Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Big Fukushima Lie Flies High
The global nuclear industry and its allies in government are making a desperate effort to cover up the consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. “The big lie flies high,” comments Kevin Kamps of the organization Beyond Nuclear.
Not only is this nuclear establishment seeking to make it look like the Fukushima catastrophe has not happened going so far as to claim that there will be “no health effects” as a result of it but it is moving forward on a “nuclear renaissance,” its scheme to build more nuclear plants.
Indeed, next week in Washington, a two-day “Special Summit on New Nuclear Energy” will be held involving major manufacturers of nuclear power plants including General Electric, the manufacturer of the Fukushima plantsand U.S. government officials.
Although since Fukushima, Germany, Switzerland and Italy and other nations have turned away from nuclear power for a commitment instead to safe, clean, renewable energy such as solar and wind, the Obama administration is continuing its insistence on nuclear power.
Will the nuclear establishment be able to get away with telling what, indeed, would be one of the most outrageous Big Lies of all time that no one will die as a result of Fukushima?
Will it be able to continue its new nuclear push despite the catastrophe?
Nearly 100 days after the Fukushima disaster began, with radiation still streaming from the plants, with its owners, TEPCO, now admitting that meltdowns did occur at its plants, that releases have been twice as much as it announced earlier, with deadly radioactivity from Fukushima spreading worldwide, and with some countries now changing course and saying no to nuclear power, while others stick with it, a nuclear crossroads has arrived.
No health effects are expected among the Japanese people as a result of the events at Fukushima,” the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry trade group, flatly declared in a statement issued at a press conference in Washington last week.
"They’re lying,” says Dr. Janette Sherman, a toxicologist and contributing editor of the book Chernobyl: The Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment” published by the New York Academy of Sciences in 2009. Using medical data from between 1986 and 2004, its authors, a team of European scientists, determines that 985,000 people died worldwide from the radioactivity discharged from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.
The Fukushima disaster will have a comparable toll, expects Dr. Sherman, who has conducted research into the consequences of radiation for decades. “People living closest to the plants who receive the biggest doses will get sick sooner. Those who are farther away and receive lesser doses will get sick at a slower rate,” she says.
We’ve known about radioactive isotopes for decades,” says Dr. Sherman. “I worked for the Atomic Energy Commission in the 1950s and we knew about the effects then. To ignore the biology is to our peril. This is not new science. Cesium-137 goes to soft tissue. Strontium-90 goes to the bones and teeth. Iodine-131 goes to the thyroid gland.” All have been released in large amounts in the Fukushima disaster since it began on March 11. There will inevitably be cancer and other illnessesas well as genetic effectsas a result of the substantial discharges of radioactivity released from Fukushima, says Dr. Sherman. “People in Japan will be the most impacted but the radiation has been spreading worldwide and will impact life worldwide.”
The American Nuclear Society, made up of what its website says are “professionals” in the nuclear field, is also deep in the Fukushima denial camp. “Radiation risks to people living in Japan are very low, and no public ill effects are expected from the Fukushima incident,” it declares on its website. As to the U.S., the Illinois-based organization adds: “There is no health risk of radiation from the Fukushima incident to people in the United States.”
Acknowledging that “radiation from Fukushima has been detected within the United States,” the American Nuclear Society asserts that’s because we are able to detect very small amounts of radiation. Through the use of extremely sensitive equipment, U.S. laboratories have been able to detect very minute quantities of radioactive isotopes in air, precipitation, milk, and drinking water due to the Fukushima incident…The radiation from Fukushima, though detectable, is nowhere near the level of public health concern.”
Says Joseph Mangano, executive director of the Radiation and Public Health Project, “The absurd belief that no one will be harmed by Fukushima is perhaps the strongest evidence of the pattern of deception and denial by nuclear officials in industry and government.”
The World Health Organization has added its voice to the denial group. “For anyone outside Japan there is currently no health risk from radiation leaking from the nuclear power plant,” Gregory Hartl, a WHO spokesman, has insisted. “We know that there have been measurements in maybe up to about 30 countries [and] these measurements are miniscule, often below levels of background radiation…and they do not constitute a public health risk.”
WHO, not too incidentally, has a formal arrangement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in place since both were established at the UN in the 1950s, to say nothing about issues involving radiation without clearing it with the IAEA, which was set up to specifically promote atomic energy. On Chernobyl, together in an initiative called the “Chernobyl Forum,” they have claimed that “less than 50 deaths have been directly attributed” to that disaster and “a total of up to 4,000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident.” That nuclear Big Lie precedes the new nuclear deception involving the impacts of Fukushima.
As to background radiation, Dr. Jeffrey Patterson, immediate past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility and professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin’s School of Public Health, says: “We do live with background radiationbut it does cause cancer.” That’s why there is concern, he notes, about radon gas being emitted in homes from a breakdown of uranium in some soils. “That’s background [radiation] but it’s not safe. There are absolutely no safe levels of radiation” and adding more radiation “adds to the health impacts.”
There has been a cover-up, a minimization of the effects of radioactivity since the development of nuclear weapons and nuclear technology,” says Dr. Patterson. Meanwhile, with the Fukushima disaster, “large populations of people are being randomly exposed to radiation that they didn’t ask for, they didn’t agree to.”
Dr. Steven Wing, an epidemiologist who has specialized in the effects of radioactivity at the School of Public Health of the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, said: “The generally accepted thinking about the safe dose is that, no, there is no safe dose in terms of
the cancer or genetic effects of radiation. The assumption of most people is that there’s a linear, no-threshold dose response relationship and that just means that as the dose goes down the risk goes down, but it never disappears.”
Of the claims of “no threat to health” from the radioactivity emitted from Fukushima, that “just flies in the face of all the standard models and all the studies that have been done over a long period of time of radiation and cancer.”
As the radiation clouds move away from Fukushima and move far away to other continents and around the world, the doses are spread out,” notes Dr. Wing. “But it’s important for people to know that spreading out a given amount of radiation dose among more people, although it reduces each person’s individual risk, it doesn’t reduce the number of cancers that result from that amount of radiation. So having millions and millions of people exposed to a very small dose could produce just as much cancer as a thousand or a few thousand people exposed to that same dose.”
He believes “we should be focusing on putting pressure on people in government and the energy industry to come up with an energy policy that minimizes harm,” is a “sane energy policy.” Those who have “led us into this situation” have caused “big problems.”
And they are still at iteven with radioactivity still coming out at Fukushima and expected to for months. On Tuesday and Wednesday in Washington, the “Special Summit on New Nuclear Energy” will be held, organized by the U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council.
Council members include General Electric, since 2006 in partnership in its nuclear plant manufacturing business with the Japanese corporation Hitachi.
Other members of the council, notes its information on the summit, include the Nuclear Energy Institute; Babcock & Wilcox, the manufacturer of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant which underwent a partial meltdown in 1979; Duke Energy, a U.S. utility long a booster of nuclear power; the Tennessee Valley Authority, a U.S. government-created public power company heavily committed to nuclear power; Uranium Producers of America; and AREVA, the French government-financed nuclear power company that has been moving to expand into the U.S. and worldwide.
Also participating in the summit as speakers will be John Kelly, an Obama administration Department of Energy deputy assistant for nuclear reactor technologies;
William Magwood, a nuclear power advocate who is a member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Matthew Milazzo representing an entity called the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future set up by the Obama administration; and Congressmen Mike Simpson of Idaho, chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee Interior & Environment and Ed Whitfield of Kentucky, chairman of the House Energy & Power Subcommittee, both staunch nuclear power supporters.
Other participants, according to the program for the event, will be “senior executives and thought leaders from the who’s who of the U.S. new nuclear community.” Bruce Llewelyn, who hosts “White House Chronicle” on PBS television, is listed as the summit’s “moderator.”
There will be programs on the “State of the Renaissance,” “China, India & Emerging Global Nuclear Markets,” “Advancing Nuclear Technology” and “Lessons from Fukushima.”
As the nuclear Pinocchios lie, the nuclear promoters push ahead.
82 Comments so far
Show AllI notice born-again nukester George Monbiot has been a bit quiet on the topic lately.
As has that rush of people who flooded these boards claiming themselves to have scientific expertise in the field and tried to assure us that Fukushima was a minor event and there no evidence of meltdown.
First let me say I'm not and expert. I'm however a well read and topic researched reader.
Fukashima is many magnitudes more dangerous than Chernobyl. Where Chernobyl contaminated around 10,000 square miles and immediately killed around 4,000 with another 978,000 dying a slow death.
Fukashima will eventually kill 10's of thousands and contaminate most of Japan and the Northern hemisphere in general. Chernobyl was (one) reactor, whereas Fukashima is (six) reactors, some of which have gone to complete meltdown, (China syndrome).
I have a working digital Geiger Counter, up here in northern Michigan and we are at 768 ms of radiation per hour.
No radiation is the only safe radiation period.
One question I haven't heard answered yet is about airliners and their flight crews that fly around the clock through these clouds of radiation. Looks like no one is checking the planes or their crews for exposure levels and contamination.
