Tuesday, 21 August 2012

Nuclear Controversies Chernobyl

by Plus

 Occupy the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission)

This might be worth a share into your community In 1995, the Director General of WHO Dr. Hiroshi Nakajima, tried to inform The International Agency for Atomic Energy on the effects of Chernobyl on children and humans in general by organizing an international conference with 700 experts and physicians. Guess what happened next...

The International Agency for Atomic Energy blocked the information from ever reaching the public world wide!! They refused to publish all the research revealing the ill effects of nuclear radiation presented at this meeting!! You see, the truth of the consequences of Chernobyl would have been a disaster for the atomic industry and so they wouldn't even look at it! Sick, sick, sick! Watch it for yourself at the link below.

THINK ABOUT THIS: Maybe if they had allowed it, people's eyes around the world would have opened to the dangers and long lasting effects of nuclear power gone wrong. Maybe then we wouldn't have a Fukushima on our hands with more kids suffering, more contaminated air, food, and water.

How much longer are we going to allow this world wide deception by the nuclear industry to continue??? MUST WATCH VIDEO HERE PLEASE SHARE PEOPLE DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON : http://vimeo.com/33724891
.
The full transcript can be found here:
vivretchernobyl.blogspot.com/2008/06/w-tchertkof-nuclear-controversies.html

Transcript in other language 中文翻譯 http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from&to=zh-cht&a=http%3A%2F%2Fvivretchernobyl.blogspot.com.au%2F2008%2F06%2Fw-tchertkof-nuclear-controversies.html
 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Statement of the German Society for Radiation Protection against Current Attempts
of the Nuclear Lobby to Deny Low-Dose Radiation Effects

The 100 Millisievert Threshold Lie

Decades ago, the concept of “stochastic” radiation effect was developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) for cancer and hereditary diseases.Makers and users of radiation technologies and several professional associations
have fought the ICRP´s no-threshold thesis since, and after the Fukushima disaster interestedbodies have promoted the assertain that no detrimental effects have ever been
observed below a dose of 100 mSv.

In contrast to this view, the international committees ICRP, UNSCEAR􀀍 and BEIR􀀍􀀍
have accepted meanwhile, that in fact stochastic effects must be expected following dosesfar below 100 mSv. This state of knowledge is derived from the following five fields of research:

1) Cancer induction after in utero exposure by ionizing radiation

The results of the Oxford Survey of Childhood Cancers have been reevaluated1, 2. Consequently the BEIR VII report of 2006 f.i. states in the summary of Chapter 7 (Medical
Radiation Studies) on page 173: “Studies of prenatal exposure to diagnostic X-rays have,
despite long-standing controversy, provided important information on the existence of a
significantly increased risk of leukemia and childhood cancer following diagnostic doses
of 10-20 mGy in utero.”

2) Low dose effects in the A-bomb survivors

It is a common claim in lectures on radiation protection, that effects in the low dose
range cannot be measured but must be extrapolated from findings at high doses. The
investigators of the Japanese A-bomb survivors protested against this interpretation,
because most survivors are in the low dose cohorts and the mean dose of the whole
sample is only about 200 mSv3. Pierce and Preston studied the data for solid cancer in
the dose range below 0.5 Sv separately and found:“There is a statistically significant
effect in the range 0-0.1 Sv”4.

3) Radon in homes and lung cancer

It was shown by analysis of 13 case-control studies in Europe5 and 7 North American
case-control studies6 that there is a proportionate increase of lung cancer and the mean
radon concentration for individuals in houses. Darby et al.5 state that the effect is also
significant in the dose range below 200 Bq/m3, which corresponds to an effective dose of
3.2 mSv per year and a lung dose of 26.7 mSv per year. This was adopted by the World
Health Organisation (WHO) in 2009, Fact sheet No. 291. In 2011, a prospective study
surveying 820,000 Canadians7 found an 15 % increase of lung cancer mortality per 100
Bq/m3 increase in radon (Darby 16 %; Krewski 11 %; WHO 16 %).

4) Occupational exposures

Since the 1970ies, a great variety of studies on nuclear workers have been done. They
showed a significant increase of effects with dose even within the legal limits. This was
(keep reading.... 

No comments:

Post a Comment