BEYOND NUCLEAR PUBLICATIONS

Search
JOIN OUR NETWORK

     

     

DonateNow

Radiation Exposure and Risk

Ionizing radiation damages living things and contaminates the environment, sometimes permanently. Studies have shown increases in cancer around nuclear facilities and uranium mines. Radiation mutates genes which can cause genetic damage across generations.

.....................................................................................................................................................................................................

Tuesday
Sep022014

Doctors want to see a drop in radioactivity

Pediatrician Dr. Alex Rosen"Nuclear bomb tests contaminate soils, while nuclear accidents and X-rays are a direct threat to our health. At a world summit this week, doctors called for more protection and awareness...

"It was a central theme at this year's world congress of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) - the consequences of nuclear testing.

The participants gathered in Kazakhstan to see the consequences first-hand at Semipalatinsk - a Soviet-era test site which was active between 1949 and 1989...

" 'All around the world, you can find small traces of the radioactive Cesium-137 in soil samples and food," says the pediatrician Dr Alex Rosen...

"He says the levels of Cesium-137 are lower than the legal threshold.

'But you've also got to say that any amount of radioactivity can lead to higher risks, and that statistically, hundreds of thousands of people have died prematurely from cancer because of these same levels," Rosen says...

" 'We have to tell people: don't let your child have an X-ray unless it's absolutely necessary, don't eat that jam from that contaminated region," Rosen says, "and don't move close to a nuclear power plant.'" Deutsche Welle

 

Wednesday
Aug272014

Childhood leukemias increased 37% near nuclear power facilities

An examination of over 60 epidemiological studies confirms the link between increases in childhood leukemia and proximity to a nuclear power reactor. Seventy percent of these studies indicate this link, including studies from the UK, Germany, France and Switzerland. 

Difficulty arises when trying to link this leukemia to radiation exposure from these nuclear facilities because the amount of radiation the reactor operators claim these populations are receiving should not, according to current risk models, be high enough to cause health impacts. In fact, the discrepancy is 10,000 fold between official dose estimates and the increased risks which are so clearly shown in these studies.

The author, Ian Fairlie, ( interviewed on Nuclear Hotseat) suggests the following explanations:

  • First, the cancer increases may be due to radiation exposures from NPP emissions to air.
  • Second, large annual spikes in NPP emissions may result in increased dose rates to populations within 5 km of NPPs.
  • Third, the observed cancers may arise in utero in pregnant women.
  • Fourth, both the doses and their risks to embryos and to fetuses may be greater than current estimate.
  • And fifth, pre-natal blood-forming cells in bone marrow may be unusually radiosensitive. The Ecologist

International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) first suggested in 2012 that refueling outages at reactors could be causing in utero health problems because reactors release radiation in larger batches during the year, but get to average this larger dose over the year, making the dose appear to be smaller.

In the US, the National Academy of Sciences is currently determining how best to assess cancer risks from radiation exposures around nuclear facilities here. this meta analysis should provide insight into how to look for such impacts.

The meta analysis, "A hypothesis to explain childhood cancers near nuclear power plants" published in the Journal of Environmental Radioactivity Volume 133, July 2014, Pages 10–17, has not yet received any letters pointing out omissions or errors.

Tuesday
Apr082014

Cover up and play down a disaster

An International Conference on Fukushima and Chernobyl was held 4-7 March 2014, hosted by the German chapter of IPPNW and local chapters of the Protestant church.

"The nuclear disasters of Fukushima and Chernobyl seriously affect humans, nature and society. Opinions on the dimension of the damage differ considerably. Representatives of UN Organizations like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) claim that there is no danger for the health of the affected population. In sharp contrast, studies conducted by physicians and other independent scientists have led to the conclusion that ionising radiation has indeed resulted in a great deal of impairment to health.

Physicians, scientists and journalists from Japan, Belarus, Germany, the USA, France and UK will meet at an international conference on the effects of nuclear disaster on nature and humans from March 4-7 in Arnoldshain to compare notes on the effects of ionising radiation. The conference is organised by IPPNW and the protestant church in Hesse and Nassau." View the presentations on their website.

PROGRAM

Dr. Keith Baverstock

Fukushima: the roles of WHO and IAEA

 

Dr. Larisa Danilova

Endocrine Diseases in Post-Chernobyl Period in Belarus

 

Dr. Winfrid Eisenberg

Leukämie bei Kindern und andere biologische Indikatoren für Niedrigdosisstrahlung

 

Dr. Ian Fairlie

Fukushima and Chernobyl: Comparison of Source Terms and Health Effects

 

Furitsu Katsumi M.D. Ph.D.

A Critique of the radiation standards of ICRP, and the health risk assessments of severe accidents by WHO and UNSCEAR on Chernobyl and Fukushima

 

Dr. Ulrich Gottstein

 

Dr. Kaoru Konta

 

Akari Konta

 

Dr. rer. nat. Alfred Körblein

Infant mortality in Japan after Fukushima

 

Prof. Dr. Mikhail Malko

The Chernobyl Accident and its Consequences

 

Dr. Eisuke Matsui

People of Futaba-machi and “Low Dose” Internal Radiation Exposure

 

Timothy A. Mousseau & Anders P. Møller

Biological Consequences of Chernobyl and Fukushima

 

Oshidori Mako

 

Dr. Martin Repp

Religion, Medicine and Nuclear Disaster

 

Prof. Dr. Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake

Genetische Folgen ionisierender Strahlung im Niedrigdosisbereich

 

Dr. Dörte Siedentopf

 

Isamu Takamatsu M.D.

Health problems after the accident of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Outbreak of childhood thyroid cancer in Fukushima

 

Dr. Olga Zubets

Cancer Epidemiology in the Republic of Belarus

Thursday
Apr032014

"The Hottest Particle"

Arnie GundersenAs posted on the Fairewinds Energy Education website:

Three years ago, Fairewinds was one of the first organizations to talk about “hot particles” that are scattered all over Japan and North America’s west coast. Hot particles are dangerous and difficult to detect. In this video Mr. Kaltofen discusses the hottest hot particle he has ever found, and it was discovered more than 300 miles from the Fukushima Daiichi site. If Fairewinds Energy Education was a Japanese website, the State Secrets Law would likely prevent us from issuing this video.  Arnie Gundersen [photo, left] provides a brief introduction and summary to the video.

Thursday
Mar272014

Japanese government suppresses efforts to account for radiation impact

A decontamination worker at the entrance of Futaba, an abandoned town near the Fukushima nuclear plant. Credit Toru Hanai/Reuters "...Off the record, university researchers in Japan say that even now, three years after the triple meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, they feel under pressure to play down the impact of the disaster. Some say they cannot get funds or university support for their work. In several cases, the professors say, they have been obstructed or told to steer clear of data that might cause public “concern.

'Getting involved in this sort of research is dangerous politically,” said Joji Otaki, a biologist at Japan’s Ryukyu University who has written papers suggesting that radioactivity at Fukushima has triggered inherited deformities in a species of butterfly. His research is paid for through private donations, including crowdfunding, a sign, he said, that the public supports his work. “It’s an exceptional situation,” he said." The New York Times