He's licking his wounds after Dr. Caldicott tore him that new asshole.
Monbiot is now synonymous with moron. A great cynical career move is to build a name for yourself as an environmental champion and then to sell out and help greenwash some filthy technology like nuclear or "clean coal". Stewart Brand is the classic case.
I hope Monbiot was paid well, but my sense is he's just a dumbass.
Thanks, SCRIBE.
Luckily we don't have any of the nuker shills posting their lies here at CD.
And it is not just TMI, Chernobyl, Fermi 1 and Fukushina. It is not uncommon for radiation to be releases from a nuclear power plant for "safety" reasons. And there have been many accidental releases of radiation from nucler plants during the past 50 years.
Then let us never forget the trillions upon trillions of microscopic specks of deadly DU which has been released into our atmosphere, blowing with the wind and they will never go away...We have to live with it,,,, or die from it. .
"No nuclear power plants, no DU". World leaders should have said that in 1945.
Check the other thread. :-(
Yeah ctrl-z,
I know they are here, one sockpuppeting can be several shills and they do that, they are professional writers.
I was being sarcastic with my first sentence.
I wish it was true.
funny how the brain-dead are capable of typing.
Google 'fuel fleas' shithead. Your lungs are littered with radioactive debris particles as you sit there typing your smarmy, lying claptrap. Before the lung cancer gets you, though , I hope your radioactive tuna fish and salad lunch gives you bowel cancer.
Till then, keep laughing and making up phony statistics right up until Fukushima kills *you*, you asshole lying shill.
a troll is a troll is a troll....what interests me is that these whoevertheyares post exactly like the zionist trolls do re: "israel"and its atrocities..
Do you plan on spamming this post onto every thread, or just the ones about nuclear disasters?
Pam6648,
It must be great to live in the present with no past or future to worry about.
A former Soviet commisioner lady looked into the Chernobyl data while the USSR was imploding. She took advantage of the chaos to get her hands on a secret report to the politburo dated May 12, 1986. The report stated that, as of that time, 10,198 people had been hospitalizd in Hospital 6 (a hospital dedicated to treat Acute Radiation Sickness) The government was saying everything was hunky jake publicly as Japan, the WHO and the pro-nuke liars are saying now.
Any fool seeing that it took until November to stop the radiation output with over 600,000 soldiers, scientists, miners and engineers, would know the end result would lead to nearly one million dead.
Would you like to see the deformities caused by this Chernobyl disaster? Probably not. Did you know the Chinese nuclear tests caused thousands of deformities along the silk road near the test sites? Probably not.
Do you think, in addition to hundreds of thousands of slow and painful deaths, the Japanese and many people in the world will see horrendous birth defects? Probably not. After all, that's in the furure and hasn't happened yet, right? You're into factual reporting of actual facts with big flashy numbers like tsunami death tolls, right?
As Bush, your pal, used to say, I don't do nuance. Neither do you.
Your flippant attitude towards the ecosphere destroying phenomenum of nuclear power plant radiation is monstrous and unforgivable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiCXb1Nhd1o&feature=player_embedded
Bullshit all you want. People are dying becasue of your lack of consciense and ruthless denial of radiaition poisoning.
You are fucking monster.
AGEL/WAYNE/GERALD:
I had this thought, and it's relevant to a poster like the "new" Pam. What if "she" is just a computer program? What if the Homeland Security apparatus assigned to this (and likely other) websites with Left/Progressive proclivities is exploring a new information technology where it is NOT a human responding to our posts.
I would imagine that the way this would be done would involve psychologists. They'd ask questions about the pertinent issues of our day. A group of selected individuals would be chosen, and their responses noted. The group might include a woman or two to lend a bit of apparent feminine texture to the conversation. A few might be savvy in science, others in high-tech. (You get the picture. Nor would I rule out a Hollywood operative, perhaps in trade for $ to back one of his films, on board to "direct" the content to "make it real.") This record of information would then be fed back when certain buzz words came up. It might SEEM like a human poster responding, because at least some of its linquistic phrasing would have been taken from original conversations.
Notice the use of repetition with "Pam." The poster, possibly NOT human, is just regurgitating the same premise again and again; and, as would be the case with a robot, seems impermeable to feelings as well as correcting "her" positions when confronted with information that clearly refutes her case or stated perspective.
Like It Or Not may qualify, as well; and we all get to feel amused by the grammatical errors of whomever it was that programmed his responses into the computer, misplaced apostrophes and all!
Something to consider in these Orwellian times, with all sorts of new technology, plus endless money poured into domestic spying programs to develop such a premise.
Siouxrose: There is certainly precedent for it:
"ELIZA is a computer program and an early example of primitive natural language processing. ELIZA operated by processing users' responses to scripts, the most famous of which was DOCTOR, a simulation of a Rogerian psychotherapist. Using almost no information about human thought or emotion, DOCTOR sometimes provided a startlingly human-like interaction. ELIZA was written at MIT by Joseph Weizenbaum between 1964 to 1966."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
Siouxrose,
It certainly is possible. The laconic and repetitious responses from "pam" (Miss Methane 2011) have the pattern of a computer program. I tried to get a human response and the laconic repetition continued so you may be right.
Hey hotshot, you don't know jack shit. So everything's hunky dory over in the Kanto plain of Honshu is it? Hey have a read of the some of the local rags. Tell us now big shot, what do these headlines say in the 東京新聞？
子に体調異変じわり
大量の鼻血、下痢、倦怠感．．．
原発５０キロ 福島 郡山は今
The Japanese people are eating it big time with 24/7 releases of deadly radionuclides and hot particles. Their air, water, soil, sewage, and food are all contaminated with radioactive cesium, iodine, strontium, uranium, plutonium, etc. And smug scum like you make light of it. ばかやろう！
Pam666,
Miss Methane 2011 strikes again. Next year your your software will be upgraded to Miss Plutonium 2012.
Congrats!
Have you announced your future wedding to the Hal 9000 computer yet?
Open the methane bay doors, pam.
I'm afraid I can't do that, Agelbert. I am programmed to ridicule and undermine anti-nuclear comments. I don't know shit about methane bay doors (or anything else, for that matter).
Surely, you pro-nuke tools can come up with something more challenging than this vocabulary deficient program.
Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Now you've done it. The Miss Methane 2011 (pam) sofware is going to have to be reprogrammed for the word "pod". The software cannot compute the relationship between "methane" and "pod" used in the "open the ___ bay doors, HAL" satement.
HAL and Pam - peas in a pod.
The Pam is not the territory,not even reversed. :-)
Perhaps pam is Peripheral Adapter Module?
Some computers from Sperry-Univac I worked with a long time ago needed some PAMs for I/O to remote sensing sites.
What would HAL do without his Pam? ;>)
DEC DCL vet here. You know, if PAM is a program there might be a way to hack it.
True. The response time is rather quick for a human. You would need to see if pam responds always in X amount of time or a certain repeated pseudo random cycle within a certain range. As a program, it would be monitoring various threads simultaneously too.
Other than getting it into some kind of semantics logic loop which would prove it was a program and thereby get CD to block it, I don't see how we can hack it from here. Now CD might have a shot since they have an e-mail address.
Hmmm. Seems like it's mostly a random phrase generator.
Yep.
The pam program also appears to be full of bugs.
Pam is buggy. ;:>)
Perhaps proper prim Pam could tell us what the headlines say. They state facts.
".. next week in Washington, a two-day “Special Summit on New Nuclear Energy” will be held involving major manufacturers of nuclear power plants including General Electric, the manufacturer of the Fukushima plants and U.S. government officials."
Where is Darius Jedburgh (the Joe Don Baker version) when we need him?
The Big Fuku
Today, Al Jazeera quotes Janette Sherman and another researcher's newly released report on the spike on infant deaths in major cities of the Pacific Northwest in the month of April. This is concurrent with what we have now learned about the 3 melt-throughs and the estimated doubling of airborne radiation releases from Fukushima in the first days and weeks after March 11th.
It's quite possibly too late for the nuclear industry to rescue itself (despite its being a major contributor to Obama's presidential campaign.) Among the emanations coming out of Japan this month that are too hot to handle is speculation that Tokyo, already experiencing its own radiation hotspots, may have to find new sources of drinking water.
Yes - 'melt-throughs' - not 'melt-downs', a lesser evil. Effectively, three China Syndromes plus the nuclear nightmare of uncovered spent fuel-pools.
Total result, according to Arnie Gunderson of Fairewinds dot com:
20 Chernobyls
According to the Busby/Gofman/Yaklobov models - expect a million plus deaths at least to eventuate over the coming years from Fukushima - perhaps many times that if things get worse, as they well might, in the event of another natural disaster at the Fukushima nuclear site, or if the containment proves impossible until many years have elapsed.
I would normally suggest legal action against those in high office who are deliberately misleading us, but I have now lost faith in the judicial system.
'The Hierarchy' is working on ways to curb the Internet. I am sure they will be increasingly successful in their nefarious endeavors.
Nevertheless, to those still able to think clearly, the truth will out, and justice prevail.
Manysummits
=====
What I would like to add here, is that those of you who are of child bearing age and thinking about marriage and having children may want to consider the purchase of a good quality digital Geiger Counter.
You will need and use this device for the rest of your life. It may become a family heirloom that you pass down to your future offspring.
You well need to know where (hot spots are) and if where you are currently living becomes "hot" also. Southern hemisphere seems to be relatively clean at this point in time. So consider your future carefully.
"Lessons from Fukushima"
Hey, that sounds like an interesting panel. Here's how the PowerPoint will run:
LESSONS FROM FUKUSHIMA
1) Nuclear Power: Inherently Insanely Dangerous and Immoral
2) Public is Scientifically Illiterate and We Own the Media
3) Use 2 to Hide 1
4) Profit!
Thank you.
It is time to abandon the antique linear no-threshold hypothesis. Even the National Institutes of Health admits it - the abstract is lengthy, but the whole thing needs to be read.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8635914
"Abstract
Contrary to the "linear no-threshold hypothesis," which implies that "any amount, however small" of radiation energy is a serious cancer threat, it is shown here that only relatively quite large amounts of such energy can pose such a threat to a person or population. Key to doing this is to make a sharp distinction between the actual amount of the radiation agent imparted energy, epsilon, which must be expressed in units of joules, and the average concentration or density of energy, epsilon/m (i.e., absorbed dose), which is expressed in units of Gy. With any cellular system, e.g., in tissue culture, one can easily adjust the numbers of cells used at each dose point so that a clearly significant number of radiation-induced quantal responses (e.g., mutations, chromosome aberrations, malignant transformations, cell death), in the absorbed dose range of about 0.7 to 3 or more Gy, can be observed. However, if the number of cells is held constant as the absorbed dose is progressively reduced, a point is reached at which no significant excess is observable. This situation is frequently "remedied" by including more cells at that point, which, of course, can increase the number of malignant transformations sufficiently to render the excess statistically valid. However, because both axes are expressed in relative terms, the data point, despite having gained statistical significance, remains at the same location on the graph. This gives the false impression that no more of the agent energy was added or needed to achieve significance. However, if both coordinates are put in absolute terms, i.e., the actual number of quantal responses vs. imparted energy, and the same exercise of "improving the statistics" at low exposures is attempted, it then becomes evident that any point thus rendered significant must be relocated at a substantially higher energy point on the graph. This demonstrates unequivocally the fallacy in the proof of the "linear hypothesis" which is based on agent concentration response curves and not agent amount. It shows that the smaller the agent concentration (absorbed dose; epsilon/m), the larger the amount of radiation energy that must be added to the system in order to demonstrate a radiation-induced response. This suggests a minimum average energy requirement for production of a radiation-attributable cancer. It Ls concluded that the "linear hypothesis" should be abandoned as the cornerstone of radiation protection and practice."
Another one worth reading in its entirety, but the pull quote is:
http://www.accesstoenergy.com/view/atearchive/s76a2275.htm
"The primary disadvantage of the no-threshold linear hypothesis of radiation damage to health is that there is not a shred of experimental evidence to support it. The predicted health effects are so low that such experiments were exceptionally difficult to carry out. Politically, of course, proponents multiplied the tiny hypothetical effects by the total number of people on the earth and then cried crocodile tears over the calculated human suffering - none of which was ever observed."
Since it is now known that not only is the no-threshold false, but Radiation Hormesis is real (http://www.radpro.com/641luckey.pdf) we can confidently conclude that the extremely low levels of radiation off the Fukushima site aren't going to cause any major health problems. This was also shown at Chernobyl where, even with high doses, only 38 deaths were caused by acute radiation sickness (http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/chernobyl.html)
mcsandberg1,
A former Soviet commisioner lady looked into the Chernobyl data while the USSR was imploding. She took advantage of the chaos to get her hands on a secret report to the politburo dated May 12, 1986. The report stated that, as of that time, 10,198 people had been hospitalizd in Hospital 6 (a hospital dedicated to treat Acute Radiation Sickness) The government was saying everything was hunky jake publicly as Japan, the WHO and the pro-nuke liars are saying now. The soviet government urged thousands in Minsk to participate in mayday celebrations knowing they would receive huge radiaiton doses. The cover up was massive then as it is now.
Since it took until November to stop the radiation output with over 600,000 soldiers, scientists, miners and engineers, it was irresponsible and criminal to deny that the end result would lead to nearly one million dead.
The deformities caused by this Chernobyl disaster are horrendous and ongoing. The Chinese nuclear tests caused thousands of deformities along the silk road near the test sites as well.
In addition to hundreds of thousands of slow and painful deaths, the Japanese and many people in the world will see horrendous birth defects.
The dismissive attitude of the pro-nuke greedsters towards the ecosphere destroying phenomenum of nuclear power plant radiation is monstrous and unforgivable.
The following documentary was made in 2006 with never before film and photos taken during the Chernobyl crisis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiCXb1Nhd1o&feature=player_embedded
mcsandberg1,
The main cause of most cancers in humans is upregulated tyrosine kinase enzymes. This is established scientific fact in the biological sciences. I don't have the link now but you can google upregulated TKE and it's all there.
According to the offical documentation on ARS (acute radiation sickness), radiation from radionuclides causes UPREGULATED TKEs.
So, you want scientific detail? Here it is:
For what it's worth, here's a very brief layout of how radiation (the medical literature DOES NOT specify any level beyond the ability to ionize) produces cancer.
Every cell needs energy to live. That energy comes in the form of ATP (adenosine tri phosphate). No ATP equals DEATH. Now there's a family of proteins called tyrosine kinase enzymes that regulate ATP phosphorilation. They are immensly important to life. ATP is the energy package but tyrosine kinase enzymes do the leg work.
ENTER RADIATION:
Radiation upregulates tyrosine kinase enzymes (TKEs). The upregulated TKEs then "forget" to tell cells when to die (failng to activate by signaling pathways which deny cells of ATP and trigger apoptosis -cell death) so cells don't die when they should and simultaneously "encourages" cell multiplication by putting the pedal to the metal on phosphorilation (lots of ATP energy). And so, the host gets tumors. Many cancers -- leukemia, breast, lung, malignant melanoma, to name a few -- contain mutations in tyrosine kinase enzymes that result in unregulated cell growth. A major breakthrough in cancer treatment was the development of Imatinib, marketed as Gleevec, which inhibits these tyrosine kinases, halting cancer growth. However, the cells do not die, but persist in a quiescent state, allowing some cancerous cells to evolve resistance to the drug and reemerge. Translation, poor prognosis.
Malfunctioning TKEs in Leukemia, for example, are associated with cancer of the immune system.
Please understand, the very basis of life is ATP phosphorilation. You cannot even twitch your eyelid without phosphorilation.
All those cancers take time to develop. I am NOT talking about ARS (Acute Radiation Sickness) here. At the low and medium radiation levels, the attack is insiduous. At high levels, DNA disorganization is so horrendous that the cells in the bone marrow cannot produce red blood cells at sufficient quantities to prevent anemia and the several types of neutrophils in the immune system stop being made too. This leaves the person wide open to death by trauma or infection. It is not widely discussed, but radiation exposure combined with trauma multiplies the possibility of morbidity.
I hope you never get cancer.
Nice try, but
"Consensus reports by the United States National Research Council and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) have upheld that insufficient human data on radiation hormesis exists to supplant the Linear no-threshold model (LNT). "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis
Since you collectivists never seem to leave your comfort zone and actually look at, for example:
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/2011/Q3/view679.html#Tuesday
"On Fukushima:
Sprouts
The silence of the media and activists is deafening
One German organic farm has killed twice as many people as the Fukushima nuclear disaster and the Gulf Oil spill combined. The death toll is now 33
Hello? Environmental groups? Journalists? Hello?
Lawrence
Precisely. So far as I know, no one off site was injured by Fukushima. Yes, it was a mess, and a lot worse than Three Mile Island: but like TMI it was a terribly expensive test to destruction that demonstrated the comparative safety of nuclear power. More people are killed in coal mines and at railroad grade crossings for coal trains than by nuclear power generation. Per kilowatt it's safer than anything else I know."
I would NOT characterize you as stupid at all, and not even misinformed, but rather under informed. There are many, even a majority of people, that hold views far different from yours. Most people, for example, know that the "we" society cannot work. Every Tea Partier I've talked to has read at least some of the classics of liberty.
What I post here is not fringe, or even that unusual.
What in the world is this? Some dude has an right-wing opinion blog and you quoted from it as evidence? Hello? McFly? Why not quote from Breitbart then? Hell, he's got a scientist that totally debunks all the evidence regarding climate change! Case closed!
Besides, this quote "safer than anything else I know" is totally correct. Until there's an accident, that is. Then what? Oh that's right, there is NO possible way to mitigate or stop the threat. Sure a coal mine kills a bunch. You close it, repair it and go back to business. Nuclear is a wee bit different, no?
I think you were better off with the links in the first post. But that's just me.
The Ukraine today:
“Thousands of children live in and consume locally grown foods from areas in the Ukraine where the soil is still contaminated with radioactive cesium,” said Svendsen, a research assistant professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics."
“Hundreds of these children may grow up with lungs that have been damaged by chronic exposure to radioactive cesium,” he said. “The long-term prognosis of these children is poor, and many will likely develop significant respiratory problems as they age.”
http://www.sph.sc.edu/news/svendsen1.htm
"The National CFIDS Foundation Inc. of Needham, MA, has announced its formal disease model for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) also known as Chronic Fatigue Immune Dysfunction Syndrome (CFIDS) as well as Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME). According to the NCF, a subgroup of patients with CFS fit a unique disease profile based on a model for a radioactive toxin.The Foundation has also noted that CFS has been previously identified as a characteristic aftermath of radioecological catastrophe. A lengthier article including references will be in the fall edition of the newsletter."
http://www.ncf-net.org/PressReleases.htm#nal
"Summary Post-radiation syndrome is proposed to be chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) or a chronic fatigue syndromelike illness, initiated by exposure to ionizing radiation. This view is supported by the nitric oxide/peroxynitrite (NO/
ONOO–) cycle mechanism, the putative etiologic mechanism for CFS and related illnesses. Ionizing radiation may initiate illness by increasing nitric oxide levels via increased activity of the transcription factor NF-jB and consequent increased synthesis of the inducible nitric oxide synthase. Two types of components of the nitric oxide/peroxynitrite cycle have been studied in post-radiation syndrome patients and shown to be elevated. The symptoms and signs of post-radiation syndrome and its chronicity are similar or identical to those of chronic fatigue syndrome and can be explained as being a consequence of nitric oxide/peroxynitrite cycle etiology. While the data available to test this view are limited, it provides for the first time a comprehensive explanation for post-radiation syndrome."
www.cfids-cab.org/MESA/Pall.pdf
scribe,
Okay. Infant mortality because of tissue damage from radionuclide exposure in the womb or shortly after birth through ionization is difficult to measure. Remember that everything you and I know about death rates in humans comes from doctors who sign death certificates stating the cause of death. The pro-nuclear folks in government, because of this, have been very keen to control what doctors put on those death certificates.
Epidemiological studies don't just count the stats; they get tissue samples from cadavers and survivors of a suspected disease syndrome in a geographic area. Furthermore, the statistics have to include a sufficiently large population sample to be considered valid for making scientific conclusions about cause and effect.
When a nuclear accident occurs, demands for proof and constant low balling of risk are rampant from the pro-nuke folks even though, in the 1950s, with live animals and humans, they studied the effects of ionizing radiation on humans and animals with horrendous attention to detail. It is an established fact from these studies and later tragically confirmed by Chernobyl (and soon Fukushima) that, the less developed the organism, the more it will be damaged by radiation. The pro-nuke folks know damned good and well that the health and welfare of fetuses, babies and children is a hot button issue so they avoid it like the plague.
As the crisis increases in magnitude, so do the lies. The multiple victims of radiation sickness and future deaths of adults and children is denied (see my comments on Chernobyl). Only a few token deaths are mentioned in order to claim everything is just great. Remember that the nuclear experts are not operating in the dark. They know EXACTLY how people are being affected.
They know because they did their nuclear war games on downstream nuclear radiation deaths from a given air burst.
They know because they watched as radiation caused deformities in mammal fetuses many years ago.
If you want to guarantee leukemia in a child within a couple of years, give a pregnant mother some womb x-rays. The child will contract the disease and die within five years. A hot particle (see Arnie Gundersen for an explanation) ingested will do much more damage. In an adult, it will take time. In a fetus, depending on where the hot particle lodges, it will severely interfere with the rapidly dividing cells. Depending on the stage in develepment, it will be deformed or have weak pulmonary or cardiac function leading to death. There isn't enough time for cancer but arrested development is worse because it leads to death quicker.
As the years go by the pro-nuke mafia always attempt to prevent epidemiological studies (see the yellow cake road about Navajo uranium miners and their communities). If that fails, they try to game the studies with bribed or threatened medical professionals. They usually succeed. In Chernobyl, they put a doctor in prison because he told the truth about radiation caused birth defects.
So my answer to you is, the rise in infant mortality, while impossible to prove without an epidemiological study involving tissue samples of living, as well as deceased infants, is, without any doubt, BEING CAUSED (it's not over) by radiation from Fukushima. Other toxins in our polluted world may have contributed, but if that was the main factor, the rise in infant mortality would be apparent in non radiation fallout areas as well. The rise occurred in a known hot particle bombardment area.
In a sane world, the burden of proof would be on the pro-nuclear people to disprove the increase in infant mortality is caused by pregnant women ingesting hot particles.
To show you to what length these pro-nuke people will go to, a medical doctor employed by the Institute of Atomic Energy in Japan (not sure of the full name - I heard it on DemocracyNow) has the brass balls to tell the Japanese on television that people are affected by radiation because they don't smile enough and have a poor attitude about life! Can you believe this shit!!!? Do you think, with government backing these doctor strangelove types, the Japanese doctors are free to claim "radiation sickness" as a diagnosis? Do you think US doctors are free to claim "radiation sickness" as a diagnosis unless it is acute? No way, jose.
In Chernobyl, the children began developing diarrhea and nose bleeds. "No big deal -it's just allergies - come back next week", the doctors said. Many died. A group of people from Chernobyl are in Fukushima with doctors now checking children. Some have nose bleeds. The Japanese doctors are claiming that the increase in nose bleeds is allergy related -no big deal. The group from Chernobyl is urging full body checks for isotopes. The government controls that through the atomic energy institute. They are not cooperating.
It is all happening again. The main weapon of the nuclear bastards against us is the latency period of radiation sickness. They are just going to watch many Japanese and others all over the world die and they'll deny it all the way while their bean counters say, "yep, we can expect a loss of x% population here and there, etc." They'll have data on all radionuclide distribution throughout the globe and will not share it because of "national security". They will, of course, take measures quietly to protect themselves and their families.
I wish it wasn't so.
Gerald,
Thank you.
My goal here is to do what I can to shed light on the truth in a given subject matter that normally is distorted by the media. Regardless of who is asking a question, if it is a thoughtful question, I try to answer it for the purpose of informing all the readers about the way things are and what they can expect from the future in that particular subject area.
When people get downright coarse and brutally insensitive (like the pam thing) I can respond in kind or resort to ridicule and fun and games as well.
I'm glad you are here. Things are bad and they are going to get worse. We need all truth defenders like you to disarm the liars and obfuscators.
I also, unlike scribe, much appreciate Siouxrose's comments and observations. I may not be into astrology, but I know an intelligent, eloquent individual with special seer gifts like her is a treasure.
Children in Japan are experiencing radiation sickness symptoms.
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/2011/06/radiation-in-japan-nosebleed-diarrhea.html
The only way the nuclear industry can realistically hope to convince people of the safety of Fukushima is to hold this conference near those plants. If they are brave enough to do that, then maybe someone will believe them.
It should be a requirement for owners of troubled nuclear plants to have to move to housing within a mile of the reactor while attempts are made to get it under control. If they won't do that, we know they are not telling the truth.
.
.
Let's face it:
until the decision is made that to de-celerate the advance of the industrial revolution's mass consumption of energy derived from fossil fuels, including uranium, is in the best interest of survival for all, nuclear proponents will have their argument of "it's cleaner than coal or oil" and they will be correct only in regard to the alteration of atmospheric carbon.
But the countering argument that the cost of unbridled mass consumption of fossil fuels is poisoning the planet beyond the capacity of its lifeforms to thrive --although correct-- has one fatal flaw: it fails to ensure a continuance of unbridled profits for those who see the world solely as business opportunity.
And to those folks, that argument is not applicable to their world view.
That, is the sorry truth of it all.
Greed, ruthless capitalistic competition, hierarchical human dominance, patriarchal dominance, hubris . . . . . mankind's emotional and superstitious pretenses govern in an unside-down inside-out simulacrum.
The types of intelligence are manifold: that the ego-allied and uncertain vacillations of emotional intelligence are falsely conflated with, and lording over scientific intelligence is the Shakespearean frailty of the creature calling itself Man, possibly leading to its demise.
How can it be that some scientific groups say the Chernobyl accident caused several thousand cancer deaths while others claim a number close to a million? Is the science so inaccurate that it leaves room for differences of nearly 3 orders of magnitude? Is one side relying on fraudulent science?
No, The difference is due to different underlying premises. The different numbers are answers to different questions. The low ballers adopt the "innocent until proven guilty" assumption and answer the question how many cancer deaths can be unequivocally tied to Chernobyl?
The high ballers acknowledge that because radiation disperses so widely and because cancers can take decades to develop, it is impossible to directly tie the Chernobyl accident to every death it caused. So they seek to answer the question, how many cancer deaths was the Chernobyl accident likely to have caused?
My opinion is that the innocent until proven guilty approach is morally unacceptable. Determining the number of provable deaths makes sense, but pretending that that's all there is to it makes no sense. In effect, it allows corporations to toy with the lives of millions of people. "Hey, the radiation I release might kill you, but you won't be able to prove it, so shut up!"
Ach, mein fuehrer, I can walk!" Dr. Strangelove