Radiation is political
and current governmental and intergovernmental standards of radiation safety
reflect the viewpoints of the winners in the fifty year old debate between
independent geneticists and scientists affiliated with the nuclear power or weapons
industry.
It may very well be that our genomes are far more vulnerable than
accepted standards of exposure presume. EPA standards for air and drinking
water and FDA standards for milk, and food also reflect substantial trade-offs
and cost-benefit tradeoffs using data that may not reflect the true costs of
radiation exposure, particularly when radionuclides are ingested and inhaled. Please see my links at the bottom of this page.
The
US Cancer Study commissioned by George W. Bush, Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk, found that the US military was
the biggest contributor to environmentally caused cancer in the US http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/annualreports/pcp08-09rpt/PCP_Report_08-09_508.pdf. Our exposure to ionizing radiation is multiple times higher (we know not how
many) than prior to the development of the atomic bomb. It is hardly surprising
that the latest Report on Carcinogens (12th ed.) finds that “the probability
that a resident of the United States will develop cancer at some point in his
or her lifetime is 1 in 2 for men and 1 in 3 for women” (http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/roc12.pdf).
Our exposure to ionizing radiation is multiple times higher
(we know not how many) than prior to the development of the atomic bomb. It was the bomb that drove this explosion of "background" radiation and the creation of new elements, such as plutonium, that are not found naturally on earth. The
seductive nuclear bomb entices nations desiring power, influence, and security.
The nuclear bomb is the ultimate phaljis for the post World War II
generations. Nuclear energy has been a
nation’s covert insurance on access to the materials needed to build a nuclear
bomb. India did just that, relying on its enriched uranium to produce its first
nuclear weapon. Perhaps the seduction of the bomb was too much for Japan and
its marvelous just-in-time capabilities offered a strategy for insuring
security while remaining officially nuclear-weapons free. The truth will not be
told on this account for many decades, if ever. However, it may very well be
that Japan’s nuclear disaster extended beyond Fukushima Daiichi.
The
true scale of the disaster will take decades, if not centuries, to unfold for
humanity. Helen Caldicott says twenty generations are required for damaged
recessive mutations to be expressed in humans. How much radiation are we really
exposed to and how much genetic damage has occurred to our genetic and
epigenetic codes? How much genetic damage have we already incurred from our
exposure to atmospheric fallout from testing? How much damage have we incurred
from our exposure to high levels of medical diagnostic testing? How much have
we been exposed to by aging, nuclear plants emitting radioisotopes like tritium
daily? The answers to these questions
remain elusive but their urgency is renewed by the Fukushima nuclear plant
disaster.
The Fukushima nuclear plant disaster is the worst in
recorded history, although considerable efforts have been made to minimize
perceptions of its scale. Three reactors had complete meltdowns and some unknown
numbers had melt-throughs, the proverbial China Syndrome. Note this infrared image of unit 1 taken in 2011
http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/10/news-inside-of-reactor-1/
http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/10/news-inside-of-reactor-1/
There were spent fuel
pool fires as well, although the details of the number of pools involved and
the extent of their damage remain undisclosed. Official representations of the
disaster are conflicting and are peppered with fallacies and distortions, such
as the mythology of cold shutdown and the cessation of emissions. This image of Fukushima emissions was taken today, October 17, 2012
Scientific
accounts of the scale of the disaster are conflicted. Many studies use
computers to model fallout deposition, relying on Tepco’s estimates for the
model’s inputs of emissions (source terms). Computer models have no validity if
the source terms are invalid. Yet, there have been few empirical studies to
rely on for analysis of fallout quantity, quality, and patterns in specific
areas. Those that have been published have been rather alarming. Empirical
studies actually measuring fallout by examining radioxenon levels in the US
pacific northwest, Iodine-131 levels in kelp off the coast of California, and
studies of particle deposition in select locations have found significant
levels of fallout of noble gasses and radionuclides.
There
are a number of conclusions that can be drawn from this discussion of
Fukushima. First, data about the scale of atmospheric and ocean emissions have
not been revealed and most studies modeling releases may be based on false
inputs. Despite ambiguity about the
scale of releases, empirical research has documented that Fukushima radiation
did in fact contaminate the entire Northern Hemisphere. A study, “Tracking the Complete Revolution of Surface
Westerlies over Northern Hemisphere using radionuclides emitted from Fukushima”
published in the Science of the Total
Environment by Herandez-Ceballos et al tracked cesium 134, 137 and Iodine
131 as these radioisotopes were swept eastward in a “complete, uninterrupted
revolution of the mid-latitude Surface Westerlies of the northern Hemisphere in
late march 211.” (p. 84). The revolution occurred in less than 21 days. The
study concluded that “little dissipation occurred during this time… and the
Fukushima radioactive plume contaminated the entire Northern Hemisphere during
a relatively short period of time” (p. 85).
Second,
evidence exists that the Japanese government has not adequately evacuated
citizens nor adequately identified and decontaminated hotspots outside of the
evacuation zone. Nor has the US government conducted and publicized research on
the contamination of US crops, precipitation, and groundwater by the Fukushima
nuclear disaster. Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen reported in 2011 that he had
been told by people in the State Dept. that U.S. government ordered officails
to downplay the health effects of radiation. Gundersen suggests that the US
government has deliberately failed to measure the radiation to avoid generating
public concern (video available http://enenews.com/gundersen-ive-told-people-state-dept-govt-downplay-health-effects-radiation-weve-really-gone-measure-video).More
recently, Japan’s former ambassador, Mitsuhei Murata, asserted that the U.S. put pressure on Japan
to tone down the alarming speculation about the fate of unit 4’s spent fuel
pool. http://enenews.com/watch-govt-main-reason-crisis-fukushima-unit-4-toned-down-video/comment-page-1#comment-293829
The reason that the scope and severity of Fukushima nuclear disaster remains undisclosed is because it is the worst nuclear disaster in human history and the truth of its effects will be born by future generations who will become innocent victims of the pursuit of the most deadly phallis of all, control over the atom.
ON THE TRUE SIGNIFICANCE OF CHERNOBYL
Why the Fukushima disaster is
worse than Chernobyl
POSTS ON RADIATION AT FUKUSHIMA
1. Post
I: Report Contains Numbers of Fuel
Assemblies at Fukushima as of March 2010
2. Post II:
How Much Radiation Is At Issue: Cesium
137 in Spent Fuel Pool 4
3. Post III:
Unanswered Questions http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/post-3-unanswered-questions-and-some.html
POSTS ON RELEASES
POSTS on GENETICS and
radiation
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.