Atomic power plant Philippsburg II has a problem with the emergency cooling system. On August8th 2011, a door is could not be closed in a cooling system, the environment ministry said in City of Stuttgart on Thursday. Operator: EnBW. Another so-called reportable event was three days earlier: During a “test for the transport” a container with fuel rods fell down:
https://www.berlinonline.de/berliner-zeitung/politik/detail_dpa_31884076.php
German atomic reactor “Brokdorf” on Sunday was unexpectedly shut down. By triggering of circuit breakers, there had been an automatic shutdown of the generator transformers, said the Justice Ministry in City “Kiel”. “Independent” experts should collect oil samples and gas samples from the transformers and evaluate them. The nuclear power plant went back to the grid in mid July, after one-month maintenance:
http://www.derwesten.de/nachrichten/panorama/Atomkraftwerk-Brokdorf-nach-Zwischenfall-runtergefahren-id4939158.html Original footage of overwhelmed Brokdorf staff (operator E.ON):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzDpG9rBs2Y They didn’t know what to do! Watch from MINUTE 00:52 on, when the alarm sounds.
“This estimate does not include the dose from radioactive carbon (carbon 14) which, because of its 5730-year half-life, persists in the human food chain and has not yet taken its total human toll.”
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/NRBE/NRBE12.html#Rfn35
“We are constantly being told about a ‘permissible amount of radiation.’ Who permitted it? Who has any right to permit it?” Albert Schweitzer
“The most important consideration is the generally accepted value judgment that early embryonic losses are of little personal or social concern.” Dr R. Mole, 1979, a member of ICRP – The international committee which makes the dose limits WORLDWIDE ignores LIFE.
http://bjr.birjournals.org/content/52/614/89
What’s behind all this? What is low radiation everyone hears about these days? It’s a long, but interesting read:
The international radiation protection bodies such as ICRP, UNSCEAR and BEIR base their findings on the somatic damage (cancer, leukemia risks) mainly on studies of the victims of the nuclear tests of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, wo still lived in 1950. That’s right, not 1945, 1950! This study is called “T65D.” It was begun in 1950. The five years before that has not been studied. It was observed since 1950. About 800,000 Japanese people harmed by radiation, and the analysation of their causes of death.
http://www.rerf.or.jp/glossary_e/t65d.htm and:
http://www.rerf.or.jp/library/archives_e/lsstitle.html / For validation of this study the US even did an atomic test in Nevada:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/212/4497/900.extract
Quote “Radiation protection norms are a HOAX: “Since 1950, more than 90,000 of the survivors of the atomic bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been enrolled in a lifetime study of their health. The study, first conducted by the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission (ABCC), was transferred in 1975 to control by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF), which has its headquarters at 5-2 Hijiyama Park, Minami-Ku, Hiroshima 732, Japan. and true magnitude of the radiation risk. RERF is equally funded by the government of Japan through its Ministry of Health and Welfare and by the government of the United States via the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) under contract with the Department of Energy (DOE)…”
Each person has been exposed to a certain dose of radiation that had to be estimated later (!) Because of the location of the bomb explosion at the moment (T65D study). It is at HIGH DOSE SHORT TERM (explosion). This is in contrast to chronic low-level radiation. ICRP, UNSCEAR and BEIR exclude results that you get from high doses to the low dose effects. THIS IS A CRIME and unscientific and unethic.
So, why do ICRP, UNSCEAR, IAEA, all governments, health ministries, nuke plant operators and BEIR ignore this? There are many answers. And many many questions. All lead to one goal. More on that later. The first thing is, we have to think like the atomic industry. They want to protect their ideology of former US president Dwight Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace”. This was made public in 1953. But, that an atom can be peaceful is unobjective. A “peaceful” atomic program even increases the risk of proliferation: Those countries which have developed and built nuclear bombs in recent decades began with a civil nuclear program. However, these civil programs were often only a cover for their military interests and provided them with access to the technologies and know-how for the design of nuclear bombs. This fact shows that the export and further proliferation of nuclear technology significantly increases the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation. Iran:
http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/06/23/us-afghan-withdrawal-because-of-upcoming-nuclear-attack-on-iran/ Atomic energy is also often washed green, after reading this, it won’t work any longer:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/CNR/GreenDereg.html
As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) was replaced by: As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP): To satisfy the ALARP principle, measures necessary to reduce risk must be taken until or unless the cost of those measures, whether money, time or trouble is disproportionate to the reduction in risk.” PAGE 170 – by UK Departement of Energy & Climatechange – QUOTE:
http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/meeting-energy-demand/consents-planning/nps2011/1925-appl-of-sust-of-revised-draft-en6.pdf basically: Money over Health – a licence to kill. In the beginning (before the h bomb test) the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle was turned against the atomic industry. It said, that radiation exposure has to be held as low as possible, that means as low as rasonably achievable. But hydrogen bombs cause much radiation.The ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) turned around this principle (after the first hydrogen bomb explosion in 1954):
http://books.google.de/books?id=MHWEk6wZc10C&pg=RA1-PA139&dq=ICRP+ALARA+1973&hl=de&ei=yopBTvnUFNGdOpvpuagJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false quote “…economic and social…” ETHIC is missing! – so that the ALARA principle is now working FOR the atomic industry, even if a reactor crashes next to you. ICRP said, that ALARA does not refer to accidents.The ICRP also says the set of radiation levels for anticipated activities should be determined by cost-benefit analysis. Your health is a cost-benefit issue during a atomic catastrophe. Basically this means: When an accident happens (an atomic reactor crash, for example) the whole point of Status Quo is that the people are contaminated with radiation.
“Presently the international organizations (WHO, IAEA) recognize as the main cause of increase of thyroid cancer in liquidators and children population after the accident their irradiation with radioactive iodine, I-131. The rest of diseases, they suppose, are provoked by psycho-emotional reactions. ”
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/kr21pdf/Burlakova.pdf The bimodal dependence of effects on dose was
revealed for all studied parameters. Namely, effects increased at low doses, reached maximum (for low doses), then decreased (in some cases the effect sign reversed) and thereafter increased with the increase of
dosage.
Why NUCLEAR reactors cause FOREST decline: “The plant must take in MUCH more air than animals to get enough carbon. Carbon 14 is produced by cosmic rays, bomb tests and nuclear power plants. By 1963, Carbon 14 in the Northern Hemisphere had increased by 100 percent, and by 1984, about one decade later, it had increased another 25 percent. An increase in radioactivity of only one percent eventually translates into a decline in tree growth of about 18 percent. It is interesting to note that a global increase of Carbon 14 – one such as has never before been seen – parallels the slowing growth and the endemic death of trees from Lebanon to the Himalayas. The decline of the forests has grown from a disturbing trend to a catastrophe of dramatic proportions. Hardly has one study on the subject been finished than it is surpassed by another bearing worse tidings. Not so long ago, the march of death was confined to certain species in certain locations – to day it is a virtually global epidemic. Fruit trees are showing the same symptoms as those of the forest. 30 percent of the fruit trees in the Canton of Thurgovi in Switzerland are destroyed. Now they fear the vineyards will follow.”
“We now have proof of the risk of interrupting the very basis of the life cycle of plants, animals and man – in brief, photosynthesis on Earth is endangered!”
“There is a fundamental difference between plants and animals, and this determines why plants are so much more sensitive to air pollution. We animals need air for its oxygen, to burn our food so as to obtain energy. The plant, however, gets almost all of its nutrition in the form of carbon, which is contained in the air in the form of carbonic acid (C02) and is made available to the plant through the process of photosynthesis.”
“The prodigious aeration of the plants explains their tremendous sensitivity to air pollution. The toxic effects of airborn pollutants show up earlier in plants than in the human.”
http://www.nuclearreader.info/chapter3.html
Page 2: “Table 1 Incidence of 12 classes of disease among liquidators per 100 thousand people” – shows massive increase of diseases. Page 6 “relation between effects at low-intensive dosage and dose rate” and Page 11 “the PRESENCE of linear or linear-quadratic dependency IS NOT obligatory for the cases of diseases and deaths from malignant neoplasm at low doses”:
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/kr21pdf/Burlakova.pdf
Quote: “The victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and patients treated with X-rays because of such dubious indications as thymus hyperplasia demonstrate the exceptionally high sensitivity of children. However, the important discovery of Stewart and coworkers in 1958 , an enhancement of childhood leukaemia following diagnostic X-ray pictures during pregnancy, listed as historic milestone by Mossman also, has provoked a deep controversy. Their findings were an impressive support of the postulated linear non-threshold relationship for leukaemia” SOURCE Page 2:
http://www.staff.uni-marburg.de/~kunih/all-doc/doserele.pdf
After an atomic war, the US government suggests 10 Gray (!!!) as an acceptable dose in one year for us: QUOTE “…Almost as soon as we had begun our work, a disturbing fact emerged. All the calculations made by government agencies as to the radiation protection necessary after a full-scale nuclear war were based on the assumption that the adult could tolerate the enormous dose of 200 rads spread over a few days and as much as 1000 rads over a year. Apparently it had been decided by the government’s scientific advisory groups that it was not necessary to take into account the long-range after-effects of radiation, either on the survivors themselves or on their offspring…” by Ernest Sternglass:
http://www.nucleardemolition.com/SF.pdf , PAGE 22
Sternglass is an emeritus professor at the University of Pittsburgh and Director of the Radiation and Public Health Project. He is an American physicist and author, best known for his controversial research on the health risks of low-level radiation from atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons and from nuclear power plants. This is his study “Infant Mortality Changes Following the Three Mile Island Accident,” from 1980:
http://atomichistory.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/sternglass_infantmortalitytmi.pdf quote “The discrepancy in infant deaths between the two sources for the period of April 1 through June 30, 1979, had been two; from October 1 through December 31 it had also been two. For eighty-eight to surface between July 1 and September 30, precisely in the controversial summer months after the TMI accident, seemed unlikely.”
Risk assessments of small radiation doses differ by two orders of magnitude, depending on whose theory they are applied to or which observed data is used. Unfortunately, this is not just an academic interest. The choice of a model for risk calculation can cause enormous Costs. Powerful outside interests are coming into play. The best illustration of this is the story of the BEIR III report: http://books.google.de/books?id=VAoAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false by Joseph Rotblat
They can irradiate you and do not compensate you – and if they do, they do it with your money. No reactor is assured, mind you. Used in Belarus (Most Chernobyl affected country in the world):and now in Japan (Fukushima):
Discovered by Abraham Petkau, 1972. He discovered: that 26 RAD per Minute (fast radiation rate) need a total dose of 3500 RAD to harm a cell membrane. With 0,001 RAD per Minute (slow dose) only 0,7 RAD are needed to harm a cell membrane. The Mechanism behind it: The production of free radicals of Oxygen (O² with a negative electric charge) caused by ionising effect of the radiation. The free radicals caused by the slow dose (0,001) are sparsely distributed radicals do have a higher chance to reach the cell membranes. Why: The free radicals of the fast radiation rate (26) are tight together and so they react faster with each other. The low electric charge of the cell membranes attract the free radicals in the early state of the reaction (minor total dose).
The indirect chemical damage to cell membranes in the low dose range is much more important than the direct effect of radiation on the nucleus with its genetic material. In the nucleus there appears to be much stronger repair mechanisms than in the cell membranes. This is consistent with the purposes of evolution: Increasingly higher development of life. First and foremost, namely the genes in the nucleus had greatly developed by repair mechanisms to be protected. Only then could the nature of the gene pool protect itself against the highly damaging properties of natural radiation, and thus maintain the relative stability of species over millions of years.
If the harmed cells are monocytes this will cause: Anemia, because the monocytes recycle 37 – 40 % of the iron of dying red blood cells. Weakened immune system in the cells, because the monocytes generate the substance which activates the immune system of the lymphocytes. This is the so called “Bura Bura” – of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors. Routine radioactive emissions are dangerous because they are the main source of low-level radiation. Strong radiation comes from large accidents. Petkau discovered that the response is logarithmic to radiation, that means, concave downward. So the risk is higher at low doses of radiation than larger ones. The damage to the immune system due to low-level radiation can be controlled to some extent by measures that strengthen the immune system: antioxidant, vitamin C, vitamin E. The biochemical mechanisms by which the immune system is damaged, are different from the damage to the DNA caused by high radiation doses. If you have low-level radiation in addition to other mechanisms, the formation of free radicals by antioxidants such as vitamin C or E can be lifted. The only way to really deal with the problem of low-level radiation, is, as soon as possible to switch off any atomic reactor .
Sources:
> Petkau A. Effects of 22 Na + on phospholipid membrane injury to irradiated erythrocytes. Radiation Research 1968, 34:335-346.
>Sternglass EJ. Implication of dose-rate dependent cell-membrane damage for the biological effets of medical and environmental radiation. Proceedings of the symposium on population exposures, Knoxville TN, October 21-23, 1974. (CONF-741 018)
Radiation particles, directly hit the protoplasm and not the nucleus. they leave behind damage, which is only noticeable when these cells divide again. So instabilities occur in the chromosomes, the genes and genetic information. Instabilities that are not visible in the first, but especially in the second and third generation increase disease susceptibility:
http://www.independentwho.info/Presse_ecrite/09_05_27_Salzburger_DE.pdf
But in contrast to the gene pool, individual members of populations (plants, animals, people) for the evolution are not so important to the contrary, her constant death and her replacement by reproduction is an important evolutionary process. The repair mechanisms in the cell membranes were needed, but weren’t so important, because you only caused diseases, but no genetic defects. And if one member of a population has fulfilled its evolutionary role of reproduction, sit is no longer needed, so a life extension beyond the reproductive age is also not absolutely necessary. This is for the survival of animals and plant species are not necessarily problematic, however, for human society. Each individual hopes to a long and healthy life, far beyond reproduction age. In addition, an adaptation to environmental toxic substances in humans is not possbile, because of the generational change phaes which are very long. But we add more radiation by atomic energy with it’s low radiation emission, accidents, catastrophes – which are peeks.
Internal irradiation happens when radioactive material is ingested into the body(…) Inhaling even the tiniest particle, that’s the danger. making comparisons with X-rays and CT scans has no meaning. Because you can breathe in radioactive material… quote:
http://www.independentwho.info/Presse_ecrite/11_03_28_TakashiHirose_EN.pdf
For years, scientists have established a causal relationship between radiation exposure and hypothyroidism. In particular, radioactive iodine (which seeks out the thyroid gland, and destroys cells) is linked with the disease. Here it is: “GEOGRAPHIC VARIATION IN U.S. THYROID CANCER INCIDENCE, AND A CLUSTER NEAR NUCLEAR REACTORS IN NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND PENNSYLVANIA”
http://www.radiation.org/reading/pubs/091116Thyroidcancer.pdf During pregnancy, thyroid gland controls Brain Growth of Fetus
Then, Chernobyl and Fukushima were used to increase background radiation – in order to accelerate and alter evolution. Please keep in mind, that it was natural radiation (not man made) that caused EVOLUTION, but also mutation, diabilities and cancer. Quote “When I looked back to see what was said to be the radiation level–just in North America–it used to be that we got sixty millirem a year background radiation–that was the measurement. Then it went up to about a hundred. And then I heard a hundred and twenty and they’re now saying two hundred. Now there are some reasons for it. That first number, sixty, didn’t have radon gas in it. Radon gas is generally released by uranium mining and it now bathes all of North America and it’s pocketed more in some places than others. Also our construction has dug into ore beds and we’ve released a lot of radiation. “ – source:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/inetSeries/RB89.html
“People who live along a transportation route are assumed automatically by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to get the equivalent of two or three chest X-rays a year–just if you live along the transportation route. That means no accident, no stopping, no nothing.” quote from:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/inetSeries/RB89.html
Prof. Jacobi – Director of the Institute for Radiation Protection of the Society for Radiation and Environmental Research Ltd. Munich (
http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/04/091/4091257.pdf ) – Neaherbergm, said in his speech from March 3rd 1973, that he is representing a maximum acceptable radiation risk of the population (without asking them!) and assumed that a civilizational radiation risk exists only when it is visible. The risk would be only low (and therefore should be acceptable and useful), that in the existing natural (spontaneous) frequency of cancer of the total population it would be not detected! For Germany, it seemed (in 2350 spontaneous cancer deaths per million inhabitants), a maximum of ten deaths per year and per million inhabitants is ACCEPTABLE! That makes (80 million people in Germany) 800 cancer deaths by nuclear power stations per year, ACCEPTABLE! Is this still a democracy? Such a drug might would have never get the permission to come on the market! But it is nuclear energy, which is allowed! Thus ANY MURDER WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE, because people die anyway!
Quote: “One also needs to recognise that practically all protection measures undertaken in the USSR after the accident at the Chernobyl NPP have failed, such as iodine prophylactics, ban on consumption of contaminated foodstuffs, decontamination of affected settlements, attempts to improve the life standards in the affected areas, etc. The same happened to the state financial support of the people from the affected territories because the inevitably arbitrary allocations have produced an opposite effect, i.e. feeling of inequality and jealousy.” – PAGE 4, left bottom:
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/kr21pdf/Malko3.pdf ALSO on PAGE 4: right, top: The “350 mSv Concept” – which is an equivalent of 500 mammograms per year! For Children!
Remember: Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology says 3.8 microsieverts per hour o.k., that’s more than 33 millisieverts (mSv) per year. For children, kindergartens, nursery, primary and junior high schools. That’s an equivalent of 50 mammograms. And now add the irradiated food, the irradiatesd water… add the altered genes, mixed up now and in future generations. Human Fetus radiation tolerance: ZERO. Source:
http://peaceandhealthblog.com/2011/04/26/children-of-fukushima/ and:
http://www.ippnw.de/commonFiles/pdfs/Atomenergie/Reference_Embryo.pdf
In contrast: “…To provide an adequate safety standard the dose limit of 1 mSv/y have to be reduced to 0.02 mSv/y or 20 µSv/y.”Page 9:
http://www.staff.uni-marburg.de/~kunih/all-doc/stoakuni.pdf by Dr. Horst Kuni, Nuclear Medicine, University Professor.
Clinical investigations included the following groups:
1. Children aged between 3 – 7 years (227 individuals),
living in Gomel (soil contamination with 137Cs was 1-5
Ci/km2);
2. Children aged between 6 – 8 years (76 individuals), living
in Vetka (soil contamination with 137Cs was 15 – 40
Ci/km2);
3. Children aged between 7 – 16years (55 individuals), living
in Svetilovichi (soil contamination with 137Cs was 15 – 40
Ci/km2);
4. Children aged between 3 – 7 years (104 individuals),
living in Grodno (soil contamination with 137Cs was less
than 1 Ci/km2) – the first control group;
5. Children aged between 10 – 15 years (50 individuals),
living in Minsk (soil contamination with 137Cs was less
than 1 Ci/km2) – the second control group;
6. Children aged between 3 – 7 years (118 individuals),
living in Zhlobin (soil contamination with 137Cs was less
than 1 Ci/km2);
7. Children aged between 14 days and 14 months (155
individuals) and their mothers, constantly living in Gomel
and in Gomel localities and having hospital treatment in
Gomel Children’s District Clinical Hospital;
8. Children aged between 8 – 15 years (211 individuals)
with chronic pathology of gastro-intestinal tract, constantly
living on the territory with the level of soil contamination
with 137Cs from 1 to 15 Ci/km2 and having hospital
treatment in Gomel Children’s District Clinical Hospital;
9. Students of Gomel Medical Institute aged between 18 –
20 years (197 individuals).
The invention of trivialization of nuclear accidents, made in Germany, 1975: Quote P.17 “The next logical step is to embed residual risks in a spectrum of natural risks such as earthquakes, lightning, and the like…”:
http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/RR-76-001.p
Wolf Härtele, 1976, in JAPAN, he is a Swabian pastor’s (!) son, Physicist, advocate of fast breeder technology and preferred disciple of Carl Friedrich von Weizsacker My Source: Book: The Atomic State – by Robert Jungk. Häfele impressed with this risk philosohpy also the Church and Society of the World Council of Churches, which took his arguments for the debate book “Facing Up to Nuclear Power”:
And this was the end of the fast breeder program:
http://www.chernobylcongress.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/Baverstock_How_the_UN_works.pdf quote: “In about 1980 Gian-Carlo Pinchera, an Italian nuclear physicist, showed that fast reactors were inherently unsafe. That single conference paper led to the almost total abandonment of the fast breeder programme. (…) he warned “beware the dying kick of the nuclear advocates.” This is what we see today but maybe they are not dying!” quote by Keith Baverstock.
This is proven also by the Bob Hopkins study from 1973. The Department of Public Health proved with the study of Kurihara “cancer mortality for selected sites in 24 countries japan society” from nov 1972 Tohoku /Japan, that there was an 600 % increase in children mortality of japanese chidren age 5 till 9 years, after the Hrioshima and Nagasaki atomic test.
No dictator has ever had so much power! To kill future generations!
Intelligence and Brain Damage in Children Acutely Irradiated in Utero As a Result of the Chernobyl Accident – Department of Neurology, Institute for Clinical Radiology, Research Centre for Radiation Medicine of Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, WHO Collaborative Centre:
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/kr79pdf/Nyagu.pdf
Important for Japan: POLIKARPOV, G. G. 1966. RADIOECOLOGY of AQUATIC organisms. English transl. edited by V. Schultz and A. Please look at the pages: 281 (PDF page) or respectively on “printed” 292 document page for a table of doses of ionizing radiation for marine and freshwater organisms:
http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp?purl=/5557734-tlwxvK/
Because reactors depend on heavy water as a moderator, they release larger amounts of tritium to the environment than light water reactors (…) Tritium is a carcinogen, mutagen, teratogen and developmental toxin. It becomes incorporated into DNA and disrupts the genetic code of men’s and women’s reproductive cells:
http://www.iicph.org/files/IICPH-Fina l-Statement-re-Darlington-NNPP-May-17-2011.pdf – current Guideline and Drinking Water Quality Standard for tritium is 7,000 Bq/L, which is based on the permissible ICRP dose limit of 1 mSv/year (lowered to 0.1 mSv in water). This “standard” corresponds to a risk of 350 excess fatal cancers per million people from just one year’s consumption of drinking water, not a lifetime (70 years) 300 million people living in the US: 105,000 DEATHS PER YEAR x 30 years = 3,150,000 murdered people by the peaceful atom! Multiplied x global = weapons of mass destruction
“But tritium can be deadly (…) However tritium behaves chemically and biochemically like ordinary hydrogen. When ingested, it can incorporate itself into all forms of body cells, including those of the reproductive system…” Source:
http://ratical.org/radiation/KillingOurOwn/KOO10.html
Japan officials are going to call radiation measurements illegal and that they are disturbing the industry. Health plays no role. They are adapting the IAEA ideology of Radiophobia: The fear of radiation is worse than the radiation. And the declining birth rates among belarusians under the age of 30 – declared by the IAEA with “Radiophobia”:
http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/28/073/28073803.pdf – quote “2. PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS : Soon after the discovery of ionizing radiation, it was realized that radiation could harmfully affect skin tissues, body organs and the human body as a whole beside the genetic effects. Lately after the drop of the first atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and also after Three-Miles-Island and Chernobyl accidents anew phenomenon described as RADIOPHOBIA have become apparent and widely spread..” PAGE 338. More on Chernobyl:
http://www.euradcom.org/publications/chernobylebook.pdf Civil Society with it’s Fukushima NGOs will become a threat to the poitical level and hunted down like in Belarus. Costs make pressure. Pressure destroys the democracy. No country in the world can pay for an atomic accident. Not a single reactor is assured, it’s simpy too expensive. Japanese government wants to reduce evacuation zone:
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/national/archive/news/2011/07/15/20110715p2g00m0dm012000c.html 1996 said the belarusian president Lukashenko during a meeting of the IAEA: “We encourage people to come back. We will open the shops again and enable the people to return to their evacuated towns and villages.” National statements were made by the President of Belarus, Mr. A. Lukashenko:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull383/box1.html and:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/1996/inf510.shtml
And we, the “other” people are also radiation victims, weknow nothing about the global radiation: There are 60 certified radionuclide stations fully equipped with high precision detectors that are set up around the world to monitor airborne radioactivity on a daily basis with unprecedented accuracy. Their objective : Find low quantities of radioactive particles that could reveal a possible nuclear test in violation of the Comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty (TICEN):
http://petitions.criirad.org/?For-a-total-transparency-on-the
Krypton 85 is emitted from nuclear power plants and bruises the skin on more than 2 millimeters, which could be the cause for skin cancer. W.L. Boeck – President of the krypton 85 Working Group of the IAEA said in 1976 that the electrical conductivity of the air over oceans could be increased by 43 %. Result would be more lightning and unexpected weather phenomena:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/193/4249/195.extract
It also seems that low radiation kills us, by weakening of our immune system, thus we become more vulnerable to simple diseases. For example, accumulation of allergies.. large parts of the population can be so in 10 years or more, simply shut down:
http://books.google.de/books?id=gjIzAAAAMAAJ – it’s some kind of genetic clean out.
More about latency and leukemia: “Once the latency period has passed, a certain type of cancer will continue to appear year after year in a group of humans subjected years before to known ionizing radiation. Acute leukemias due to irradiation continue to appear in apparently undiminished numbers, consistently even 20 years after the Hiroshima-Nagasaki bombing. One form of leukemia, so-called chronic myelogenous leukemia, seems to appear among the exposed population steadily over a period of about 10 years and then to appear less frequently.” SOURCE:
http://ratical.org/radiation/CNR/PP/chp3.html Table of Contents:
http://ratical.org/radiation/CNR/PP/index.html#TOC
The cancer risk of a child can be doubled by one or two x-rays (10 – 20 mGy) on the pregnant mother before the birth of the child, if it is done in the last months before birth. Atenth of the dose is enough, if the x-ray is made in the first months of life. Source: MacMahon B Prenatal x-ray exposure and childhood cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1962;28(1):173-191.
The IAEA is everywhere, this watchdog is an advertising agency for the military and the atomic industry. They even gagged the WHO. This is how they work: By mid 1998 first draft of the Guidelines was circulating between IAEA and WHO at the management level. Although there had been a clear agreement between the two organisations at the management level and the work had taken place openly the IAEA withdrew at that stage strongly advising that the whole issue should either be dropped or revised. The issue was the proposal to lower the action level for implementation from 100mGy to 10mGy dose to the thyroid’s of children.”
Rosa Goncharova‘s geneticist. In the Belarusian capital Minsk, she directs the laboratory of the Institute of Genetics and Cytology of the Belorussian Academy of Sciences. For decades, the research professor and her team investigated the effects of long-lasting radioactive low-level radiation.
What harm take people living in contaminated areas?
“Must live”, because there are 2600 villages that should relocate. Rosa Gonchrova summarizes the results of their studies (in german):
“One of the main lessons learned from Chernobyl is the fact that even low doses of ionizing radiation in animals and humans have biological and genetic consequences. This is now proven. They produce damage in the body cells and in the sex cells. Even at a low dose of less than 100 micro Sievert and even years at a tolerated dose of one millisievert were identified in our laboratory genetic changes.”
“About one Milllisievert per year: This is the annual dose limit for people who do not work professionally with ionizing radiations. For occupationally exposed persons in Europe are higher limits. The research team has identified mutations, ie changes in the genes of the nucleus.”
“Man, like every other living being possesses, protection systems, the repair such mutations almost. If there is now under the influence of radioactivity additional mutations, the organism will be charged additionally, he must also fight against it.”
“For these children we have found changes in individual genes. And the worst part is that these children show an increased sensitivity to other unfavorable factors. That is, these children fall ill more frequently than others. Among the unfavorable factors include poor diet, environmental factors, chemical pollution. This is true not only for children but for adults too. They all have an increased sensitivity to other unfavorable factors.”
“In plain English: who spends his life in contaminated areas spend, must, whose immune system is weakened.”
Radioactivity, as it opens the doors for other health problems.
The most dangerous radiation is which is ingested with food. Thus, for example, cesium-137 from the inside to act on the cells, because it displaces the vital potassium in muscle tissue. Or strontium-90, a radionuclide that accumulates in the bone and bone marrow: there can damage blood cells and can cause cancer such as blood.”
- On the question of whether changes in the genetic inheritance of future generations, says geneticist Rose Goncharova: “We demonstrated in our laboratory for the first time that genetic changes over generations may be swept on. We have found after Chernobyl more than 22 animal generations of genetic instability. There are animals that live in the contaminated areas who have to live under the influence of low doses. We have been scientifically proven.”
“This has been proven in one of the most common mammals in the bank vole. The cells of these mice were well comparable with those of humans, says the researcher. Therefore one can transmit many findings to him.”
“Even after 22 generations of mice you can still see changes, mutations. They are inherited. The radioactivity is harmful. So it happens that many offspring do not survive or even many embryos. Those who survive are somehow cope with the situation. But whose genome is unstable, and they also pass into the next generation. And often they are ill. Their whole system is more unstable than in other animals.”
“The mortality rate in these animals is very, very high. Mice produce very many offspring, and therefore they can afford a high death rate. Man, however, will usually produce only one child. In any case, not five, six, seven at once. He also does not bring several generations in a year or during his life to the world. So we can also transmit the results that actually would be transferable to humans, not in all respects to him.”
“Which low doses of radiation effects in humans may have, but points to a study that was published in December 2010 in Germany. It states: Within a radius of 35 km around a nuclear plant are fewer girls were born in areas without nuclear power. We investigated the surroundings of 27 facilities in Germany and four in Switzerland. Fewer female births have been noted previously: In regions that were hit by the Chernobyl radioactive precipitation. It is believed that female embryos are more sensitive to radiation and therefore die rather than male.”
Then: The dose of cesium 137 and strontium 90, which causes stomach cancer is less than 1 Centigray per year. At the same time, the IAEA said that this dose is about 100 per year Centigray. Both results are from the same foundations. In animals, resulting in about 25MsV reparation, there is no lack of effects at radiation doses below 1 Centigray. (P.143 of the book “IPPNW” (peace nobel prize) people’s tribunal 1996 Chernobyl”. quote by Dr. Katsumi Furitsu, Osaka, Japan. I’ve met her:
The main way in which the “radiation protection industry” has succeeded in hugely underrating the ill-health caused by nuclear power is by insisting on a group of extremely restrictive definitions as to what qualifies as a radiation-caused illness statistic. For example, under IAEA’s criteria:
> If a radiation-caused cancer is not fatal, it is not counted in the IAEA’s figures
> If a cancer is initiated by another carcenogen, but accelerated or promoted by exposure to radiation, it is not counted.
> If an auto-immune disease or any non-cancer is caused by radiation, it is not counted.
> Radiation-damaged embryos or foetuses which result in miscarriage or stillbirth do not count
> A congenitally blind, deaf or malformed child whose illnesses are are radiation-related are not included in the figures because this is not genetic damage, but rather is teratogenic, and will not be passed on later to the child’s offspring.
> Causing the genetic predisposition to breast cancer or heart disease does not count since it is not a “serious genetic disease” in the Mendelian sense.
> Even if radiation causes a fatal cancer or serious genetic disease in a live born infant, it is discounted if the estimated radiation dose is below 100 mSv [mSv= millisievert, a measurement of radiation exposure. One hundred millsievert is the equivalent in radiation of about 100 X-Rays].
> Even if radiation causes a lung cancer, it does not count if the person smokes — in fact whenever there is a possibility of another cause, radiation cannot be blamed.
> If all else fails, it is possible to claim that radiation below some designated dose does not cause cancer, and then average over the whole body the radiation dose which has actually been received by one part of the body or even organ, as for instance when radio-iodine concentrates in the thyroid. This arbitrary dilution of the dose will ensure that the 100 mSv cut-off point is nowhere near reached. It is a technique used to dismiss the sickness of Gulf War veterans who inhaled small particles of ceramic uranium which stayed in their lungs for more than two years, and in their bodies for more than eight years, irradiating and damaging cells in a particular part of the body.
Last but not least, we should know, that atomic reactors and atomic bombs are siamese twins:
The Atomic Explosion at an Atomic Reactor – THIS COULD BE THE FINAL BLOW against the atomic industry ONCE AND FOREVER!
Cobalt 60 was detected in Kashiwa shi of Chiba. It proves reactor 3 had an atomic explosion, and it proves gov / tepco are still hiding most important facts.It’s very natural to think there may be way more things concealed:
http://10401.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-88.htm (now taken offline). But they also found Cobalt 60 in seafood:
Chernobyl too, but this is IGNORED by today’s science:
http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/03/16/fukushima-chernobyl-unofficial-data/ Dr. Chris Busby Believes Fukushima Was A Nuclear Explosion :
http://www.rense.com/general93/chrisbsy.htm AND: University of Innsbruck says Chernobyl was primarily caused by a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION – Page 1, left: translation: “… the one Nuclear explosion, and finally a meltdown followed by “:
http://physik.uibk.ac.at/physik4/tschernobyl/2-Der_Unfall.pdf AND: “Some specialists are sure that after the steam explosion a nuclear explosion similar to an atomic bomb explosion occurred in the core of the 4th Unit . Its power had to be much higher than power of the steam explosion. The conclusion of the authors is based on experimental findings established by studying of activities of isotopes 133Xe and 133Xem in the air that existed in the first days after the Chernobyl accident. Their study was carried out in the city Cherepovets that is about 1,000 km in north direction from the Chernobyl NPP. The authors could find that the ratio of activities of these isotopes is the same as in the case of nuclear explosion.” SOURCE:
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/kr79pdf/Malko1.pdf — TO ALL: Plese help finding this: “Martinez Val, Jose M., Aragones, Jose M., Mingues, Emilio, Perlado, Jose M., Velarade, Guillermio. An Analysis of the Physical Causes of the Chernobyl Accident. Nuclear Technology. Vol. 90, June 1990, pp.371 – 378.”
the forcible pollution by all of us by the nuclear industry / military is irresponsible. Natural radiation is dangerous and leads to spontaneous mutations, and diseases. We can not accept such a thing as a reason to add yet more radiation because it is passed on from living creature to living creature and from generation to generation.
maybe they can destroy the democracy, make us sick. But not our courage.
800 tons of DU is the atomicity equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The U.S. has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 400,000 Nagasaki bombs. Four nuclear wars indeed, and 10 times the amount of radiation released into the atmosphere from atmospheric testing! SOURCE:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/DU/KYagasakiOnDU.pdf
PET / CT scanner. These are systems that simultaneously do (X-ray) computer tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) of a whole person. The PET is a nuclear medicine three-dimensional method in which positron emitters are used – mostly fluorine-18 – with a half-life of 1.8 hours (or full decay time of 18 hrs). For a single whole-body examination while the effective dose climbs to 10 millisieverts (mSv) for CT alone to 25 mSv. The organ doses are correspondingly: bone marrow 29 mSv, 27 mSv lung, ovary 33 mSv, 36 mSv intestine, stomach 29 mSv. For comparison, the threshold for the population at a nuclear power plant is 0.3 mSv (effective) per year for occupationally Exposed 20 mSv per year:
http://www.strahlentelex.de/MedizinischeStrahlenbelastung.htm
radioactive iron Fe-59 given to 820 pregnant women (between 10th and 35th pregnancy week). The women knew nothing about it. Result: High malignancy rates in offspring: Acute lymphatic leukemia, synovial sarcoma, lymphosarcoma, primary liver carcinoma.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/radiation/dir/mstreet/commeet/pm04/pl4brf/pl4brd.txt
“As Alice Stewart mentioned in her talk, there are two categories of human illness that everyone agrees can be caused by exposure to atomic radiation even at very low levels. They are (1) cancers of all kinds, and also (2) genetic mutations — which can be caused right down to the lowest levels of radiation exposure. Most scientists believe that these harmful effects are linearly related to the dose, so that if the dose is doubled, the number of cancers and genetic defects will also be doubled, and if the dose is cut in half, only half as many cancers and genetic defects will be seen. It is important to realize that if a damaging dose is spread out among a very large population, so that each individual receives only a very small portion of the total dose, the number of cancers and genetic defects is in no way diminished. Thus, in the case of radioactive pollution, dilution is no solution at all.”
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/WorldUraniumHearing/AliceStewart.html#MUTATE
“According to the ICRP in 1991, just 5 mSv to the testes could cause damage to offspring – yet this dose was permitted yearly to members of the public, and ten times more was permitted to nuclear workers, in all countries prior to 1990. It continues today to be permitted yearly for nuclear workers in most countries.”
http://iicph.org/victims_of_the_nuclear_age
Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass (born 1923, Berlin) is an emeritus professor at the University of Pittsburgh and Director of the Radiation and Public Health Project. He is an American physicist and author, best known for his controversial research on the health risks of low-level radiation from atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons and from nuclear power plants. This is his study “Infant Mortality Changes Following the Three Mile Island Accident,” from 1980:
http://atomichistory.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/sternglass_infantmortalitytmi.pdf
Go on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
http://wonder.cdc.gov/cmf-icd9.html click on: I Agree, do a search, 1979, 1980, PA / Pennsylvania…
and: sternglass fallout and sat scores evidence for cognitive damage during early infancy phi delta kappa april 1983
http://www.jstor.org/pss/20386800
No wonder the NRC staff did not want to let the public know that they knew exactly in which direction the most radioactive clouds had moved, since this information could then be used to tie any later localized rises in fetal deaths, infant mortality, and cancer to the radioactive gas clouds from Three Mile Island. SOURCE:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/SFchp18.html
quote: “But the firing of Gordon MacLeod hardly ended the controversy over the health impact of the accident and how it had been handled. In November, Ernest Sternglass charged that figures from the nearby Harrisburg and Holy Spirit hospitals indicated that infant deaths there had doubled from six during February through April of 1979 to twelve in May through July. Only one infant had died at the Harrisburg Hospital in May through July of 1978; seven had died there in those same three months following the accident. The statistics seemed tragically reminiscent of the era of nuclear bomb testing. The NRC, the state, and the utility had all claimed–as had the AEC after so many atomic explosions–that radiation releases had been too small to have more than a very marginal health impact, if any at all. Sternglass asserted the authorities had failed to account for the extreme sensitivities of fetuses in utero in claiming a very marginal health impact from the accident’s releases…” Ernest Sternglass, “Infant Mortality Changes Following the Three Mile Island Accident,” presented at the 5th World Congress of Engineers and Architects, Tel Aviv, Israel, 1980“
quote: “The charge that TMI had actually killed area infants provoked a storm of outrage from the government of Pennsylvania. The state responded–as it had at Shippingport six years earlier–that the official statistics Ernest Sternglass had used were, after all, inaccurate. Dr. George Tokuhata, director of the state’s Department of Epidemiological Research, said a “printing error” on the part of the U.S. Bureau of Vital Statistics had skewed the state’s infant-mortality figures. There were thus eighty-eight fewer infant deaths in Pennsylvania in the summer of 1979 than originally recorded.Sternglass, however, held his ground. Discrepancies between state and federal data are not uncommon. But this particular case seemed “suspicious.” The discrepancy in infant deaths between the two sources for the period of April 1 through June 30, 1979, had been two; from October 1 through December 31 it had also been two. For eighty-eight to surface between July 1 and September 30, precisely in the controversial summer months after the TMI accident, seemed unlikely.”
More about NRC:
http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/us-n-r-c-says-tritium-is-normal-reason-for-children-leukemia/
