Joined: 21 Aug 2009
| Post subject: Contamination/The Jetstream/Precautions/Treatments PAGE FULL
|The following represents some of The MediaLens Message Board and Twitter traffic on the subjects of radiological contamination, The Northern Jetstream and possible precautions against/treatments for exposure.
" http://squall.sfsu.edu/gif/jetstream_atl_init_00.gif (Daily Update) This train terminates here............." Posted by sandtrout2010
Quote: "The major jet streams on Earth are westerly winds (flowing west to east). Their paths typically have a meandering shape; jet streams may start, stop, split into two or more parts, combine into one stream, or flow in various directions including the opposite direction of most of the jet." From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_stream . Meaning that the Northern Jestream often dumps much of it's precipitation here.
Is this another "polar thermal breakout" from the Arctic region to mid-latitudes ?
And did you realise that the same kind of thing has been happening at the South Pole, where there was a/some breakout of cold polar air over Pakistan and China during the last few months ?
After discussing the risk of major toxic pollution from the Japan multiple nuclear accident site, the conclusion was - if there is a plume of fallout, it will go out over the Pacific Ocean, minimising the risk.
What happens if the weather is crooked because of jet stream weirdness ?
I think we should be told.
The last thing we want is pulverised Plutonium airborne and heading for the West Coast of the United States or South Korea or China or...Mexico.
What I'm most concerned about is that if there is any kind of major radiological emission from the Fukushima Daiichi reactors and/or cooling/waste ponds, then a good deal of Japan is going to become uninhabitable due to the high toxicity of Plutonium and other nucleides/isotopes.
I do care what happens to the people in the Pacific, but I think that Japan itself the greatest damage, far, far more than the US of A." Posted by jo abbess.
"We cannot ignore the fact however that physics dictates that it is N.W Europe which will have much of any jetstream carried particles dumped on it. My emphasis here though is for "local consumption" in order to raise the awareness levels of our pitifully under-informed population......" Posted by sandtrout 2010
"Very low radiation detected on west coast: sources: Reuters"."who would know if lying?"
Posted by sandtrout2010 on March 18, 2011, 3:16 pm
"Immediate Right-to-Know" Posted by sandtrout2010 on March 18, 2011, 3:30 pm, in reply to ""Very low radiation detected on west coast: sources: Reuters"."who would know if lying?""
"This why we should be kept informed from the outset exactly how and where any radioactive contaminants might appear following any radiological accident (and of-course any human "nuclear activity" of any-kind).
The lack of information we get appears to be a function of the danger of the activity.
Why not build the back-up generators on stilts? Because we are so scared of the process already any risk assessment beyond this point becomes a physical impossibility."
Japanese finally admit that radiation leak is serious enough to kill people
Posted by pete f on March 18, 2011, 8:16 pm
"Possible Precautions Against and Treatments for Radiation Exposure
Posted by sandtrout2010 on March 17, 2011, 3:47 pm
Buy Kelp (iodine source and endocrine supporter).
Use crystal sea-salt in your cooking http://curezone.com/foods/salt/book_seasalts_hidden_powers.htm
Researchers found higher incidence in recovery from radiation exposure in the population of Nagasaki after the bomb, this was attributed to the relatively high level of salt intake and seaweeds in the coastal diet.
Also include foods containing trace elements and minerals (fresh or dried mushrooms are a good source, some like Ganoderma probably have a place in the "radiologists" pharmacy -a "radiologist" in this case being a physician who generally doesn't, rather than one who generally does-), and ensure your vitamin intake is at least at the level of the R.D.A, "active" cultures and mineral supplements should also be considered.
"Mushroom Immune Defence" and other similar products may be beneficial, also jiaogulan, quote"...
Quote: "Leticia's Amazing Story
About nine years ago, at the age of 58, she was diagnosed with cervical cancer. She underwent radiation therapy and received localized cobalt treatment inserted into her cervix. This made her extremely weak and sick. After two weeks of the treatments, Leticia decided she would rather die than undergo that horrible torture. Doctors gave her six months to live.
Resolving to do her best to fight the cancer, Leticia made whatever lifestyle improvements she could, becoming a vegetarian as well as endeavoring to purify her existence through meditation. After a year, the cancer had not advanced; however, she continued to feel sick and was always weak. Then a friend recommended a Chinese doctor, who told her about a Chinese herb, jiaogulan, which was known for helping cancer patients. He sent her a jiaogulan plant with his wife, who was visiting Thailand. Leticia grew the herb and made a tea from the dried leaves. The tea gave her energy and allowed her to sleep well. Gradually and steadily she regained her health. She is now sixty-five years old, healthy, happy, beautiful, and enjoying her grandchildren. She feels that without jiaogulan she would certainly be dead.
As a result of her experience with jiaogulan tea, she has expanded her pesticide-free, herb-growing capabilities to create a company that serves customers around the world with a pleasant tasting medicinal herb tea."" From Forum thread by Williamtheb
Teas and foods containing high levels of anti-oxidants are useful and bowel health is also essential, high-fibre foods should be considered.
Aloe Vera is a great detoxifier but there are others. Aloe Vera however rehydrates driving out toxins and replacing them with trace-elements, minerals and vitamins (including B12)."
Further to: "Herbs of Grace" Blog..............("most excellent")
Posted by sandtrout2010 on March 17, 2011, 4:05 pm, in reply to "Possible Precautions Against and Treatments for Radiation Exposure"
"With the recent earthquake in Japan, resulting in the instability of several nuclear reactors, many people have been asking what they can do to protect themselves from radiation exposure or poisoning, or what they can do to naturally detoxify their system if they are exposed. The following is a compilation of the research I have been able to find on ways to naturally and safely prevent and/or detoxify your body from radiation exposure/poisoning. I will start out by listing the various protocols that have been shown to be effective, then I will expand on the details.
1. Diet consisting mainly of brown rice, miso and seaweed
2. Other additions to the diet
· Spirulina, chlorella and the algaes (kelp, etc.)
· Brassica vegetables and high beta carotene vegetables
· Beans and lentils and other foods high in nucleotide content
· Potassium, magnesium, calcium and mineral rich foods
· cod liver oil and olive oil
· Avoid sugars and sweets and wheat
3. Clay, Sea salt and Baking Soda Baths
4. Homeopathic remedies
5. Schuessler’s Bioplasma
Diet of brown rice, seaweed and miso
At the time of the atomic bombing, Tatsuichiro Akizuki, M.D. was Director of the Department of Internal Medicine at St. Francis’s Hospital in Nagasaki and he fed his staff and patients a strict diet of brown rice, miso and tamari soy soup, wakame, kombu and other seaweed, Hokkaido pumpkin, and sea salt. He also prohibited the consumption of sugar and sweets since they suppress the immune system. ?By imposing this diet on his staff and patients, no one succumbed to radiation poisoning whereas the occupants of hospitals located much further away from the blast incident suffered severe radiation fatalities. Much of this positive result has to do with the fact that the sea vegetables contain substances that bind radioactive particles and escort them out of the body.(Tatsuichiro Akuziki, M.D. Nagasaki 1945, London Quarter books, 1981).
Seaweeds are very high in mineral content. Consuming natural iodine, such as in the seaweeds, helps prevent the uptake of iodine-131, while iron inhibits the absorption of plutonium-238 and plutonium-239. Vitamin B-12 inhibits cobalt-60 uptake. Zinc inhibits zinc-65 uptake and sulfur is preventative for sulfur-35 (a product of nuclear reactors) incorporation by the body.
Sea vegetables can prevent assimilation of different radionuclitides, heavy metals such as cadmium, and other environmental toxins.
“ An experiment conducted by J.F. Stara at the Environmental Protection Agency showed that sodium alginate significantly reduced the amount of radio active strontium in the bones of cats. Stara observed that radio active strontium in the bones is resecreted into the intestines where it is bound by alginate, neutralized then excreted in the stools.”
“There is no family of foods more protective against radiation and environmental pollutants than sea vegetables … sea vegetables can prevent assimilation of different radionuclitides, heavy metals such as cadmium, and other environmental toxins.”....
.."I will move on to point number two – Other additions to the diet – in my next post." From Radiation Detoxification Steven Schecter, N.D (Go to
Japanese Nuclear Plant Crisis Senate Enviro/Public Works Comm. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zvhdy/America_this_Week_20_03_2011/
"Hirose Takashi: The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident and the State of the Media
Broadcast by Asahi NewStar, 17 March, 20:00
Interviewers: Yo and Maeda Mari
Yo: Today many people saw water being sprayed on the reactors from the air and from the ground, but is this effective?
Hirose: . . . If you want to cool a reactor down with water, you have to circulate the water inside and carry the heat away, otherwise it has no meaning. So the only solution is to reconnect the electricity. Otherwise it’s like pouring water on lava.
Yo: Reconnect the electricity – that’s to restart the cooling system?
Hirose: Yes. The accident was caused by the fact that the tsunami flooded the emergency generators and carried away their fuel tanks. If that isn’t fixed, there’s no way to recover from this accident.
Yo: Tepco [Tokyo Electric Power Company, owner/operator of the nuclear plants] says they expect to bring in a high voltage line this evening.
Hirose: Yes, there’s a little bit of hope there. But what’s worrisome is that a nuclear reactor is not like what the schematic pictures show (shows a graphic picture of a reactor, like those used on TV). This is just a cartoon. Here’s what it looks like underneath a reactor container (shows a photograph). This is the butt end of the reactor. Take a look. It’s a forest of switch levers and wires and pipes. On television these pseudo-scholars come on and give us simple explanations, but they know nothing, those college professors. Only the engineers know. This is where water has been poured in. This maze of pipes is enough to make you dizzy. Its structure is too wildly complex for us to understand. For a week now they have been pouring water through there. And it’s salt water, right? You pour salt water on a hot kiln and what do you think happens? You get salt. The salt will get into all these valves and cause them to freeze. They won’t move. This will be happening everywhere. So I can’t believe that it’s just a simple matter of you reconnecting the electricity and the water will begin to circulate. I think any engineer with a little imagination can understand this. You take a system as unbelievably complex as this and then actually dump water on it from a helicopter – maybe they have some idea of how this could work, but I can’t understand it.
Yo: It will take 1300 tons of water to fill the pools that contain the spent fuel rods in reactors 3 and 4. This morning 30 tons. Then the Self Defense Forces are to hose in another 30 tons from five trucks. That’s nowhere near enough, they have to keep it up. Is this squirting of water from hoses going to change the situation?
Hirose: In principle, it can’t. Because even when a reactor is in good shape, it requires constant control to keep the temperature down to where it is barely safe. Now it’s a complete mess inside, and when I think of the 50 remaining operators, it brings tears to my eyes. I assume they have been exposed to very large amounts of radiation, and that they have accepted that they face death by staying there. And how long can they last? I mean, physically. That’s what the situation has come to now. When I see these accounts on television, I want to tell them, “If that’s what you say, then go there and do it yourself!” Really, they talk this nonsense, trying to reassure everyone, trying to avoid panic. What we need now is a proper panic. Because the situation has come to the point where the danger is real.
If I were Prime Minister Kan, I would order them to do what the Soviet Union did when the Chernobyl reactor blew up, the sarcophagus solution, bury the whole thing under cement, put every cement company in Japan to work, and dump cement over it from the sky. Because you have to assume the worst case. Why? Because in Fukushima there is the Daiichi Plant with six reactors and the Daini Plant with four for a total of ten reactors. If even one of them develops the worst case, then the workers there must either evacuate the site or stay on and collapse. So if, for example, one of the reactors at Daiichi goes down, the other five are only a matter of time. We can’t know in what order they will go, but certainly all of them will go. And if that happens, Daini isn’t so far away, so probably the reactors there will also go down. Because I assume that workers will not be able to stay there.
I’m speaking of the worst case, but the probability is not low. This is the danger that the world is watching. Only in Japan is it being hidden. As you know, of the six reactors at Daiichi, four are in a crisis state. So even if at one everything goes well and water circulation is restored, the other three could still go down. Four are in crisis, and for all four to be 100 per cent repaired, I hate to say it, but I am pessimistic. If so, then to save the people, we have to think about some way to reduce the radiation leakage to the lowest level possible. Not by spraying water from hoses, like sprinkling water on a desert. We have to think of all six going down, and the possibility of that happening is not low. Everyone knows how long it takes a typhoon to pass over Japan; it generally takes about a week. That is, with a wind speed of two meters per second, it could take about five days for all of Japan to be covered with radiation. We’re not talking about distances of 20 kilometers or 30 kilometers or 100 kilometers. It means of course Tokyo, Osaka. That’s how fast a radioactive cloud could spread. Of course it would depend on the weather; we can’t know in advance how the radiation would be distributed. It would be nice if the wind would blow toward the sea, but it doesn’t always do that. Two days ago, on the 15th, it was blowing toward Tokyo. That’s how it is. . . .
Yo: Every day the local government is measuring the radioactivity. All the television stations are saying that while radiation is rising, it is still not high enough to be a danger to health. They compare it to a stomach x-ray, or if it goes up, to a CT scan. What is the truth of the matter?
Hirose: For example, yesterday. Around Fukushima Daiichi Station they measured 400 millisieverts – that’s per hour. With this measurement (Chief Cabinet Secretary) Edano admitted for the first time that there was a danger to health, but he didn’t explain what this means. All of the information media are at fault here I think. They are saying stupid things like, why, we are exposed to radiation all the time in our daily life, we get radiation from outer space. But that’s one millisievert per year. A year has 365 days, a day has 24 hours; multiply 365 by 24, you get 8760. Multiply the 400 millisieverts by that, you get 3,500,000 the normal dose. You call that safe? And what media have reported this? None. They compare it to a CT scan, which is over in an instant; that has nothing to do with it. The reason radioactivity can be measured is that radioactive material is escaping. What is dangerous is when that material enters your body and irradiates it from inside. These industry-mouthpiece scholars come on TV and what to they say? They say as you move away the radiation is reduced in inverse ratio to the square of the distance. I want to say the reverse. Internal irradiation happens when radioactive material is ingested into the body. What happens? Say there is a nuclear particle one meter away from you. You breathe it in, it sticks inside your body; the distance between you and it is now at the micron level. One meter is 1000 millimeters, one micron is one thousandth of a millimeter. That’s a thousand times a thousand squared. That’s the real meaning of “inverse ratio of the square of the distance.” Radiation exposure is increased by a factor of a trillion. Inhaling even the tiniest particle, that’s the danger.
Yo: So making comparisons with X-rays and CT scans has no meaning. Because you can breathe in radioactive material.
Hirose: That’s right. When it enters your body, there’s no telling where it will go. The biggest danger is women, especially pregnant women, and little children. Now they’re talking about iodine and cesium, but that’s only part of it, they’re not using the proper detection instruments. What they call monitoring means only measuring the amount of radiation in the air. Their instruments don’t eat. What they measure has no connection with the amount of radioactive material. . . .
Yo: So damage from radioactive rays and damage from radioactive material are not the same.
Hirose: If you ask, are any radioactive rays from the Fukushima Nuclear Station here in this studio, the answer will be no. But radioactive particles are carried here by the air. When the core begins to melt down, elements inside like iodine turn to gas. It rises to the top, so if there is any crevice it escapes outside.
Yo: Is there any way to detect this?
Hirose: I was told by a newspaper reporter that now Tepco is not in shape even to do regular monitoring. They just take an occasional measurement, and that becomes the basis of Edano’s statements. You have to take constant measurements, but they are not able to do that. And you need to investigate just what is escaping, and how much. That requires very sophisticated measuring instruments. You can’t do it just by keeping a monitoring post. It’s no good just to measure the level of radiation in the air. Whiz in by car, take a measurement, it’s high, it’s low – that’s not the point. We need to know what kind of radioactive materials are escaping, and where they are going – they don’t have a system in place for doing that now." From "What They're Covering Up at Fukushima"
By HIROSE TAKASHI
Introduced by Douglas Lummis (go to http://www.counterpunch.org/takashi03222011.html )
"Neutron beam observed 13 times at crippled Fukushima nuke plant
TOKYO, March 23, Kyodo
Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Wednesday it has observed a neutron beam, a kind of radioactive ray, 13 times on the premises of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant after it was crippled by the massive March 11 quake-tsunami disaster.
TEPCO, the operator of the nuclear plant, said the neutron beam measured about 1.5 kilometers southwest of the plant's No. 1 and 2 reactors over three days from March 13 and is equivalent to 0.01 to 0.02 microsieverts per hour and that this is not a dangerous level.
The utility firm said it will measure uranium and plutonium, which could emit a neutron beam, as well.
In the 1999 criticality accident at a nuclear fuel processing plant run by JCO Co. in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, uranium broke apart continually in nuclear fission, causing a massive amount of neutron beams.
In the latest case at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, such a criticality accident has yet to happen.
But the measured neutron beam may be evidence that uranium and plutonium leaked from the plant's nuclear reactors and spent nuclear fuels have discharged a small amount of neutron beams through nuclear fission.
==Kyodo" Go to http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/03/80539.html
"Japan Radioactive Iodine Releases May Exceed Three Mile Island by 100,000 Times
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Calls for More Intensive Contingency Planning by Japanese Authorities; U.S. Should Move as Much Spent Fuel as Possible to Dry Storage to Reduce Most Severe Risks, Suspend Licensing and Relicensing During Review
TAKOMA PARK, MD - March 25 - The damaged Fukushima Daiichi reactors in Japan continue to release radioactivity into the atmosphere. So far, the accident has released far more radioactivity than the 1979 Three Mile Island (TMI) accident. While Chernobyl had one source of radioactivity, its reactor, there are seven leaking radiation sources at the Japanese site. Together, the three damaged reactors and four spent fuel pools at Fukushima Daiichi contain far more long-lived radioactivity, notably cesium-137, than the Chernobyl reactor.
The French radiation protection authority, Institut de Radioprotection et de SĂ»retĂ© NuclĂ©aire (IRSN), estimates the radioactive releases of iodine-131 in Japan had reached about 2.4 million curies by March 22, 2011. That is about 160,000 times the best estimate of the amount released during the TMI accident in Pennsylvania (15 curies) and about 140,000 times the maximum estimate of 17 curies. It is about 10 percent of the estimated amount released during the Chernobyl accident, according to the IRSN. Combined cesium-134 (half-life: about 2 years) and cesium-137 (half life: about 30 years) releases from Fukushima are estimated at about half-a-million curies, about 10 percent of estimated Chernobyl cesium releases. The TMI accident did not emit measurable amounts of radioactive cesium, according to the presidential commission that investigated the accident.
â€śThis accident has long since passed the level of Three Mile Island,â€ť said Dr. Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER). â€śWhile the releases are still considerably below Chernobyl, they have already reached a level that could affect the region around the site for a prolonged period. It is simply a fantasy and highly misleading for the official accident level to remain at level 5, given the estimated radioactivity releases and the extended evacuation, contamination of food and water, and other countermeasures that have already been ordered by the government.â€ť
The primary risk of concern with iodine-131 is thyroid cancer, with children more at risk than adults. A high enough intake of iodine-131 by children can also cause developmental problems and other thyroid diseases. Young girls are at greater risk than boys. Female infants have a risk of thyroid cancer 70 times greater than adult males for the same radiation exposure. Some iodine-131 deposits on land, including pastures. When contaminated grass is eaten by cows and goats, iodine-131 concentrates in milk. It has a half-life of about eight days, meaning that appreciable amounts will remain in the environment for a few months after large releases. Cesium-137 will take a few hundred years to decay to very low levels. Some cesium-137 from atmospheric testing in the 1950s and 1960s is still present in soil all over the world. It causes all types of radiogenic cancers since it distributes itself all over the body, like potassium. Cesium-137 contamination is the main reason that a huge exclusion zone (about 1,000 square miles) still needs to be maintained around Chernobyl.
The radioactive fallout from the damaged Fukushima reactors has already covered substantial parts of Honshu, Japanâ€™s main island. Japanese officials have warned citizens against consuming 11 types of vegetables found to have higher than the legal levels of radioactivity, as well as milk from regions near the plant. They have urged residents to avoid giving tap water to children and infants.
Despite these warnings, authorities in Japan have not been forthcoming about the actual levels of radioactive releases, which according to some reports are grave enough that additional, immediate public protection is necessary. The large radioactivity releases, large evacuation zone, and extensive contamination of food and water indicate that it should be raised to level 6, which is also the evaluation of the French and U.S. authorities. This would give a more realistic picture to the public in Japan and allow for appropriately intensified contingency planning.
Efforts to stabilize the damaged reactors have only been partly successful; cooling with seawater may have created its own problems. A significant blockage of the space between the fuel rods with salt deposits could slow cooling water flow even if fresh water can be pumped in. The re-start of normal pumping faces formidable technical and safety problems.
â€śTokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) and the Japanese government must inform the public of their estimates of the releases so far and the potential scale of additional releases, provide updates that are as complete as possible, and create appropriate contingency plans for the public.â€ť
Last week, IEER noted that damages from severe spent fuel accidents in the U.S. could range from $900 million to $700 billion (http://www.ieer.org/comments/Daiichi-Fukushima-reactors_IEERstatement.pdf). Vermont Yankee, for example, contains more spent fuel in its pool than all four stricken pools at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. Yet the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has not ordered any additional actions to protect this material.
â€śThe Nuclear Regulatory Commission should order all aged spent fuel in the U.S. to be moved from pools to hardened dry storage,â€ť said Dr. Makhijani. â€śIt should suspend all licensing and relicensing proceedings until the long-term safety review is complete. It should also review the nearly certified reactor designs, like the AP1000. It is lamentable that the NRC extended the license of the Vermont Yankee reactor, which is the same design as the stricken Fukushima units, while the Japanese crisis is still going on and there has been no time to learn its lessons. I am shocked the NRC did not even order the emptying of all of Vermont Yankeeâ€™s older spent fuel into dry cask storage, as a condition of the license extension.â€ť
IEER is dedicated to increasing public involvement in and control over environmental problems through the democratization of science." Go to
The World Health Organisation and the International Atomic Energy Agency
"The WHO is compromised by its links to the IAEA
"A 1959 deal between WHO and IAEA
This potential conflict between those who wished to exploit the new nuclear technology for both profit and military power and the custodians of public health was superficially resolved by an Agreement (Res. WHA 12-40, 28 May 1959) stating that the IAEA and the WHO recognize that “the IAEA has the primary responsibility for encouraging, assisting, and co-ordinating research on, and development and practical applications of, atomic energy for peaceful uses throughout the world without prejudice to the right of the WHO to concern itself with promoting, developing, assisting, and co-ordinating international health work, including research, in all its aspects.” If the reader is confused, so is the writer. To understand this, one needs to know that the health effects of radiation were classified as secret under the U.S. Atomic Energy Act for national security. The “international health work” assigned to the WHO was taking care of the victims. While technically IAEA and WHO are “equal” in the U.N. family, those agencies which report directly to the Security Council, as does IAEA, have more status.
In Article I (3) of the WHO/IAEA agreement, it is stated that “Whenever either organization proposes to initiate a programme or activity on a subject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult with the other with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual consent”. This clause seems to have weakened the WHO from investigating the Chernobyl disaster, and gave the IAEA a green light to bring in physicists and medical radiologists to assess the damage relative to their limited knowledge of the health effects of radiation. (Note: while radiologists use ionizing radiation in their work, they deal with health damage only after the patient receives therapy levels of radiation.) This first evaluation used a different epidemiological protocol in each geographical area and with different age groups, eliminated all concern for cancers as not having sufficient latency periods, and failed to note the extraordinary epidemic of thyroid diseases and cancers. From the point of view of Medical Epidemiology they failed miserably to deal with the reality. The director of this 1991 Epidemiological study, Dr Fred Mettler, is a Medical Radiologist. There were no Epidemiologists, Public Health professionals, or Toxicologists on the IAEA Team."" Posted by RS (Go to http://iahm.org/journal/vol_2/num_3/text/vol2n3p21.htm )
"As the clean-up continues across the worst earthquake and tsunami hit areas a suspected breach in a reactor core at the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant could mean more serious radioactive contamination. (March 25) ..." Go to http://www.youtube.com/associatedpress#p/u/2/nV8ykHsmgD4
Quote: "Fukushima Dai-ichi status and prognosis
The disjointed news flow from Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) continues to provide a confusing picture of the status of the 4 crippled nuclear power stations at Fukushima Dai-ichi on the East coast of Japan. This is leading to a very broad spectrum of opinion on the actual status and future consequences. The spectrum of opinion ranges from those who argue that Fukushima Dai-ichi is on course to become a Chernobyl scale incident or worse, to those who argue this is a storm in a teacup, pointing out that reactors have been hit by a large earthquake, gigantic tsunami and survived with minimal casualties so far. So where does the truth lie?
What do we think we know for sure?
1) The Japanese government have warned of a grave nuclear incident on a number of occasions.
2) The status of the reactors, fuel pools and dispersion of radioactive materials continues to get worse, not better.
3) There are perhaps 7 or 8 reactor loads of fuel in play compared with a single load at Chernobyl and 4 or 5 of those are outside of containment in badly damaged spent fuel pools.
4) This report suggests that daily release of radioactive 131I and 137Cs is running at around 73% and 60% of Chernobyl respectively.
5) The Chernobyl fire burned for 8 to 10 days whilst Fukushima Dai-ichi has been emitting radioactive material for around 15 days with no end in sight.
6) There is a 30 km exclusion zone in place and thousands of residents have become refugees with little prospect of returning home in the near future.
Weaknesses and leaks in containment
At this press conference, Dr. Masashi Goto, former Toshiba nuclear power plant designer, provides some explanation for how reactor vessels and primary containment may have developed leaks. Dr Goto explained that both containment and pressure vessels have access hatches for fueling and maintenance and these hatches have flanges, bolted in place and using organic seals. The design temperature is 138˚C and at temperatures over 300˚C the flanges buckle and can leak. The organic seals may have burned. There are also ducts for electric cables, pipes, and valves. etc., that are weak points.
Note that Dr. Masashi Goto also says that the cores of reactors 1, 2 and 3 had already melted, but does not make clear if this was partial or total melt down.
The JAIF status report up top states that containment venting is temporarily stopped. It was this venting to release pressure that caused radiation to spike on a regular basis during the early days of the event. There have been a number of equivocal statements about pressure stabalisation in reactors 1 to 3 and I believe the simplest explanation is because they are now leaking. The JAIF status report says this:
It is presumed that radioactive material inside the reactor vessel would have leaked outside the containment vessel at unit-1, 2 and unit-3, based on the investigation of the water sampled in the turbine building from Mar. 24th to 27th.
Noting that this seems to contradict JAIF saying that the containment vessel structural integrity is "not damaged" in units 1 and 3.
The fact that the reactor pressure vessels and containment seem to be leaking is not necessarily a bad thing since this lowers the risk of a pressure build explosion. But it does mean that these reactors will continue to leak radioactive material for so long as water is injected for cooling purposes. It also raises questions about the purpose of trying to restore the primary cooling loop that is dependent upon a pressure seal to drive steam toward the heat exchangers.
Understanding radiation dosage numbers
Different types of radiation (alpha, beta, gamma) have different effects on the human body and different types of radioactive materials also present different hazard levels depending upon how they are chemically ingested. For example, iodine concentrates in the thyroid gland posing risk of thyroid cancer. The REM (see below) is a measure that attempts to normalise this variability.
REM = roentgen-equivalent man
100 REM ~ 1 sievert
LD50 ~ 4.5 Sieverts or 450 REM
The LD50 is the level of exposure required to kill 50% of an affected group.
The spread of radioactive material
The following unofficial numbers for 24th March posted by commenter schoff, that I have reason to believe are accurate, show high levels of radiation in the dry well (D/W) which is the volume between the pressure vessel and primary containment. These numbers seem to confirm that the pressure vessels have leaked. At these levels workers would receive lethal dosage in 5 minutes and so it is clear that no one is going to be able to enter the dry well area to inspect damage or attempt repairs or remedial work.
The readings from secondary containment (the wrecked reactor buildings) are also high providing a lethal dose in 1 to 2 hours. Again, this is sufficiently high to prevent remedial work or repairs and explains why water has to be cannoned into the fuel pools from the exterior.
Area Rad Monitors
1 "D/W: 4780 rem/hr S/C: 349 rem/hr"
2 "D/W: 5490 Rem/hr S/C: 193 Rem/hr"
3 "D/W: 6000 Rem/hr S/C: 158 Rem/hr"
The S/C is believed to stand for Suppression Chamber Torus. D/W is the drywell.
Heavily contaminated water is now turning up at many locations within and without the reactor buildings and this is now beginning to hamper remedial works around the site.
This report in New Scientist also suggests that very large amounts of 131I and 137Cs are being dispersed vertically upwards from the site. Recall that radiation above the buildings was too high for helicopters to hover at the time spent fuel pools were exposed. 131I has a half life of 8 days and 137Cs has a half life of about 30 years. As a rule of thumb, after about 5 half lives have past, the abundance of the isotopes have decayed to virtually zero. 131I will continue to be a problem for so long as it is leaking from the site but will decay to zero quite quickly once leakage stops. 137Cs may be a problem for about 150 years.
Traces of 131I from Fukushima Dai-ichi have shown up in Scotland and other sites in Europe.
The one thing in favor of the Tepco workers battling to contain the incident is that radiation levels throughout much of the site remain safe enough to enable periodic spraying of water into the spent fuel ponds. I fear this situation will not last for much longer.
Comparison of Fukushima Dai-ichi and Chernobyl
There are a number of key differences between Chernobyl and Fukushima Dai-ichi making comparisons of the incidents difficult:
1) The Chernobyl accident took place at fission power blowing the roof of the core and reactor building while Fukushima Dai-ichi was successfully shut down.
2) Chernobyl had a graphite core that burned, spreading radioactive material far and wide.
3) Chernobyl lacked a primary containment system.
4) Chernobyl involved a single reactor load of fuel while Fukushima Dai-ichi likely has 7 to 8 reactor loads spread between the cores of units 1, 2 and 3 and the spent fuel ponds of units 1 to 4.
5) Fukushima Dai-ichi unit 3 has MOX fuel loads containing plutonium in reactor and in spent fuel pool.
6) Fuel in pool of reactor 4 is not spent and is a 'hot' load outside of containment.
7) Fukushima Dai-ichi is located in the heart of Japan, the world's third largest economy whilst Chernobyl is located in Ukraine which has lower economic standing in the world.
In my estimation, the larger mass of fuel, much of it outside of containment, the geographic location and possible socio-economic impacts on Japan, longer duration and open-ended nature of this event and extant risk of explosion and fire will ultimately make Fukushima Dai-ichi the more serious incident.
Future course and consequences
Notwithstanding the successful filling of the spent fuel ponds with water, I do not believe Tepco has been able to take any action thus far that has halted the decline in condition of the Fukushima Dai-ichi reactor complex. Things are getting worse, not better, for every day that passes. The site is slowly but surely becoming too hazardous for operations, and if that happens, remedial work on cooling reactors and filling fuel ponds may have to stop raising the specter of further melt down and fires. All the while corrosion is eating away at the pressure vessels and associated pipes and valves and absent circulation cooling the heat dissipation problem builds (see slow burning issues).
Rational voices point to the fact that most modern reactors in operation as well as those being built and planned are much safer than the aging fleet at Fukushima Dai-ichi. This may be so, but populations around the world fear radiation and it is the public that will have the final say.
Safety of nuclear power and death of the nuclear renaissance (March 15th)
Fukushima Dai-ichi status and potential outcomes (March 17th)
Fukushima Dai-ichi status and slow burning issues (March 25th)
From "The Oil Drum" (Go To http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7722 )
Quote:"417,000 cancers forecast for Fukushima 200 km contamination zone by 2061
Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), Professor Chris Busby, has released calculations of the cancer incidence to be expected in fallout areas of Japan. Using data from the International Atomic Energy Agency and official Japanese web sites he has used two methods to estimate the numbers of cancer cases. He compares these results with estimates derived from ICRP modelling.
The "Tondel" Method is based on a conservative study by Martin Tondel in northern Sweden. This examined cancer incidence during 10 years after Chernobyl. It differentiated the varying levels of land contamination and found that the disease increased by 11% for each 100 kiloBecquerels of fallout per square metre of land surface. Professor Busby has applied this factor to the zone up to 100 km from the reactors, where IAEA has reported, on average, 600kBq per sq.m radioactivity. In the 3.3 million population of this 100 km zone a 66% increase over and above the pre-accident rate is predicted in 10 years. This implies 103,329 extra cancers due to the Fukushima exposures between 2012 and 2021.
Applying the "Tondel" method to the ring between 100 km and 200 km from Fukushima, population 7.8 million but lower concentrations of fallout, 120,894 extra cancers are to be expected by 2021.
Assuming permanent residence and no evacuation the total predicted yield according to the "Tondel" method is 224,223 in ten years.
The second method is derived from weighting factors advised by the ECRR on the basis of the different ways in which different radionuclides behave in biological systems. This predicts 191,986 extra cancers in the 0 - 100km circle and 224,623 in the outer ring. Probably half of these will be expressed in the first ten years and the remainder between 10 and 50 years.
Assuming permanent residence and no evacuation the total predicted yield according to the second method will be 416,619 of which 208,310 will appear in the first ten years. There is thus good agreement between the two methods.
The ICRP method predicts 6158 additional cancers in 50 years which, among the 2˝ million cancer cases expected normally in that population over half a century, would be invisible and deniable.
The report with all methods, assumptions and data as a pdf.
Professor Chris Busby on Russia Today
Professor Busby deconstructs media favourites Wade Allison, George Monbiot and other "experts". See this acknowledgement about Dr. Wakeford.
Thursday 31st March Beta monitoring on USA western seaboard We have not been able to access Radnet April 2nd to update this graph
This data from Radnet, captured 31 March at 11.30 UTC updates the previous day's late posting. The daily trend of rising beta radiation during the day, with a reduction at night has continued. We speculate that this may be due to onshore winds during the daytime, and offshore winds at night. Email us if you know something we don't. The peak values have clearly increased over the last four days.
Wednesday 30th March
BBC recklessly endangers life
The BBC has ridiculed people for taking Iodine tablets as a precaution against radioactive pollution from Fukushima. On Monday 28th March Material World - a regular Radio 4 science programme - featured Professor Robin Grimes, Director of the Centre of Nuclear Engineering at Imperial College, London. He ridiculed Californians for taking stable Iodine (the stable Iodine fills up the thyroid gland so it can't absorb Iodine 131). He added that it was not necessary even for people in Tokyo:-
I believe people in California are buying Iodine tablets and things like that which is completely, completely crazy. However there will be people close to the [Fukushima] plant who should be taking that [Iodine] as a precaution and they are being told to do so; that's being dealt with in a sensible manner but [for] people in - say - as far away as Tokyo that would not be necessary at this point in time - not even close.
Mindful that after Chernobyl increased thyroid cancer was observed in Britain as well as Russia, LLRC's current advice is that people in Japan definitely ought to be taking stable Iodine; California is borderline, while in the UK it's probably unnecessary at present. However, as the UK Health Protection Agency agrees, there are no risks associated with Iodine tablets so long as the dose is not grossly exceeded. There is no argument against taking them as a precaution. Grimes' remarks can only be seen either as ignorant or as just one more attempt to play down the hazard of nuclear power.
US Attorney Stuart Smith of environmental and personal injury specialists Smith Stag told LLRC
Grimes' advice would, if followed, increase risks with possibly fatal conseqences, especially for children. People would be justified in prosecuting him, his employers and the BBC for recklessly endangering life.
Stuart Smith's law firm is a pioneer in the field of Technologically Enhanced Radioactive Materials and oilfield waste litigation.
The criminal offence of Reckless Endangerment
The UK has no law of reckless endangerment but in USA and Scotland among other countries it is a criminal offence to put lives at risk through an action or by failing to act.
LLRC Secretary Richard Bramhall said:
BBC producers seem to have forgotten that they are required to balance the expression of opinions on controversial issues. On radiation and health the BBC is institutionally unbalanced, routinely allowing "experts" like Professor Grimes to claim that only 50 deaths are attributable to Chernobyl without reference to the countervailing evidence. The "Horizon" documentary "Nuclear Nightmares" in 2006 was an outstanding example. My complaint eventually led the BBC Trust to rule "Nuclear Nightmares" was biased. I hope the threat of a class action in California or Japan will concentrate minds a bit.
The Material World broadcast is the first item on this listen again link, which is scheduled to be on the BBC web site until Friday.
LLRC supports the Nuclear Information and Resource Service Grassroots Platform for Nuclear Safety and Security. It calls for the radiation risk model of the European Committee on Radiation Risk to replace the International Commission on Radiological Protection - as LLRC has long recommended.
Sign up online or email firstname.lastname@example.org
Friday 25th March
An open letter to George Monbiot: When nuclear apologists speak the language of dose they speak the language of deceit. If you speak it too, you become one of the liars you say you despise.
Thursday 24th March
Two half-hour videos on the health effects of major accidents
Three Mile Island in 1979 and Chernobyl in 1986 each released significant amounts of radioactivity. In each case the official view is that there was no observable impact on health. In each case there is a contrary view backed up by hard data. The first of these videos highlights the publication of a book on Chernobyl that we have already reviewed on this site. One of the book's contributing editors, Dr Janette Sherman, speaking to interviewer Karl Grossman on 5th March, said that a new nuclear disaster was bound to happen soon. She also highlights the scandalous agreement that gives the pro-nuclear International Atomic Energy Agency the power to veto any radiation research by the World Health Organisation.
Three Mile Island Revisited dates from 1991 and features citizen epidemiology of a high order, showing massive health impact that the US authorities deny.
Wednesday 23rd March
Fukushima 70 kilometre contamination levels twice as high as Chernobyl Permanent Control Zone.
Honshu should be evacuated. The IAEA website yesterday revealed beta-gamma contamination measurements taken between 35 and 68 km from Fukushima. The results ranged from 0.08 to 0.9 MegaBecquerels per square metre (MBq/m2). The Chernobyl Permanent Control Zone was contaminated up to 0.55 MBq/m2. The highest level of contamination classified after Chernobyl was greater than 1.48 MBq/m2. The data for Chernobyl were for Caesium and the same is probably true for the Fukushima data. All official agencies are conspicuously silent about the alpha-emitters Plutonium and Uranium. We remain deeply concerned about this lack of information.
Yesterday the US Environmental Protection Agency said a sampling filter in Hawaii had detected minuscule levels of an isotope that is also consistent with the Japanese nuclear incident. The filter was being sent for further analysis. How the fallout was distributed
The animation is a continuous loop showing the plume from Reactor 3 (MOX fuel) at hourly intervals from midnight 14 March to 3 a.m. 15th March. Fukushima is in the middle of the picture. To the right is the Pacific, left is inland. Tokyo is south-west of the wrecked reactors, under the plume in the final frames shown here.
Unidentified contaminant in Hawaii
Yesterday the US Environmental Protection Agency said a sampling filter in Hawaii had detected an isotope consistent with the Japanese nuclear incident. The filter was being sent for further analysis.
Cancer in Sweden following Chernobyl is a stark warning for Japan
A cautious but careful study [ref] in northern Sweden polluted by Caesium and Uranium fuel particles showed cancer increased by 11% in the ten years following the accident. The level of fallout in that part of Sweden was 0.1 kBq MBq/m2. If we assume that cancer increases linearly with the level of fallout, the areas of Japan affected at 0.9 MBq/m2 may experience increases of 90%. We recommend that the public within 150km should leave the area immediately.
Monitoring must be extended to all areas of Japan. Alpha-emitting radionuclides must be included and the data published.
It is inevitable that the sea is seriously contaminated and will distribute the radioactivity to coastal dwellers for hundreds of kilometres through seafood and by inhalation of radionuclides resuspended by wave action and blown inland.
Other nations must conduct thorough monitoring.
The invalid ICRP risk model must be abandoned for estimating the effects of internal radioactivity. The model of the European Committee on Radiation Risk must be used.
Monday 21st March 2011 The emerging issue is official attempts to play down the radiological impact of this disaster. There appears to be no monitoring of alpha emitting radionuclides. Japanese nuclear regulators yesterday published this press release about dust sampling on site (20/03/2011). It refers only to gamma emitters, which are easy to detect and hard to deny.
The animation shows the plume from the fire at Reactor 4 at 3 hourly intervals, 15-16 March. Fukushima is in the middle of the picture. To the right is the Pacific, left is inland, where restrictions have been applied to some foodstuffs.
In the USA radiation has reportedly been detected, but the consistent official response is reassuring. However, Environmental Protection Agency monitoring data has vanished from the web. In Canada there remains no official public statement about the risk to Canadians of inhaling the contaminants. Official advice about At what dose might health effects occur? is bland and misleading. The real answer is that no dose is safe, and Plutonium and Uranium are very dangerous if inhaled or ingested, even though assessed "doses" might be very low. At present we have no way of knowing whether these elements are reaching the west coast of the Americas.
Sunday 20th March
European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) advises on estimating the health impact Two years ago the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) admitted that its risk estimates cannot be applied to accidents. To fill this regulatory vacuum, the European Committee on Radiation Risk formulated its recommendations specifically with a view to the health impact of accidents and other scenarios where radiation becomes dispersed into the environment. ECRR, unlike ICRP, takes account of all relevant epidemiology, new science, scientific uncertainties and knowledge gaps. The ECRR Recommendations are therefore substantially different from ICRP's. ECRR has issued a statement which applies the Committee's risk model to fragmentary radiation dose data the Japanese government has released and comments from Japanese chief cabinet secretary Yukio Edano. ECRR statement html, ECRR statement PDF
More information on the scientific invalidity of ICRP advice
UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office disinformation about Geiger Counters - a clarification on monitoring for radioactive pollution
One of our correspondents tells us the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office claims Geiger Counters can measure alpha radiation. We aren't sure why they venture into this topic, but they are under pressure to give scientifically reliable advice to British citizens in Japan and we suspect they are thrashing about for anything that might undermine confidence in what we say here. The alpha radiation issue is important and the FCO is guilty of misdirection. If people think Geiger Counters can detect Plutonium and Uranium they may well believe that low readings indicate these alpha emitters are not present. It's not that simple. Read more here
Reports from CRIIRAD in France show that they have the data on contaminated food. It's in French. Neither CRIIRAD nor LLRC has the time to translate. Among other data, levels of Iodine 131 in milk are 3 to 5 times above normal. Here's the CRIIRAD report
Friday 18th March
Fallout reaches USA This Associated Press report quotes an anonymous diplomat with a conscience admitting that data usually kept secret shows the fallout has arrived in southern California.
We repeat our advice that the fallout is extremely likely to contain Plutonium and Uranium from the spent fuel rods and possibly from the reactors themselves. Monitoring with Geiger Counters is incapable of detecting these elements yet they pose serious long-term health risks if ingested inhaled or absorbed through intact skin or skin lesions (wounds). The authorities are silent on these matters. In the long term they will neglect their presence in the environment. We recommend that you should collect samples if you are interested in providing hard data to help determine where the fallout has gone. Here's how to do the sampling. This is important if we want researchers to be able to establish the truth of whether the fallout causes genetic disorders like cancer. At this stage in history it's Citizen Science because experience shows the authorities will always deny the possibility.
Advice on taking iodine.
Professor Chris Busby talks about the radiation risks on radio in USA and more here (LLRC hasn't had time to view this yet. Let us know what you think.)
On Wednesday 16th we said
Do-It-Yourself monitoring to protect your health - updated to answer Foreign and Commonwealth Office nonsense.
Current gamma monitoring in Tokyo
Fuel rod fires: Fallout in Honshu mapped here
Modelled on the US Air Resources Laboratory's system, this map animation shows dispersion of the plume from the fuel rod fires in Fukushima Reactor 4 yesterday 15th March. Frames are 3-hourly, starting soon after midnight to just before 2 pm UTC. On the new page, scroll down to see successive frames.
TV reports indicate rain in the Sendai region today. This may account for the striated plume patterns.
We advise that Honshu should immediately be evacuated to the maximum possible extent. Reassurances about radiation exposures issued by the Japanese government can not be believed; they are based on the ICRP invalid risk model which ICRP itself has admitted cannot be applied in accident situations. The basic concept of radiation dose is generally recognised to be invalid for many types of internal exposure relevant to the present emergency. In addition to gamma-emitting isotopes of Caesium and Iodine, there is an extremely high probability that Plutonium and isotopes of Uranium are being released. The use of water in contact with the reactor cores entails the release of Tritium. Carbon 14 is also likely to be present. None of these alpha- and beta-emitters will be included in gamma readings, leading to severe underestimates of the potential genetic damage once they are ingested, inhaled or absorbed into human tissue. The present emergency is therefore exactly similar to the Chernobyl disaster which has had a huge impact on human health.(More on Chernobyl) The French risk agency was right to classify the accident at severity level 6.
And a further disagreement, between LLRC's Professor Chris Busby and Professor Ian Fells a well-known supporter of nuclear energy. 14th March: Reactor 3 plume approached Tokyo
Modelled on the US Air Resources Laboratory's system, this map shows the plume's upwind end approached Tokyo between 20.00 and 21.00 hours Universal Time on 14th March, contrary to official assurances that the pollution is being dispersed at sea.
Monday 14th March: We said The violence of the explosion in Reactor No. 3 gives us reason to doubt official statements that the containment vessel is intact. We note that the US navy, having detected radioactivity on its ships 100 miles offshore, is retreating. Unless and until there is good evidence that Reactor 3 is intact it is prudent to assume that some of its fuel is now airborne, as was the case at Chernobyl in 1986. Chernobyl fallout was wind-borne all round the world, causing detectable and significant health detriment in many countries.
As in earlier statements, we warn that reassurances from all agencies about health risks from radioactive pollution are based on the invalid and discredited radiation risk model of the International Commission or Radiological Protection (ICRP), according to which the Chernobyl disaster can not have caused any observable health effects in the general population.
Immediate precautions for populations downwind of Fukushima are to stay indoors. Do not eat local produce; drink bottled water.
There is now an urgent need for independent monitoring of radiation exposures. See this page on monitoring.
13th March bulletin
The truth about Chernobyl. A massive publication from the New York Academy of Sciences giving the views and the findings of scientists and clinicians in the affected territories. It is a deeply subversive alternative to the lies of the World Health Organisation and the International Atomic Energy Agency, who claim that the fallout has had no observable health impact.
Soundbite: between 1986 and 2005 a million deaths across Europe are attributable to genetic damage from fallout.
Radioactive contamination at Hinkley Point's new build site concealed by Environmental Impact Assessment.
Coverup revealed by new report from Green Audit
And, after the denials for EdF and knee-jerk rejection by the Environment Agency, this reply.
Augean plc, a waste disposal company, propose to dump vast amounts of radioactivity into a landfill in Northamptonshire, England. The local authority refused planning consent. Augean appealed. On this site see the expert testimony and LLRC's submission.
The facts behind the Sellafield autopsy research - a file we submitted to the Redfern inquiry in 2008. This is a detective story, a forensic dissection of one of the nuclear industry's cover-ups.
New Recommendations from European Committee on Radiation Risk:- "ECRR's new model is vindicated by real-life experience of cancer after the Chernobyl disaster". More information
Our observations on Mark Lynas' pro-nuclear rant in the New Statesman are here because the New Statesman's comments page rejected them.
British Nuclear Test Veterans and their quest for justice: has Ministry of Defence secrecy been defeated? See documented evidence of the MoD's lies and a Judge's Directions.
Important new report on Uranium from the European Committee on Radiation Risk. Link.
British jury finds Uranium guilty - Verdict based on failure of ICRP risk model
On September 10th a Coroner's jury in the West Midlands found that depleted Uranium caused the fatal cancer of a soldier - Lance Corporal Stuart Dyson - who served in Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War. Our report links to a PDF compilation of the expert witnesses' written statements.
Scientific absurdity at The Guardian
Simon Jenkins' ludicrous book review on Friday 8th January  had more factual errors than we can spare the time to address, but the Guardian's blitz on radiation risk over the weekend 8th - 11th January 2010 needs a little attention. More (including comments on letters from Prof Dillwyn Williams and Dr Ian Fairlie).
Low Level Radiation Campaign
For 50 years the nuclear establishment has claimed its discharges are pretty harmless. They admit that there's no safe dose, so that even the smallest amounts of radiation can cause genetic damage leading to cancer, leukaemia or birth defects, but according to the official view not even the Chernobyl disaster has caused any visible effects. Officially, it caused the deaths of a few highly irradiated firemen and up to 2000 additional thyroid cancers, which are mostly treatable. And that's it, they say.
We have a different story to tell.
The nuclear age is also the cancer age. The first visible population effect was the increase in childhood leukaemia which began during World War One and rose in line with radium production for decades. The Cold War orgy of nuclear bomb tests, which spread man-made radioactivity all round the globe, was accompanied by a change in infant mortality rates which accounted for the deaths of tens of thousands of children. Variations in the amounts of radioactive fallout were reflected in subsequent cancer rates and we are now living through a cancer epidemic.
Cancer and leukaemia clusters have been found in association with nuclear sites and with places where radioactive discharges are deposited in, for example, mud banks and estuaries.
The effects of Chernobyl, especially those reported from Belarus, the Ukraine and Russia, are a holocaust.
Officials deny that any of this can be attributed to radioactivity but, as we explain on this site, the denials have no scientific basis. This is because
the underlying scientific model is based on external irradiation
risk is quantified in terms of dose
dose is now acknowledged to be meaningless for many types of radioactivity when they are inside the body (see these quotes from various authorities.
This is the biggest and longest running health scandal of all time. The Low Level Radiation Campaign has been working to uncover it since 1992, taking the lid off cover-ups, lies, data withheld, data revised, gross errors by cancer authorities, bad science, bowdlerised reports, bullying in committees, legal threats and dissenting scientists being libelled and barred from conferences.
As (we believe) a direct result, the authorities can no longer deny the truth and we are now witnessing a slow-motion paradigm shift." http://www.llrc.org
Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:18 pm
||All times are GMT + 1 Hour
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2005 phpBB Group