 129I from the FDNA is transported conservatively in this aquifer via preferential flow paths to the water table…

See also: Official in Canada advises public not to drink rainwater coming from Fukushima

And: Rain with 20,000,000 particles of Iodine-131 per liter fell on US (VIDEO)

February 19, 2016 Posted by | environment, NORTH AMERICA, radiation | Leave a comment

Fukushima radiation monitored by citizen science

How Citizen Science Changed the Way Fukushima Radiation is Reported, National Geographic  by Ari Beser in Fulbright National Geographic Stories on February 13, 2016 Tokyo – “It appears the world-changing event didn’t change anything, and it’s disappointing,”said Pieter Franken, a researcher at Keio University in Japan (Wide Project), the MIT Media Lab (Civic Media Centre), and co-founder of Safecast, a citizen-science network dedicated to the measurement and distribution of accurate levels of radiation around the world, especially in Fukushima. “There was a chance after the disaster for humanity to innovate our thinking about energy, and that doesn’t seem like it’s happened.  But what we can change is the way we measure the environment around us.”

Franken and his founding partners found a way to turn their email chain, spurred by the tsunami, into Safecast; an open-source network that allows everyday people to contribute to radiation-monitoring……….

Since their first tour of Koriyama, with the help of a successful Kickstarter campaign, Safecast’s team of volunteers have developed the bGeigie handheld radiation monitor, that anyone can buy on Amazon.com and construct with suggested instructions available online. So far over 350 users have contributed 41 million readings, using around a thousand fixed, mobile, and crowd-sourced devices.

According to Franken, “We’re working with communities to install these sensors in people’s neighborhoods. We’re financed by donations only. We get donations so we put together a plan, volunteers provide space, and Internet access, and agree that the data collected are public.

“What we’ve come to determine in Fukushima is that radiation levels are spotty. They can vary from street corner to street corner. We’ve also been able to determine that the levels over the last five years have reduced, partly because of half life of cesium, and because of environmental factors. We’ve also seen an increase in official government data being released in a similar style to Safecast’s drive-by method versus spot checking.”

According to Franken, “There is no safe dose of radiation as it’s debated by scientists; the higher the level, the higher the risk is that it will trigger a cancer. Though, at low levels the risk is much smaller, it is not zero. ……..

One of the biggest problems in Fukushima is the anxiety and the uncertainty that people are suffering from the incident. I think what were doing is trying to alleviate that by giving them ways to educate themselves about the problem and giving them solutions where they can be empowered to do something about it, as a opposed to just going along with the current of the crisis.” http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2016/02/13/how-citizen-science-changed-the-way-fukushima-radiation-is-reported/

February 15, 2016 Posted by | 2 WORLD, Fukushima 2015, radiation | Leave a comment

Low dose ionising radiation takes its toll on living organisms – Timothy Mousseau

radiation-warningEven low radiation dose can take toll: scientist http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/2016/01/27/457138/Even-low.htm By Enru Lin, The China Post  TAIPEI, Taiwan–Animals exposed to even low doses of radiation suffer a higher incidence of physical abnormalities, a world-leading ecologist said in Taipei on Tuesday.  Timothy Mousseau, an ecologist at the University of South Carolina, is a pioneering expert on what radiation does to organisms.

For decades, he and his research team have studied Chernobyl, Ukraine — site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster in 1986 — and Fukushima in Japan.

Their studies found that radiation exposure had significant effects on local populations, for instance causing tumors, small brain sizes, sterility and cataracts in birds in Chernobyl.

No Safe Dose?

Findings indicate that radiation, even at low doses, can increase mortality rates and the incidence of physical abnormalities.

“There is no threshold below which there is no effect on organisms,” Mousseau said.

“We need to be very concerned not only about the consequences of nuclear accidents, but also the regular day-to-day operations of nuclear power plants, where radiation is released on a regular basis.”

Call for Taiwan Research

Mousseau was speaking on invitation at a press briefing and forum at the Legislative Yuan, where he was joined by three Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers including Tien Chiu-chin (田秋堇).

At the event, anti-nuclear activists called on the central government to commission an independent research team to study effects on people who live near Taiwan’s three operating nuclear power plants.

Birds, Butterflies First

Mousseau said his data suggested that some organisms were far more sensitive to radiation than others.

Studies from Chernobyl and Fukushima showed that the first significant effects of radiation occurred in the same taxonomic groups.

“Birds and butterflies are the two most sensitive groups — we saw immediate large responses in birds and butterflies in Fukushima,” he said.

Other animals, such as grasshoppers and spiders, are less susceptible to the effects of radiation.

On Humans

Meanwhile, there is insufficient research on the human population to make convincing assessments on the impact of low dose radiation.

Mousseau said that in the U.S., studies are thwarted when researchers can’t access the relevant health records.

“There are privacy issues related to health records that are so strong in the United States, and there is a lack of organization of the registries. That makes it very difficult to do solid, hard science,” he said.

January 30, 2016 Posted by | 2 WORLD, environment, health, radiation, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Injecting dogs with plutonium – to prove what?

Nuclear radiation, Kierkegaard, and the philosophy of denial, The Ecologist, Chris Busby 8th January 2016  “……….Injecting dogs with plutonium – to prove what?

HormesisSome years ago I was up against one of these hormesis geezers, a certain Dr Otto Raabe, in a court case in America. He was the expert for the defence. Raabe was in charge of the Beagle dog studies in New Mexico.

They injected these poor creatures with Plutonium, Radium or Strontium-90 and watched them develop bone cancer and leukemia. The doses were enormous, the number of dogs was small (cost). The whole place was contaminated with Plutonium, the particles hanging in the air like fairy dust. The burial site for the dogs is so radioactive it is fenced off as a US superfund site for decontamination.

Raabe’s thing was that he had mathematically converted beagle dogs into humans: you should just see his amazing three dimensional graphs (these guys love all that stuff). Well you can probably find them somewhere on the internet.

The best thing was that in one of his papers he discussed how difficult it was to do these beagle studies. He wrote that 12 (yes 12) of his control dogs (no injections of Plutonium) had unfortunately died of lung cancer and had to be removed from the analysis. What!!?

I checked out the rates of lung cancer in dogs (you can find everything on the web) and that was the end of Raabe. Low dose, you see. Fairy dust………..http://www.theecologist.org/essays/2986384/nuclear_radiation_kierkegaard_and_the_philosophy_of_denial.html

January 8, 2016 Posted by | radiation, Reference, USA | 1 Comment

America’s secret plutonium experiments on humans

Then there is the horrifying reality that these experiments were taking place in the shadow of Nazi Germany; some of the scientists involved in the radiation experiments were the very men whose earlier experimental designs had tormented prisoners of concentration camps. Welsome describes Operation Paperclip, conducted under the auspices of the U.S. government. Paperclip imported Nazi scientists and supported their work, helping to confer, in the words of scientist Joseph G. Hamilton, “a little of the Buchenwald touch” on American medicine.

This valuable work represents an elegy to lost ideals, lost health, and lost trust. One can only hope it will serve as a cautionary tale.


Book-Plutonium-FilesThe Plutonium Files: America’s secret medical experiments in the Cold War N Engl J Med 1999; 341:1941-1942 December 16, 1999  Harriet A. Washington

The Plutonium Files: America’s secret medical experiments in the Cold WarBy Eileen Welsome. 580 pp. New York, Dial Press, 1999. $26.95. ISBN: 0-385-31402-7

Amid the embarrassments of Monicamania and of multiple public mea culpas, the past few years have not been exemplary ones for American journalism. This fact makes the triumph of The Plutonium Files all the sweeter, because this superlative book is a reminder of the purpose of investigative journalism.

This richly detailed, subtly nuanced history of government-engineered radiation experiments on unwitting Americans is based on the Pulitzer-prize–winning series Eileen Welsome wrote for the Albuquerque Tribune. Welsome’s tenacious and resourceful detective work has unveiled the saga of a sordid, tragic, yet fascinating chapter in the history of American medical science. The book succeeds on many levels. It is a gripping exposé of governmental exploitation and of medicine’s moral failures in an era in which blind trust defined the normal relationship between physicians and patients.

Between April 1945, scant months before the bombing of Hiroshima, and July 1947, the scientists of the Manhattan Project followed the construction of the atomic bomb with a chilling second act: medical experimentation on hundreds of unsuspecting Americans. Continue reading →

January 4, 2016 Posted by | civil liberties, radiation, Reference, resources - print, secrets,lies and civil liberties, weapons and war | 4 Comments

Secret radiation experiments carried out on people

Some of the classified government experiments included:

Book Human Radiation Experiments* Exposing more than 100 Alaskan villagers to radioactive iodine during the 1960s.

* Feeding 49 retarded and institutionalised teenagers radioactive iron and calcium in their cereal during the years 1946-1954.

* Exposing about 800 pregnant women in the late 1940s to radioactive iron to determine the effect on the fetus.

* Injecting 7 newborns (six were Black) with radioactive iodine.

* Exposing the testicles of more than 100 prisoners to cancer-causing doses of radiation. This experimentation continued into the early 1970s.

* Exposing almost 200 cancer patients to high levels of radiation from cesium and cobalt. The AEC finally stopped this experiment in 1974.

* Administering radioactive material to psychiatric patients in San Francisco and to prisoners in San Quentin.

* Administering massive doses of full body radiation to cancer patients hospitalised at the General Hospital in Cincinnati, Baylor College in Houston, Memorial Sloan-Kettering in New York City, and the US Naval Hospital in Bethesda, during the 1950s and 1960s. The experiment provided data to the military concerning how a nuclear attack might affect its troops.

* Exposing 29 patients, some with rheumatoid arthritis, to total body irradiation (100-300 rad dose) to obtain data for the military. This was conducted at the University of California Hospital in San Francisco.


highly-recommendedThe Human Radiation Experiments By ALAN R. CANTWELL Jr., M.D.October 8, 2001 By   

—In preparing America for nuclear attack during the Cold War years following World War II, thousands of US citizens became the innocent victims of over 4,000 secret and classified radiation experiments conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and other government agencies, such as the Department of Defense, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the Public Health Service (now the CDC), the National Institutes of Health, the Veterans Administration (VA), the CIA, and NASA.

Millions of people were exposed to radioactive fallout from the continental testing of more than 200 atmospheric and underground nuclear weapons, and from the hundreds of secret releases of radiation into the environment. Over 200,000 “atomic vets” who worked closely with nuclear detonations at the Nevada test site during the 1950s and 1960s were especially vulnerable to radiation fallout.

Also affected were the thousands of so-called “downwinders”, who lived in nearby small towns in Nevada, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico. These downwinders (along with the animal populations) suffered the worst cumulative radioactive effects of fallout, along with a contaminated environment teeming with radioactive food and farm products. The plight of these poor country people exposed to government-induced radiation sickness has been recorded in Carole Gallagher’s remarkable photo-essay American Ground Zero: The Secret Nuclear War (The Free Press, 1993).

In reviewing declassified AEC records (now the Department of Energy) from the 1950s, Gallagher was shocked to discover one document that described the people downwind of the Nevada Test Site as “a low use segment of the population.” Her shock at such callous bigotry caused her to eventually move West to research, investigate and document those who lived closest to the Test Site, as well as workers at the site, and soldiers repeatedly exposed to nuclear bombs during the military tests.

Disinformation and Nuclear Fallout

In the nuclear arms race, government doctors and scientists brainwashed the public into believing low dose radiation was not harmful. Some officials even tried to convince people that “a little radiation is good for you.” Totally ignored was the knowledge that the radiation from nuclear fallout could lead to an increased risk of cancer, heart disease, neurological disorders, immune system disease, reproductive abnormalities, sterility, birth defects, and genetic mutations which could be passed on from generation to generation. The full extent of this radiation damage to the American public during the Cold War years will never be known. Continue reading →

January 4, 2016 Posted by | radiation, Reference, Religion and ethics, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Radiation Risk : Linear No Threshold (LNT) Model Tested

Radiation Risk: Linear No Threshold (LNT)  Model Tested

January 4, 2016 Posted by | radiation, YouTube | Leave a comment

How plutonium infiltrates the body’s cells

PuPlutonium Trojan Horse in the Body , Mining Awareness Plus, 26 Feb 15 Plutonium shares some important similarities with biologically important trivalent transition metals, especially iron. This could have importance from a material science point of view, as well.

“Plutonium tricks cells by ‘pretending’ to be iron
By Jared Sagoff July 8, 2011

Plutonium gets taken up by our cells much as iron does,…

Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory and Northwestern University have identified a new biological pathway by which plutonium finds its way into mammalian cells. The researchers learned that, to get into cells, plutonium acts like a ‘Trojan horse,’ duping a special membrane protein that is typically responsible for taking up iron.

This discovery may help enhance the safety of workers who deal with plutonium, as well as show the way to new ‘bio-inspired’ approaches for separating radioactive elements from other metals in used nuclear fuel.

Because the bodies of mammals have evolved no natural ability to recognize plutonium—the element was first produced in 1941—scientists were curious to know the cellular mechanisms responsible for its retention in the body. The researchers exposed adrenal cells from rats to minute quantities of plutonium to see how the cells accumulated the radioactive material.

Using the high-energy X-rays provided by Argonne’s Advanced Photon Source, the researchers were able to characterize a particular protein known as “transferrin,” which is responsible for bringing iron into cells. Each transferrin is made up of two subunits, known as N and C, that normally bind iron. When another protein—the transferrin receptor—recognizes both the N and C subunits, it admits the molecule to the cell. However, when both the N and C subunits contain plutonium, the transferrin receptor doesn’t recognize the protein and keeps it out.

Contrary to their expectations, the researchers discovered that in one of the mixed states—when an iron-containing N-subunit is combined with a plutonium-containing C-subunit—the resulting hybrid so closely resembles the normal iron protein that the uptake pathway is ‘tricked’ into allowing plutonium to enter the cell.

‘Although the interaction between plutonium and bodily tissues has been studied for a long time, this is the first conclusive identification of a specific pathway that allows for the introduction of plutonium into cells,’ said Mark Jensen, an Argonne chemist who led the research.

… The research was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science as well as by the National Institutes of Health.”http://www.anl.gov/articles/plutonium-tricks-cells-pretending-be-iron Author manuscript found here: “An iron-dependent and transferrin-mediated cellular uptake pathway for plutonium“, Mark P. Jensen et. al. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3462652/)

From the Jensen et. al. author manuscript: “… Pu is radiotoxic and is strongly retained by organisms1, Pu uptake from an accident, environmental contamination, or a nuclear or radiological attack can pose significant health risks. Plutonium localizes principally in the liver and skeleton in humans where it remains for decades2. It associates in vivo with the iron-containing proteins serum transferrin and ferritin3,4, but despite the danger of plutonium poisoning, the specific molecular-level pathways Pu travels to enter and localize in cells have never been identified2,5…”………. https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/02/26/plutonium-trojan-horse-in-the-body/

January 4, 2016 Posted by | radiation, Reference | Leave a comment

Scientists used X ray images to prove the ecosystem damage from ionising radiation

highly-recommendedtext ionisingThe X-Ray Images That Showed Midcentury Scientists How Radiation Affects an Ecosystem http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_vault/2015/12/28/how_midcentury_ecologists_used_x_ray_radioautographs_to_see_how_radiation.html  By Laura J. Martin In June 1947, biologists from the University of Washington collected a wrasse from the waters around Bikini Atoll, squished it against a photographic plate, and took an x-ray. The resulting image shocked them. Almost an entire year had passed since the United States had detonated “Able” and “Baker,” two fission bombs, at the atoll. The scientists involved in the Bikini Scientific Resurvey were certain that the expansive Pacific Ocean would have quickly diluted and dispersed any radioactive products from the 1946 detonations.

And yet here, in dazzling white, was radiation revealed. Bikini Atoll’s biota had absorbed the products of the explosions. More curious, still: the radioactivity was not distributed evenly across a fish’s body. It seemed to be concentrated in the digestive system.

The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission was the main funder of ecological research in the United States from World War II until the 1970s. Between 1946 and 1962, the United States exploded 105 atomic and nuclear weapons in these inhabited Pacific atolls, changing their ecology, as well as the science of ecology itself. During this time the Commission continued to contract ecologists from the University of Washington and other institutions to return to the proving grounds.

The first studies done by the University of Washington Radiation Ecology laboratory—assembled by the Manhattan Project under strict confidentiality in 1943—had reflected the Manhattan Project’s belief that the major hazard of atomic technology was prolonged exposure to external sources of highly penetrative gamma radiation. The biologists burned specimens to ash and then passed those ashes through a Geiger counter. But during the Bikini Scientific Resurvey, they decided to employ a relatively new and more efficient method, “radioautography,” based on the assumption that a radioactive sample placed against photographic film would produce a brighter or darker image, depending on how much radiation reacted with the film.

Over the next two decades, such radioautographs led to the emergence of the idea that radiation is “biomagnified” as it moves up the food chain. This concept wouldprove essential to convincing legislators to ban DDT and restrict other pollutants. Interconnections among species—the objects of abstract flow charts in the 1930s —became brilliantly visible.

A number of other photos from the Pacific Surveys can be viewed at the University of Washington’s Digital Collection at this link.

Laura J. Martin is an environmental historian. She is a Ziff Environmental Fellow at the Harvard University Center for the Environment and a postdoc in the Department of the History of Science. Visit her website or find her on Twitter.

December 30, 2015 Posted by | 2 WORLD, environment, radiation, Reference | Leave a comment

USA: Your town’s radiation levels this week

radiation-warningFlag-USAFukushima Update: “Your Radiation This Week, BEFORE IT’S NEWS, Dec 19 to Dec 26, 2015″ By Bob Nichols

– “Good Day, this is “Your Radiation This Week.” These are the recorded Radiation Highs that affected some people this week around the United States.
 You should compare the Rad numbers directly with the Rad numbers in with my articles listed on the VT Author’s Page here.
These are the American cities that exceeded 1,000 CPM this week. Thirty-two (32) American cities topped 1,000 CPM this week. There were Thirty-one (31) Cities last week.There are Nine American cities between 900 and 999 CPM. Unfortunately, the Rad Contagion has swelled the American cities between 900 and 999 CPM to Eighteen Cities. Stay Alert and take all appropriate precautions.
The Rad poison has spread all over the country and settled in for the long haul. The most prevalent isotope, Cesium 137, takes a daunting 600 years to decay to infinitesimal levels. It is not even particularly long-lived radiation. The Cesium will remain, though; we won’t.
ll Radiation Counts reported are partial Counts. Uncounted types of radiation include Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Neutron and X-Ray radiation. Uncounted radiation, if added, makes the actual Count higher and more dangerous. The highest radiation reporting city is listed first, the least radioactive city reporting is listed last. All reporting cities are above normal. I just could not overlook Washington, DC 375 CPM subtotal Gamma and Beta for a High Rad reading. This is not even a low for the District. The low Beta only reading was 0nly 79 CPM. The benefits of living in Washington, DC are never ending and far surpass those of Normal men and women living in other cities, towns and metropolitan areas – even New York. NY City recorded a 764 CPM Radioactive High this week.

Normal Radiation is 5 to 20 CPM. 50 CPM is an alert level.
RADIATION  CPM* • TIMES NORMAL BACKGROUND LEVEL • CITY, STATE • TYPE (

1,485 CPM,  297 Times Normal,  Miami, FL.  Beta, Gamma.
1,397 CPM,  279.4 Times Normal,  Little Rock, AR  Beta, Gamma.
1,387 CPM,  277.4 Times Normal,  Colorado Springs, CO.  Beta, Gamma.
1,311 CPM,  262.2 Times Normal,  Lincoln, NE  Beta, Gamma.
1,233 CPM,  246.6 Times Normal,  Omaha, NE.  Beta, Gamma.
1,226 CPM,  245.2 Times Normal,  Portland, ME  Beta, Gamma.
1,222 CPM,  244.4 Times Normal,  Spokane, WA.  Beta, Gamma.
1,208 CPM,  241.6 Times Normal,  Amarillo, TX.  Like it Never Existed
1,191 CPM,  238.2 Times Normal,  Bismark, ND.  Gamma, Beta.
1,185 CPM,  237 Times Normal,  Raleigh, NC.  Beta, Gamma.
1,178 CPM,  235.6 Times Normal,  Bakersfield, CA  Beta, Gamma.
1,162 CPM,  232.4 Times Normal,  Navajo Lake, NM  Beta, Gamma.
1,160 CPM,  232 Times Normal,  Billings, MT  Beta, Gamma.
1,153 CPM,  230.6 Times Normal,  Pierre, SD  Beta, Gamma.
1,140 CPM,  228 Times Normal,  Tucson, AZ  Beta, Gamma.
1,133 CPM,  226.6 Times Normal, Idaho Falls, ID  Beta, Gamma.
1,124 CPM,  224.8 Times Normal,  El Paso, TX.  Beta, Gamma.
1,122 CPM,  224.4 Times Normal,  Los Angeles, CA.  Beta, Gamma.
1,122 CPM,  224.4 Times Normal,  San Diego, CA.  Beta, Gamma.
1,119 CPM,  223.8 Times Normal,  Anaheim, CA.  Beta, Gamma.
1,093 CPM,  218.6 Times Normal,  Kearney, NE.  Beta, Gamma.
1,078 CPM,  215.6 Times Normal,  Worcester, MA.  Beta, Gamma.
1,060 CPM,  212 Times Normal,  Kansas City, KS  Gamma, Beta.
1,052 CPM,  210.4 Times Normal,  Louisville, KY  Beta, Gamma.
1,049 CPM,  209.8 Times Normal,  Wichita, KS.  Beta, Gamma.
1,046 CPM,  209.2 Times Normal,  San Bernardino County  Beta, Gamma.
1,044 CPM,  208.8 Times Normal,  St George, UT.  Beta, Gamma.
1,041 CPM,  208.2 Times Normal,  Oklahoma City, OK.  Beta, Gamma.
1,039 CPM,  207.8 Times Normal,  Yuma, AZ.  Beta, Gamma.
1,036 CPM,  207.2 Times Normal,  Laredo, TX.  Beta, Gamma.
1,032 CPM,  206.4 Times Normal,  Memphis, TN  Beta, Gamma.
1,029 CPM,  205.8 Times Normal,  Salt Lake City, UT. Beta, Gamma.
375 CPM,    75 Times Normal,  Washington DC  High Beta, Gamma.
79 CPM,     15.8 Times Normal,  Washington DC  Low Gamma.
Fresno, California has stopped reporting for the time being or permanently; it is not clear which. We’ll see what happens. In the meantime as a reminder, Fresno’s Five year Radioactive High was 2,504 CPM.
Most Radioactive City in America: Miami, Florida wins and is the most radioactive City in the nation this week. There is no prize. Little Rock, Arkansas is close behind in the CPM race to the end.◆
◆
Baby Pulse Spikes Rad Monitors in US: ..……
◆
Yuma, Phoenix and Tucson Go High, Are Shutdown: ……
St. Louis and the Rad problem:………
Amarillo: A word about Amarillo, Texas. Since we all know what was there, there no need to go into all that. The Rad report from EPA and all the historical Rad records are totally gone, totally blown away. There is nothing left to report the Rad numbers now or in the past; the EPA records vanished overnight. The town is fine, omitting the obvious, as far as I know. http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-liberal/2015/12/fukushima-update-your-radiation-this-week-dec-19-to-dec-26-2015-2519688.html

December 30, 2015 Posted by | environment, radiation, Reference, USA | Leave a comment

“Radiation Sensors in Major U.S. Cities Turned Off By EPA

highly-recommendedtext ionisingBEFORE IT’S NEWS, Dec 19 to Dec 26, 2015″ By Bob Nichols”………“Radiation Sensors in Major U.S. Cities Turned Off By EPA”: Billings, Montana on Oct 16, 2015 was reading a Combined Beta and Gamma Rad of 1,227 Beta and 703 Gamma for a Combined reading of 1,930CPM. The Beta Rad unit stopped publicly reporting, then four (4) days later on Oct 20, 2015 at 12:37:25 the unit came to life again. It’s… ahh, personality had changed, though. The new Beta and Gamma reading was 926 Beta and 401 Gamma. The new Combined radiation number on Oct 20 was 1,227 CPM Combined. The Combined reading was 603 CPM less than it was 4 days before. There was no Note or Comment on the missing four days. It was a 4 Day Rad Gap and an unexplained disappearance of 603CPM. The disappearing CPM was comprised of 302 CPM Gamma and 301 CPM Beta. In the next 4 Hours the Combined CPM eroded another 550 CPM for a total CPM Loss of 1,153 CPM. Billings, Montana today is barely in the List of cities above 1000 CPM. Billings is now 23rd on the list and reads 1,101 CPM. The missing Radiation remains “Unaccounted For.” Presumably it [the radiation] did not go to the Moon; therefore, it is on Earth somewhere now. (So, they apparently tried to “rig” the system and failed, so instead turned it all off. Just my hunch… – CP)
◆
German Analysis of Certain Isotopes after Meltdown: Hold on to your hat… In 1992 Germany calculated that in reactor meltdowns like Fukushima Daiichi the radioactive isotope Strontium 90 would aggressively poison the environment for 109.2 years and then decline slowly over the next 273 years. Of course, we will ALL be long dead by then. Other deadly Rad isotopes put Strontium 90’s generous life span to shame. The German study is here for those brave enough to tackle it. Source: The IAEA: Dispersion of radionuclides and radiation exposure after leaching by groundwater of a solidified core-concrete melt by Bayer, A.; Tromm, W.; Al-Omari, I. (Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (Germany)) from 8. International congress of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA8)
Isotope Count reporting: These CPM numbers do not represent the actual radiation counts in your radiation weather this week. It is higher [or worse] than these government certified partial reports say. Use these report numbers as your Starting Point in adding up your daily, monthly and annual exposure from your Rad Weather. Most radiation monitors report on the radioactive presence of Cesium 137 at the detector. YRTW will report on “the secrets the Pros use” in estimating the actual Total radiation counts. It is not a pretty picture. Squeamish readers may want to turn to other Veterans Today articles reporting on usual things like wars and people getting blown up by an actual named enemy you can see in pictures.
Day One out of the reactor use a news reported Cesium multiplier of 150 Times. After 15 days outside the reactor the multiplier is still approximately 100 times the Cesium Twins. Take all appropriate Rad precautions. A second Multiplier is for Rad particles that have been outside the reactor for ten years or more. The Total radiation declines to approximately Five (5) Times the Cesium level. The Lethality is still increasing though. Here’s how you can calculate an estimate of your Total Rad today: Use a reported account of the Cesium 137/134 CPM in your area and Multiply Times 5. Another way to say it is:
Cs137/134 CPM X 5.0 = Total Radiation released in CPM
Radiation types commonly measured by radiation monitors include Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Neutron and X-Ray radiation. Only Beta and Gamma are reported by the EPA and here on YRTW. There are 1,944 other individual Rad elements, only a few are ever mentioned in articles. In short: The newer disaster’s Cesium 137/134 radiation CPM that is conveniently echoed by local and national news outlets, tells you right away by simple Multiplication how big the disaster really is, even if they are lying. At least it gets you closer than “There is no danger to the public.” That would be You. Think of it as the insider’s secret code. Multiply away! That’s it. No magic or VooDoo, just the facts as close as you can calculate it. However, provided Cesium 134 is present you are experiencing a recent radioactive release and all bets are off. Why is that? Because the two Rad Isotopes decay at greatly different rates. The relatively long lived Cs 137 is half gone in 30.1 years. The shorter lived Cesium 134 is half gone in only 2.06 years. As a result the Multiplier changes very rapidly. Good Luck.
The Lethality goes up for 35 years; then declines slightly and hangs steady for millions of years, for that release. New releases start a new clock all over again. Regrettably for all normal Humans, that is a bunch of generations. The end result is extinction, of course.  Everybody is included; no one is left out. Truthfully, it is a bummer and I know of no variety of radiation-exempt Human Species.
 
How often do radioactive releases occur? The answer is: Radioactive releases occur almost daily in most reactors. This venting does complicate your health and your estimated Rad readings. May you always have better Rad Weather; but, that’s not likely.”

December 30, 2015 Posted by | radiation, Reference, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »