Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘US’

17098093_1286955404726420_2200176157965570779_o

Right now a one billion USD lawsuit is opened by irradiated and damaged soldiers, who were on the USS Reagan during the Venting of TECPO’s reactors:

http://norcalrecord.com/stories/511141853-sailors-1-billion-lawsuit-over-radiation-from-fukushima-nuclear-disaster-sails-through-federal-court

Also, Chris Busby is right now in San Francisco, developing a strategy to help these sailors infront of court. He is one of last remaining experts actually doing something for the human race. More on his profile:

https://www.facebook.com/chris.busby.714?fref=mentions

What I want to add are examples from Chernobyl, the cancer categories, the model of when a cancer is radiation induced, a similar case from the U.S., and data linked to the USS Reagan and TEPCO’s VENTING.

Don Gabel died in the first proven case of radiation-caused cancer at Rocky Flats, in the 1970ies: https://books.google.de/books?id=YIAzHckpZswC&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&f=false

17191754_1286986068056687_98755878022666238_o

“Dr. Mettler (IAEA) learned well that solid cancers without a ten year latency period did not “count” as radiation-related under ICRP latency models. Therefore the Chernobyl thyroid cancers were seen, but not reported as radiogenic, since they were within five years of a disaster! The nuclear industry has a monopoly on radiation and human health scientific information, and its dissemination through the Universities into nuclear reactor facilities, hospital radiology laboratories and UN organizations. This poses a further serious problem. Normally, one believes the evidence at hand, rather than the theory! If one has been taught theory as fact, the situation becomes more complicated. ICRP has created an artificial “consensus” on the health effects of radiation” from: https://ratical.org/radiation/Chernobyl/CaUFtH.html

stage-show2

Concering Three Mile Island, from: https://ratical.org/radiation/NAvictims.html

Restrictive Definitions

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.

This is what they go against. But Sciences changes, as Busby said on facebook.

Another category, no one knows: The IAEA says only the first seven days of a nuclear catastrophe count as an accident. How is that possible, if you look at the decay times of radionuclides and the genetic long term effect? Well, it sure helps the government to re populate the areas, make compensation claims small and fake some radiation maps as public service, against the panic makers:

11722157_862633310491967_4261527797011097163_o

 

nomeltdown-2

It all is also linked to the “Meltdown” term. I believe it was VENTING. And that there is no core, no molten core anywhere, not inside, not below. Show me a single pic of molten fuel. Anything, since 2011. There is nothing.

Here below are NRC trans script snapshots, the big one is about the USS Reagan.

Let me explain:

We must accept that the large amounts of nuclear material, or almost everything, has left the reactors. Not tiny amounts as TEPCO and IAEA Vienna / JAEC Japan say. We must concentrate the clues contradicting the meltdown. If one gets off here, one is not interested in the truth. There is data from SPEEDI, CTBTO, TEPCO, and JAEC data from Germany and Norway, which shows that enormous amounts have escaped. So much that not a meltdown could have been the source. BECAUSE it says in the text book, that a meltdown is equivalent to 2 – 5% of the total inventory that exists in a reactor. A number, a theory, not reality. From which all radiation maps and evac zones are calculated, including possible damage compensation, and also this case against TEPCO.

I think almost 100 % escaped. From all three reactors. There is solid confirmation for this claim: From Futaba to the USS Reagan, infront of Tokyo bay, to Takasaki 200 miles away – they were all irradiated with radionuclides, more than ever in human history (the CTBTO RN 38 station was shut down to be decontaminated).

Excerpt:

“Two stations of the CTBTO network, Okinawa and Takasaki, are located in Japan, but 133Xe (XENON) measurements are made only at Takasaki. However, the Takasaki noble gas detections were, for an extended period of time, reaching the dynamic range of the system, meaning that measurements were so high that they became unreliable. Regarding the 137Cs (CESIUM) measurements at Takasaki, there was another problem:”

“During the first passage of the plume at this station, radioactivity entered the interior of the building. This resulted in a serious contamination, meaning that 137Cs shows up continuously in the measurements since the initial event, even when it is completely absent in the ambient air.”

“Both stations are part of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) – The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) foresees a global ban of all nuclear explosions. To verify compliance with the CTBT, a global International Monitoring System (IMS) with four different measurement technologies is currently built up, namely for seismic (170 stations), hydroacoustic (11 stations), infrasound (80 stations) and radionuclide (80 stations) monitoring. 60 particulate monitoring stations are currently delivering data to the International Data Centre of the Preparatory Commission for the CTBTO in Vienna.”

Source: http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/12/2313/2012/acp-12-2313-20

Did you know? Even world’s most advanced measurement system gives data about emissions only after 2 – 3 days. Here is a list of CTBTO stations which catched radioactive atoms from the TEPCO reactors, in chronological order (bottom of the page, german language) The following stations have actually been able to detect radionuclides. Translation: “The activity concentrations measured outside Japan with the extremely sensitive IMS systems are very small and are partly in the range of the detection threshold. The simulated time of arrival can not be evaluated precisely because the IMS radionuclide stations measure particles in a three-day crypt: The plants suck air through a filter for 24 hours, after which the sample decays for 24 hours to reduce the background by short-lived isotopes And the energy of decay is counted and counted for a further 24 hours in a gamma spectrometer. The results are therefore always available two to three days after the measurement. Within this accuracy, however, the modeled arrival times were mostly confirmed. Detections up to and including March 25th 2011″: https://www.bgr.bund.de/DE/Themen/Erdbeben-Gefaehrdungsanalysen/Seismologie/Kernwaffenteststopp/Verifikation/Atmosphaer-Transport/Besondere%20Ereignisse/atm_fukushima_inhalt.html

Not possible by a simple meltdown. Then the other confirmation: The plant site still exists. Why is this important? The reactors operated with pressure containments, BWR type. But TEPCO and JAEC confirmed that their fuel rods were 100% dry, on March 14th 6 pm. Much pressure was building up. In a pressurized system (!). But it was not blown to pieces. It should have been beacause of the pressure building up. Only the burst protection around the containment was. Why is that? Why is the plant site still there? A good question. It should have been exploded just like the pressure cooker bomb during the marathon in the U.S. The architecture of reactors consists of many valves and safety pressure relief systems. Some are spring designed, to give out a “Puff” from time to time, and with it radionuclides, despite the active coal filters.

“To justify venting or purging, there must be an established need to improve working conditions” JUSTIFICATION: Avoiding explosion of the containment: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/gen-letters/1979/gl79054.html

But when the reactors became dry – all three (!) – TEPCO melted, vented, melted, vented, controlled, over days. To the outside. There is no molten core anywhere, “falling” into the sea, as some dreamers say. TEPCO even drilled holes from outside into the burst protection, to relief the system. But when hundreds of tons of MOX / UO2 fuel melt, no space is enough to catch it. A dry reactor heats up with 212°F per 0,1 seconds. Means it reaches its melting temperature 5,072°F in 2,8 seconds. Then its in the molten form. But is does not stop there. But that is the limit of most people’s imagination power. TEPCO knows this. It vaporizes, aerolizes. And at the bottom of a molten core a critical mass is possible, because the neutrons are no longer catched by water. The splitting rate races. And the pressure rises with the temperature. What did TEPCO do? VENTING. Until the system could not hold any longer, the system was overrun by it, and the space went out in the torus / dry well and even the chimney wasnt enough. Cracks and vessel breached, as photos and gamma cams have shown. Pipes were sucked flat, instead of blown to pieces. There are photos.

Then we can read about the 400 mSv per hour measuerd near the plant (“There was a media report of a 40-rem dose measured somewhere near the plant.”) quote from NRC on PAGE 15: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A106.pdf

Gregory Jaczko was informed about the venting of TEPCO reactors in the NRC document ML12052A099.pdf. What did he know, what did he do? Venting reactor containment means letting it fly – to the people. THIS is NOT a meltdown. The reactors are empty. Scanner pics of TEPCO show this. How can this be a meltdown? http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A099.pdf

What I mean with Reactor Fuel Enthalpy (TEPCO never shows anything like this, to avoid questions about the so called meltdown): “Prompt fuel dispersion was observed at radial average peak fuel enthalpies above 275 cal/g UO2- Tests at greater than 400 cal/g UO2 produced more severe consequences, with resultant coolant pressure increases to 12 MPa, energy conversions to nearly 3%, and metal-water reaction to nearly 100%of the cladding.” There is also data about melting and fragmentation. Remember: Chernobyl 1,400 cal/g (!!!) There was nothing melting anymore, it became gaseaous. SOURCE PDF: http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/12/581/12581572.pdf

SOARCA / MACCS2: “Accident Consequence Analysis Code: The computer code used to calculate dispersion of radioactive material to the environment and the population.” http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/research/safetycodes.html

cherno-fuku-msv-comp

This is a video from Chernobyl 4 for comparsion, to understand the TEPCO air dose date below. According to Alexandr Kupnyi, who made the footage, near the elephant foot is an air dose of 2 – 3 röntgen per hour. so 0,01 – 0,02 Sievert per hour. 10 – 20 milli SIevert per hour. And the dose rate at Fukushima coast, during venting was 60 – 110 milli Sievert per hour.

Hundr

 

eds of sievert per hour were measured, causing 100 mill Sievert per hour air dose infront of Fukushima coast line. I think 3 x 16 billion curie escaped. The radioactivity of 3,000 Hiroshima bombs. We are not dead, because it left the building as tiniest pieces of itself, available everywhere to everyone, showing up NOT in the immediate offspring, because the effects are not dominant enough in DNA. That makes it impossible to track down, but will be the death for millions over the next generations. Many simple can not propagate, for example, because the cells / glands responsible are among the most vunerable in the human body. What I add is this: Since this industry was born and is fed by the military, no price is too high. TEPCO scales readings down when people enter. But scale it up, when robots enter. They switch off their Toys R Us Robots, and call it “killed” by radiation, to support their meltdown theory. In order the industry survives and people never know that a full and complete fuel loss is possible by VENTING, and that this emergency system is everywhere, in each reactor worldwide. This is also the reason why we have NEVER SEEN and will never see any fuel sample grabbed by a camera or robot, from TEPCO’s reactors, Because if we could see it we could estimate the fuel enthalpy, the energy deposited into the fuel and from then on we could explain the nature of the catastophe and fuel loss. TEPCO would risk their meltdown theory. I repeat: NO evidence was ever shown to the world, supporting the meltdown. And this is why we should find the regulations for operating reactors in Japan. For example in the UK Safety Assessment Principle 152 requires ‘The containment should adequately contain such radioactive matter as may be released into it as a result of any fault in the reactor.’ If a reactor VENTS its core almost completely to the outside, licence can not be granted and operation of reactors become instant ILLEGAL. But since this step is not done by clinging to the meltdown, Japan will switch on their reactors, one by one. And we watch. And this lawsuit will fail then, because it was only a meltdown and so the radiation can’t and couldn’t be so high, in TEPCO’s eyes.

“The licensing basis calculations for a control rod drop accident predict a peak fuel rod enthalpy of about 220 calories/gram when the inserted reactivity is 1.3% K. (…) When the core is reflooded, about half the core will undergo a cold water reactivity transient. (…) every fuel rod in the core would be perforated. I(…) the effect of the transient on the fuel matrix itself. (-..) Reflooding the reactor will insert about 8% K, when filled with cold water (with xenon present). However, it takes about 30 seconds to refill the vessel from the bottom to the top of the core (…) it is likely that there will be at least some severe fuel damage in the region where the control rods do not insert. As a shutdown core is reflooded, individual fuel rods, now at a high surface temperature, will first experience film boiling and then “quench” as the cladding temperature drops and the rod transitions into nucleate boiling (…) Source: https://www.nrc.gov/sr0933/Section%203.%20New%20Generic%20Issues/080r4.html

Again, Facts are Facts:

no AC power, lost all injection capability, trouble controlling their SRV. I asked ‘ what was the vessel pressure? The guy told me it was 4 megapascals, and all they got are fire pumps. And there’s no way a fire pump is going to push against 4 megapascals.”
Tony: ‘we’re concerned they’ve been in the situation on and off really from the beginning and they’ve been having trouble getting injection all along… very likely, also drawing, you know, it’s also leading us to this conclusion.”
pg 276
“… when you said ‘a loud sound’ ….would be it was probably when the core went x-up.”
Tony: “and landing in the water under the vessel, it would have caused a little steam explosion.”
Jack Grobb: “ But what you think is that that was a steam explosion from the fuel going x-vessel, and we heard that containment at that point in time went from 3 atmospheres to 1 atmosphere.”
Jim: “That makes sense.”
Tony: “Yep. It would.”
ET Transcripts #4 of 10 –14 March 2011
http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1205/ML12052A105.pdf

 

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

use it, copy it, share it.

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

It is possible. By world’s most powerful army: CIVIL SOCIETY!

san-onofre

Bye bye radiation sky: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-06-07/business/39807950_1_atlas-cops-n-kids-louis-cruz-news-golden-gloves-finals

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

On NRC Server:

From the 1970ies: Mrs. Mary Weik (New York) on Indian Point, Hudson River, Leukemia and Cancer – collected works: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1002/ML100220378.pdf She was attacked by officials like AEC (NRC) that she was only a “housewife” and her works are worthless. NRC’s response: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1002/ML100261297.pdf from the NRC server (full of docs): http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1002/

with kind regards,

Jan Hemmer

 

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

NRC “science”:

Former NRC chairman Schlesinger wanted to shoot radioactive waste into space: http://books.google.de/books?id=fmip1KhHnrUC&pg=PA475&lpg=PA475&dq=Schlesinger+AEC+space+radioactive+waste&source=bl&ots=lEbmQ8lYyg&sig=JHFMgVqTcx_DeSm3Tz6G1rJX5CY&hl=de&sa=X&ei=wB84T5GlOoSf0QWm4qinAg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Schlesinger%20rocket&f=false

No step further today.

with kind regards,

Jan Hemmer

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

ONE radiograph during pregnancy: 20 % increase for cancer probability before the child is 10 years old. Two radiographs during pregnancy: 28 %. Three: 70 %. FOUR:…. 100 PERCENT. There is NO SAFE LEVEL OF RADIATION EXPOSURE: http://books.google.de/books?id=aAoAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=cancer+stewart+xray+1970+radiographs&source=bl&ots=UGZYt0TZGo&sig=ENE9wYZjjNs3Rh2XyptdZwP3Ucw&hl=de&ei=7545Tu6iF8aAOsLrvbMG&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

No One Escapes Harm: The Essential Story of In-Utero Irradiation http://ratical.org/radiation/CNR/No1Escapes.html

The X-rays and Health Project (XaHP): http://www.x-raysandhealth.org/

THE PETKAU EFFECT: http://www.nuclearreader.info/chapter3.html

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

BEIR? ICRP? IAEA? SAFE LEVELS? Here are your facts, by a former NRC scientists and whistleblower: http://www.ratical.org/radiation/CNR/GreenDereg.html

K.Z. Morgan (former ICRP chairman) “there is no dose of radiatoon so low that the risk of malignancy is zero” QUOTE page 30, right, although the ICRP claimed the opposite until 1960http://books.google.de/books?id=aAoAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=cancer+and+low+level+ionizing+radiation+morgan+k.z.&source=bl&ots=UGZYt-R5El&sig=u136wezO8Tvy5YZE-bfJhYjB-AQ&hl=de&ei=GHM5TtXrOoTKswbx4vUY&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=there%20is%20no%20dose%20of%20radiatoon%20so%20low%20that%20the%20risk%20of%20malignancy%20is%20zero&f=false

Karl Morgan “There is no safe level of exposure and there is no dose of radiation so low that the risk of a malignancy is zero”:  http://books.google.de/books?id=9-8EkIhxeK0C&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=%E2%80%9CThere+is+no+safe+level+of+exposure+and+there+is+no+dose+of+radiation+so+low+that+the+risk+of+a+malignancy+is+zero%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=GZXG5ZVK0i&sig=vVvf-pFUOPAPISPaBR5IWmVzlV8&sa=X&ei=AnUyUIq4L6Ss0QWtzoDgDA&ved=0CBQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9CThere%20is%20no%20safe%20level%20of%20exposure%20and%20there%20is%20no%20dose%20of%20radiation%20so%20low%20that%20the%20risk%20of%20a%20malignancy%20is%20zero%E2%80%9D&f=false

more: http://books.google.de/books?id=QunaUpeENl4C&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

“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

ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) protects atomic industry NOT human health: Until 1990 ICRP said it is not necessary to evacuate people, as long as the radiation does not exceed 500 mSv. Then they lowered it from 100 mSv to 20 milli sievert (2000 percent increase for children) which Japan implemented. Which is an equivalent of 50 mammograms: http://books.google.de/books?id=Ber3ENERfGwC&pg=PA343&lpg=PA343&dq=ICRP+40++500mSv&source=bl&ots=IaOqT2MqK2&sig=l3l0MYGe_nKkaXxvFZxkkG8hP5M&hl=de&ei=gc81TpqyI4PfsgajxLG5Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=ot%20exceed%20500%20mSv.%20The%20ICRP&f=false

NOW we know, there is only one tolerance limit: ZERO – the Reference Embryo: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/atomic-alert-in-japan/

ICRP versus ECRR: http://www.euradcom.org/2009/lesvostranscript.htm

and: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/less-girls-are-born-because-of-nuclear-power-global-population-growth-control/

The excess cancer risk from obstetric X-ray examination was directly related to the fetal dose: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2870%2991782-4/abstract

5 mGy – 50 mGy = 5000% Leukemia increase for children: http://cel.webofknowledge.com/InboundService.do?SID=Q2kiGlBbfFgNPfKfkLo&product=CEL&UT=A1972N025000001&SrcApp=CR&Init=Yes&action=retrieve&customersID=Highwire&Func=Frame&SrcAuth=Highwire&IsProductCode=Yes&mode=FullRecord

The dosage given for diagnostic radiography is carciogenic at any rate for the foetus: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2009217/?page=9

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2870%2991782-4/abstract

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

妊娠中の日本人女性の避難すぐ

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…

11/92 interview with Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass, author of Secret Fallout: http://www.ratical.org/radiation/inetSeries/ejs1192.html

His book SECRET FALLOUT LOW-LEVEL RADIATION FROM HIROSHIMA
TO THREE-MILE ISLAND as a full PDF FILE: http://www.nucleardemolition.com/SF.pdf

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

media bought by atomic industry: http://www.nytimes.com/1995/08/02/business/cbs-accepts-bid-by-westinghouse-5.4-billion-deal.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

More insight:

quotes by: http://ratical.org/radiation/KillingOurOwn/KOO14.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: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/us-n-r-c-says-tritium-is-normal-reason-for-children-leukemia/

More about WHO / IAEA: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/how-the-iaea-actively-endangers-the-health-of-children/

Why low radiation (PETKAU EFFECT) is dangerous & how it works: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/low-radiation-the-petkau-effect/

Life-Upgrade.com

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »