Translate

Top 10 Negative Effects of Radiation from X-Rays, CT Scans, MRI's & PETScans

Top 10 Negative Effects of Radiation from X-Rays, CT Scans, MRI's & PET Scans
This Conveniently Quick Report Answers:

what is cancer
what is cancer from radiation
what is radiation
what are the effects of radiation
what is the effect of radiation
what does radiation do
what are the side effects of radiation
how to protect from radiation
what are the effects of nuclear radiation
how does radiation cause cancer
how does radiation affect the body
Here are some simple lay NO-RAD-ZONE notes on the Top 10 negative effects of radiation from CT Scans, X-rays, MRI and PET Scans.

Learn: The Top 10 negative effect of radiation and how to protect your DNA with nutritional supplements. Body Scans effect health. Radiation causes cancer and death from DNA damage. Radiation causes internal damage, genetic birth defects, Teratogenic Effects, Poor Immunity, Radiation Sickness, Nausea, Diarrhea, Vomiting and Emotional Stress.

This NO-RAD-ZONE Report shows what vital nutrients will help protect against the damaging effects caused by radiation exposure. Research shows the following supplements in this report can offer significant protection from radiation. NO-RAD-ZONE promotes the daily use of DNA protecting nutrients. Please follow the links provided in this must-read report to learn more and get protection.

Let it be known: for survivors of radiation exposure, diseases such as leukemia, lung cancer, thyroid cancer, breast cancer, and cancers of other organs can appear due to exposure to radiation.

Now let us begin.
WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF RADIATION?

Death Very high levels of radiation exposure often lead to death within a few days or weeks.
Cancer It’s estimated that about 0.4 percent of all cancers in the United States may be attributable to the radiation from CT studies. A surge in the use of CT scans in the last 25 years has led to millions of patients per year being unnecessarily exposed to dangerous radiation that increases their risk of cancer, according to a paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
DNA damage can bring about cell mutation, cell suicide and random cell division.
Internal Damage Inflammation of the sac around the heart, respiratory failure, and vision impairment are all possible symptoms of radiation exposure. Can cause extensive internal damage to nerve cells and the cells that line the digestive tract. Extensive internal damage from radiation results in a loss of white blood cells and temporary hair loss.
Genetic and Birth Defects Please notify and consult with your physician if you are pregnant or lactating and you are undergoing a body image scan. Radiation can cause changes to the genetic makeup of cells, leading to the development of cancer. Birth Defects from radiation include: Abnormal growth, mental retardation, poorly formed eyes, a small head and childhood cancers.
Teratogenic Effects These are radiation effects on the fetus. Fetal DNA is more vulnerable and is easily damaged by radiation. Common examples of the effects of radiation on fetal DNA include, short stature, abnormal organ position as well as abnormal organ size. Other changes can be less obvious and include diseases that affect cell life, metabolism and energy storage. In either case, these changes can lead to extremely severe birth defects and the death of the baby.
Poor Immunity, disrupted white blood cell activity, poor liver function, inflamed cells, poor quality muscle mass and fluid imbalances are a few negative side effects of X-Ray’s, CT Scans, MRI’s & Pet Scans.
Radiation Sickness or Radiation Poisoning is the term used to describe the damaging effects of large doses of radiation on the body, such as after a nuclear bomb explosion or nuclear reactor explosion.
Nausea, Diarrhea, and Vomiting Smaller, but still significant, doses of radiation cause nausea, diarrhea, vomiting and fatigue as well as confusion and decreased organ function.
Psychological and behavioral effects of radiation exposure are complaints among A-bomb survivors. Neurotic symptoms, including general fatigue, amnesia, and lack of concentration as well as other symptoms commonly associated with autonomic nerve imbalance, such as palpitation or a sense of burning or chill. Fear of the effects of radiation from getting a body scan is a health concern in itself. Coping with having scans done in the past is a challenge. The only way to emotionally deal with a body scan is to be educated and PREPARE AND PROTECT OUR LOVED ONES AS WELL AS OURSELVES.
http://junogalaxy.blogspot.com.au/2013/06/srnl-pnnl-respond-to-fukushima-cleanup.html?m=1

http://www.no-rad-zone.com/mag_2011_Radiation-Effects.html

The Law of Dharma or the Purpose in Life

by Deepak Chopra

Everyone has a purpose in life . . . a unique gift or special talent to give to others. And when we blend this unique talent with service to others, we experience the ecstasy and exultation of our own spirit, which is the ultimate goal of all goals.

I will put the Law of Dharma into effect by making a commitment to take the following steps:

1. Today I will lovingly nurture the god or goddess in embryo that lies deep within my soul. I will pay attention to the spirit within me that animates both my body and my mind. I will awaken myself to this deep stillness within my heart. I will carry the consciousness of timeless, eternal Being in the midst of time-bound experience.

2. I will make a list of my unique talents. Then I will list all the things that I love to do while expressing my unique talents. When I express my unique talents and use them in the service of humanity, I lose track of time and create abundance in my life as well as in the lives of others.

3. I will ask myself daily, “How can I serve?” and “How can I help?” The answers to these questions will allow me to help and serve my fellow human beings with love.

[Original]
http://www.chopra.com/community/online-library/the-seven-spiritual-laws-of-success/the-law-of-dharma-or-purpose-in-life




ACTION ALERT DEMAND ACTION NOW


ACTION ALERT DEMAND ACTION NOW

ACTION ALERT, WRITE OR CALL NRC COMMISSION AND DEMAND THEY TAKE LEGAL ACTION AGAINST SCE EXECUTIVES WHO LIED TO THE NRC. ITEM 2 DEMAND THE SCHEDULING OF THE ADJUDICATED PUBLIC HEARING.

Email address and Phone #’s of the NRC commission below.

Chairman@nrc.gov Tel: 301-415-1750
CMRSVINICKI@nrc.gov Tel: 301-415-1855
CMRAPOSTOLAKIS@nrc.gov Tel: 301-415-1810
CMRMAGWOOD@nrc.gov Tel: 301-415-8420
CMROSTENDORFF@nrc.gov Tel: 301-415-1800
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ap-exclusive-calif-sen-boxer-wants-justice-dept-probe-on-troubled-san-onofre-nuclear-plant/2013/05/28/5aaf8d48-c77e-11e2-9cd9-3b9a22a4000a_story.html
AP Exclusive: Calif Sen Boxer wants Justice Dept probe on troubled San Onofre nuclear plant
http://www.washingtonpost.com

When We Tested Nuclear Bombs


Since the time of Trinity -- the first nuclear explosion in 1945 -- nearly 2,000 nuclear tests have been performed. Most of these occurred during the 1960s and 1970s. When the technology was new, tests were frequent and often spectacular, and they led to the development of newer, more deadly weapons. Since the 1990s, there have been efforts to limit the testing of nuclear weapons, including a U.S. moratorium and a U.N. comprehensive test ban treaty. As a result, testing has slowed -- though not halted -- and there are looming questions about who will take over for those experienced engineers who are now near retirement? Gathered here are images from the first 30 years of nuclear testing. See also "Can We Unlearn the Bomb?" and "Atomic Weapons on Film." [36 photos




(Original 
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/05/when-we-tested-nuclear-bombs/100061/

Fukushima: Massive Leaks and Radioactive Fallout Continuing On a Daily Basis … For Years On End

 
Global Research, April 06, 2013
 
You may have heard that Tepco – the operator of the stricken Fukushima nuclear power plants – announced a large leak of radioactive water.

You may have heard that the cooling system in the spent fuel pools at Fukushima has failed for a second time in a month.

This is newsworthy stuff … but completely misses the big picture.

Japanese experts say that Fukushima is currently releasing up to 93 billion becquerels of radioactive cesium into the ocean each day.

How much radiation is this?

A quick calculation shows that it is about ten thousand times less than the amounts released by Chernobyl during the actual fire at the Russian nuclear plant.   But the Chernobyl fire only last 10 days … and the Fukushima release has been ongoing for more than 2 years so far.
Indeed, Fukushima has already spewed much more radioactive cesium and iodine than Chernobyl. The amount of radioactive cesium released by Fukushima was some 20-30 times higher than initially admitted.
Fukushima also pumped out huge amounts of radioactive iodine 129 – which has a half-life of 15.7 million years. Fukushima has also dumped up to 900 trillion becquerels of radioactive strontium-90 – which is a powerful internal emitter which mimics calcium and collects in our bones – into the ocean.

And the amount of radioactive fuel at Fukushima dwarfs Chernobyl … and so could keep leaking for decades, centuries or millenia.

Tepco graphics of the Fukushima plants even appear to show water directly flowing from the plant to the ocean.  See this and this.

The bottom line is that the reactors have lost containment.  There are not “some leaks” at Fukushima. 
“Leaks” imply that the reactor cores are safely in their containment buildings, and there is a small hole or two which need to be plugged.   But scientists don’t even know where the cores of the reactors are.   That’s not leaking. That’s even worse than a total meltdown.

So what are the consequences for people living outside of Fukushima itself?
(Original
 http://www.globalresearch.ca/fukushima-massive-leaks-and-radioactive-fallout-continuing-on-a-daily-basis-for-years-on-end/5330096

UN expert says Japan government, nuclear plant operator evading responsibility for disaster


TOKYO — A United Nations expert who investigated the aftermath of Japan’s 2011 nuclear power plant disaster says the government and the operator of the facility should do more to help those affected by the catastrophe.
A report by special rapporteur Anand Grover, posted on the U.N. Human Rights Council’s website, says the government’s takeover of Tokyo Electric Power Co. allowed the utility to evade full responsibility for the nuclear disaster, the worst since Chernobyl. (keep reading....

ANNAPOLIS, MD - MAY 27:  Oscar Duran of Washington, DC gets help getting out of a hole from his wife, Selma Duran, left, and Daron Renton, right, while Oscar's son, Adrian Duran, 4, top, looks on at Sandy Point State Park on Monday May 27, 2013 in Annapolis, MD.  Oscar's family helped cover him with sand after the hole was dug. Many people headed outdoors to enjoy Memorial Day that saw temperatures in the 70's in the region.  (Photo by Matt McClain/ The Washington Post)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/un-expert-says-japan-government-nuclear-plant-operator-evading-responsibility-for-disaster/2013/05/26/14ff3348-c5d0-11e2-9642-a56177f1cdf7_story.html#

An Appeal from a Fukushima Woman: A Young Girl Die...

FukushimaVoice: An Appeal from a Fukushima Woman: A Young Girl Die...: From  a weekly protest gathering outside the Prime Minister’s official residence. On April 12, 2013.  Good evening, everyone. ...

BLUE RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE LEAGUE

 BLUE RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE LEAGUE

 Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League
http://www.bredl.org/nuclear/index.htm

Fukushima Radiation Spreads Worldwide

 Earth Changes http://www.sott.net/article/240352-Fukushima-Radiation-Spreads-Worldwide


California, Finland, Canada, Australia Hit By Radiation

The University of California at Berkeley detected cesium levels in San Francisco area milk above over EPA limits ... and even higher than they were 6 months ago.

Finnish public television says that cesium from Fukushima has been detected in lichens, fungi and elk and reindeer meat in Finland.

The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency confirmed a radiation cloud over the East Coast of Australia.

The West Coast of Canada is getting hit by debris from Japan ... and at least some of it is likely radioactive.

The authors of the controversial study claiming 14,000 deaths in the U.S. so far from Fukushima are now upping their figure to 20,000. I spoke with nuclear health expert Chris Busby about their study, and he said that mortality figures fluctuate pretty substantially in the normal course, and so it is hard to know at this point one way or the other whether their figures are accurate.

And while there is no evidence linking them to Fukushima, Bed Bath and Beyond has recalledradioactive tissue holders after they set off police radiation monitors aboard a delivery truck This may just be an example of the incredibly lax handling of radioactive materials.

And thyroid cancers are - mysteriously - on the rise in the U.S.

But don't worry: The owner of the Fukushima plant has the plant in cold shutdown, so everything is "under control" ... Although temperatures have apparently jumped inside Fukushima's number 2 reactor, and the Japanese have no idea where the nuclear fuel has gone, so they are drilling a hole into the containment vessel to try to find it. http://www.sott.net/article/240352-Fukushima-Radiation-Spreads-Worldwide


D-tect Systems: Radiation Contamination in Food and Water: What's ...

D-tect Systems: Radiation Contamination in Food and Water: What's ...: As Japanese emergency workers continue to pump out thousands of gallons of contaminated water from the damaged reactors of the Fukushima...radiation contamination in food and water has emerged as a new focus of the international media.....

The “Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial Team” rejected a second time


Posted on 25 April 2013
The 24 June 2011, parents 14 primary school children in Koriyama City and antinuclear activists have filed a complaint to the District Court to demand their right to study in a healthy environment and thus to organize collective evacuation of children.
The district court rejected their request Koriyama the 16 December 2011.
The plaintiffs appealed to the end of the year 2011 High Court of Sendai.
The complaint asks the Government and the judiciary to take immediate steps to remove children from Fukushima collectively.
Details “save children from radiation”

25 April 2013 – See the reaction of one of the trial lawyers at the bottom of page


24 April 2013

The Sendai High Court has rejected the demand that the city of Koriyama, affected by the impact of the nuclear disaster 2011 evacuates his children.

The plaintiffs argued that the city of Koriyama before the legal responsibility to evacuate school children, to ensure a healthy environment.
The court recognized that the level of radiation in the city was higher than levels considered safe before the disaster. But the government does not bear the responsibility to evacuate the school as requested.
In practice this means the people from themselves if they feel worried.

Toshio Yanagihara, one of the lawyers said that the decision was unfair because “children are victims no responsibility for the nuclear accident“. This judgment is also subject to appeal.
Koriyama est une would 330.000 inhabitants about 60 Km west of the ruined reactors.
Thousands of children suffered from cancer after the Chernobyl disaster, but these cancers do not appear until several years.
It is not known whether children Fukushima are also subject to cancer, expensive le cancer ever since various causes, and radiation affects people differently.
Radioactive contamination is complex, not only taints the air, but also food, soil and water.
De nombreux habitants de Fukushima sont inquiets et ont déménagé.
La façon dont le gouvernement a géré la catastrophe de Fukushima a conduit à la méfiance du public.
Des milliers de personnes ont manifesté dans les rues, exigeant une élimination progressive de l’énergie atomique.
Le gouvernement a exprimé le souhait de relancer les réacteurs après vérification de leur sécurité.

Translation- résumé libre de l’article en anglais de l’ Asahi Sinbum

25 April
VOICI LA RÉACTION D’UN AVOCAT JAPONAIS AU JUGEMENT

C’est sous-titré en anglais facile à comprendre.
J’esaierai de trouver le temps de faire une traduction en français


Note:
Collective evacuation means that the state organizes and finances the evacuation of populations.
To evacuate alone as proposed by the court, must have money, a trade, do not have too much debt on site; must also find a base, a housing, employment…. In addition there are family issues. In many cases, the mother and the children are gone and the husband remains in place because of his work. Those who stay with their children are often worried about their future; especially as the authorities hide the overall results of examinations of the thyroid performed.
The level of radiation considered internationally as “harmless” – or rather not too offensive- est de 1mSv/an (en plus du rayonnement naturel)
Le gouvernement japonais a décidé que les gens pouvaient habiter dans les zones à 20mSv/an
Le niveau naturel au japon est généralement inférieur à 0,10µSv/h.
0,10Sv / hour, cela fait 0,9mSv/an pour une exposition permanente.









Hundreds protest amendment of pacifist constitution in Tokyo

Hundreds protest amendment of pacifist constitution in Tokyo
Hundreds of Japanese, young and old, gathered in downtown Tokyo in a peaceful protest Friday against calls by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to amend the country's pacifist constitution and give the government more power to abridge civil liberties.

Opposition parties, labour groups, religious organizations and individuals turned out to march from a park near the Imperial Palace through the Ginza shopping district, beating drums and chanting their opposition to such moves by Abe and the ruling Liberal Democratic Party.

Japan was marking the 66th anniversary of its constitution on Friday, a national holiday.

Supporters of amending the constitution want to change the requirement that constitutional amendments win two-thirds approval in both houses of parliament before they are put to a national referendum. They want that changed to simple majority approvals in parliament before a referendum.

Opponents say such changes could allow the government to undermine civil liberties. Reinforcing such concerns is a proposal by the Liberal Democrats that calls for making civil liberties such as freedom of speech and expression subordinate to the public interest.

"The constitution is meant to protect the people and their rights from the government. What they want to do is to reverse that," said Hiroshi Honna, a member of a group of Second World War air raid victims' families and of a group against amending Article 9 of the constitution, in which Japan renounces the use of war.

His was among dozens of groups handing out flyers and marching in the "Ginza Parade." Surveys show mixed opinions among Japanese to revising the constitution.

While many Japanese favour Abe's calls for a greater sense of patriotism and national pride, many believe their nation's rejection of war and its protection of civil liberties are essential for its prosperity.

The constitution was written by U.S. officials whose main concern was keeping Japan from rearming soon after the Second World War. Until recently, discussions of constitutional amendments mainly focused on longtime calls to change Article 9, which keeps a tight rein on Japan's military, known as the "Self-Defence Forces."

Abe took office late last year, vowing to end two decades of economic stagnation and restore Japan's greatness. He has long campaigned for boosting the role of the military, and with his popularity ratings at more than 70 per cent appears confident of winning a strong mandate for the Liberal Democrats in a July election for the upper house of parliament.

Among other things, Abe wants Japan to be able to engage in "collective defence," with its troops able to fight alongside Tokyo's allies - especially the U.S. troops who are obliged to defend Japan - if either comes under direct attack. The United States has about 50,000 troops in Japan, including its largest airbase in Asia.

Right now, if Japan's current standoff with China over a group of disputed islands flared into actual conflict, and U.S. navy ships coming to Japan's assistance took enemy fire, Japan wouldn't be able to help them.

Kazuo Shii of the Japan Communist Party said high requirements for amending the constitution were considered "common sense" in most countries.

"The constitution exists to protect your own rights," he said. "There is a good reason it is not easy to amend it."

© Copyright (c) The Associated Press

http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/story.html?id=8338294

Nanoscale Ag may decrease radiation of Cesium 134 and 137 by LENR transmutation?

Nanoscale Ag may decrease radiation of Cesium 134 and 137 by LENR transmutation?
Mar 30th, 2013 @ 11:02 pm › Toshiro Sengaku
On the week of Feb 5, the conference of “radiation detectors and their uses” was held in High Energy Accelerator Research Organization in Tsukuba city of Japan. Japanese web site is (here) and Google translated one is (here).

In the conference, there was a very interesting presentation “Experiment and verification of the radioactive cesium decrease effect of nanoscale pure silver (Ag) with supporting material” for LENR watchers. (This title is translated to English by me and may be inaccurate.)

The Japanese abstract (PDF document) was published (here) and p.69 and p.70 are for the presentation.

Experiment and verification of the radioactive cesium decrease effect of nanoscale pure silver (Ag) with supporting material



ナノスケール純銀担持体の放射性セシウム減弱効果の検証測定 from 俊郎 浅学俊郎
The author, Dr. Shin Iwasaki, a physicist and ex-professor of Tohoku University of Japan, describes the results of some experiments that the nanoscale Ag supported by bone charcoal and white granite or collagen liquid can decrease the radioactivity of the radioactive cesium in Fukushima prefecture of Japan in the laboratory.

In Fukushima, after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster of March 11, 2011, the soil and many houses were contaminated by radioactive cesium. To decontaminate, people had to wash roofs and walls by water, and remove the surface-soil containing the radioactive material. The big problem is how to treat the washing water or removed soil, because we have no way to decrease the radioactivity.

Dr. Norio Abe, a biologist and the chief of Itabashi Firefly Ecosystem Center in Tokyo, thought of the idea to use nanoscale silver Ag to decontaminate radioactive soil because he had well-known the capability of nanoscale Ag to keep the environment clean for the firefly.

Surprisingly, the radioactivity of the soil decreased after he had spread nanoscale Ag with collagen liquid.

While the reason or mechanism is unknown, he succeeded to decrease the radioactivity of contaminated water or soil in several fields in Fukushima.

In March 2012, Dr. Shin Iwasaki joined the group with Dr. Norio Abe and started to help verify the strange phenomenon. Then in Nov 2012, after much trial and error, he was able to measure the effect. In the abstract, the main result is shown in Fig. 1.

He made the sample in U9-type container by combining the 4-5 nanometer Ag with bone charcoal and washing with water including Cesium. He measured radioactivity by monitoring the gamma spectrum over a long period using Csl (T1) detector + 512ch MCA. He said that his team payed attention to uniformity of the sample, self shielding, volatilization and location of the measuring instruments.

While the natural half-life of Cs-134 is 2 years, and one of Cs-137 is 30 years, Dr. Iwasaki analysed the experiment and concluded there was a decrease in the ”half-life” of radioactivity of these Cesium isotopes to about 1 or 2 months.

The graph of Fig. 1 shows the time series of the relative values of radioactivity to the original sample without nanoscale Ag. For example, ”1.0″ is the value of the original sample and “0.6″ means the value is 60% of the original sample. 3P and LC shows the following values and the background radioactivity is reduced.

3P: sum of 3 peaks including 604keV of Cs-134, 661.6keV of Cs-137 and 795.7keV of Cs-134 and others.

LC: sum of continuous values under the 3 peaks.



This experiment started at Dec 22, 2012 and ended at Jan 16, 2013. In the first few days, the half-life of the radioactivity is equal to about 20 days, He added 0.6 cc pure water to the sample and stirred at Jan 14, 2013 and the value started to decrease again.

This result is very impressive for me because the experimental system is simple and the effect is big. Dr. Shin Iwasaki suggested the phenomenon may be one kind of LENR.

Unfortunately, this project has little budget, and he can not analyze the mix of elements of the used sample. In the abstract, he calls for other scientists to reproduce this experiment. I hope they will too. This phenomenon may help to decontaminate water and soil around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

Cold fusion now!

Contact Toshiro Sengaku or go to Amateur-Lenr Wants To Know




Categories: Alternative Energies, Science and Technology
Tags: Cesium, Fukushima, Nanoscale Ag, radioactivity

http://coldfusionnow.org/nanoscale-ag-may-decrease-the-radiation-of-cesium-134-and-137-by-lenr-transmutation/

top-secret studies, the “Human Radiation Experiments,”

EXPOSE REVISITED - This year marks the 20th anniversary of the declassification of top-secret studies, the “Human Radiation Experiments,” done over a period of 30 years, in which the US conducted radiation experiments on as many as 20,000 vulnerable US citizens.
http://www.citywatchla.com/4box-right/5005-humans-used-for-radiation-experiments-a-shameful-chapter-in-us-history

Victims included civilians, prison inmates, federal workers, hospital patients, pregnant women, infants, developmentally disabled children and military personnel — most of them powerless, poor, sick, elderly or terminally ill. Eileen Welsome’s 1999 exposé The Plutonium Files: America’s Secret Medical Experiments in the Cold War details “the unspeakable scientific trials that reduced thousands of men, women, and even children to nameless specimens.”

The program employed industry and academic scientists who used their hapless patients or wards to see the immediate and short-term effects of radioactive contamination — with everything from plutonium to radioactive arsenic. The human subjects were mostly poisoned without their knowledge or consent.

An April 17, 1947 memo by Col OG Haywood of the Army Corps of Engineers, reported by The Washington Post on Dec. 16, 1994, explained why the studies were classified: “It is desired that no document be released which refers to experiments with humans and might have adverse effect on public opinion or result in legal suits.”

In one Vanderbilt University study, 829 pregnant women were unknowingly fed radioactive iron. In another, 188 children were given radioactive iron-laced lemonade. Detailed by a 1986 report of the Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power, from 1963 to 1971, 67 inmates in Oregon and 64 prisoners in Washington had their testicles targeted with X-rays to see what doses made them sterile.

At the Fernald State School, mentally retarded boys were fed radioactive iron and calcium but consent forms sent to parents didn’t mention radiation. A 1994 Minneapolis StarTribune report, “48 more human radiation experiments revealed,” noted psychiatric patients and infants were injected with radioactive iodine.

In a rare public condemnation, Clinton Administration Energy Sec. Hazel O’Leary confessed to being aghast at the conduct of the scientists. She told Newsweek in 1994: “I said, ‘Who were these people and why did this happen?’ The only thing I could think of was Nazi Germany.” None of the victims were provided follow-on medical care.

Scientists knew from the beginning of the 20th century that radiation could cause genetic and cell damage, cell death, radiation sickness and even death. A Presidential Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments was established in 1993 to investigate charges of unethical or criminal action by the experimenters. Its findings were published by Oxford University Press in 1996 as The Human Radiation Experiments.

The abuse of X-radiation “therapy” was also conducted throughout the ’40s and ’50s. Everything from ringworm to tonsillitis was “treated” with X-radiation because the long-term risks were unknown or considered tolerable. Joseph Mangano’s 2012 Mad Science: The Nuclear Power Experiment reveals that children were routinely exposed to alarmingly high doses of radiation from devices like “fluoroscopes” to measure foot size in shoe stores. Nasal radium capsules inserted in nostrils, used to attack hearing loss, are now thought to be the cause of cancers, thyroid and dental problems, immune dysfunction and more, although a National Cancer Institute fact sheet claims there is no clear link between nasal radium exposure and cancer.

In large-scale experiments as late as 1985, the Energy Department deliberately produced reactor meltdowns that spewed radiation across Idaho and beyond. The Washington Post reported the meltdown July 10, 1985, quoting an Energy Department spokesman as saying, “It appears that the test was a complete success.” The Air Force conducted at least eight deliberate meltdowns in the Utah desert in 1959, dispersing 14 times the radiation released by the partial meltdown of Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979, an Associated Press reported in 1994.

The military even dumped radiation from planes and spread it across wide areas around and downwind of Oak Ridge, Tenn., Los Alamos, NM, and Dugway, Utah. This “systematic radiation warfare program,” conducted between 1944 and 1961, was kept secret for decades.

“Radiation bombs” thrown from USAF planes intentionally spread radiation “unknown distances” endangering the young and old alike. One such experiment doused Utah with 60 times more radiation than escaped the Three Mile Island accident, according to Sen. John Glenn, D-Ohio, who released a report on the program 20 years ago.

The Pentagon’s aboveground nuclear bomb tests of 1945-1962, totaling more than 200, and the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, are not officially listed as radiation experiments. Yet between 250,000 and 500,000 US military personnel were contaminated during their compulsory participation in the bomb tests and the post-war occupation of Japan.

Documents uncovered by the Advisory Committee show that the military knew there were serious radioactive fallout risks from its Nevada Test Site bomb blasts. The generals decided not to use a safer site in Florida, where fallout would have blown out to sea. “The officials determined it was probably not safe, but went ahead anyway,” Pat Fitzgerald, a scientist on the committee staff, told The New York Times March 15, 1995.

In addition, Dr. Gioacchino Failla, a Columbia University scientist who worked for the Atomic Energy Commission, was quoted in the same 1995 report as saying, “We should take some risk… we are faced with a war in which atomic weapons will undoubtedly be used, and we have to have some information about these things.”

With the National Cancer Institute’s 1997 finding that all US citizens in the country at the time of the bomb tests were contaminated with fallout, it’s clear we did face war with atomic weapons — our own.
http://www.citywatchla.com/4box-right/5005-humans-used-for-radiation-experiments-a-shameful-chapter-in-us-history
(John LaForge works for the nuclear watchdog group Nukewatch in Wisconsin, edits its Quarterly newsletter, and writes for PeaceVoice … where this column was first posted.)

-cw
CityWatch

Vol 11 Issue 36

Pub: May 3, 2013

Extremely radioactive debris found on the top of reactor3 North side

Extremely radioactive debris found on the top of reactor3 North side, Tepco “Safely moved to the South side”
Posted by Mochizuki on May 4th, 2013 ·

On 5/4/2013, Tepco released the press release to announce they found the extremely radioactive debris on the top of reactor3.
At this moment, English version of the report is not published yet.
The debris was found in the North side of the top, where used to be the operation floor.
When they loaded it onto the remote controlling truck, they measured 540 mSv/h. However it is not announced how far they measured it from the surface of debris.
At 13:45, they regulated entering around the truck, but they moved the debris to the temporary storage facility of highly radioactive debris on the south side of the reactor building.
Tepco announced they are going to move it to the solid radioactive waste storage facility on the North side of the seismic isolation building within 5 days.

http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/2013/1227050_5117.html

http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/2013/1227052_5117.html

放射性碎片發現在3號反應爐北邊,東京電力公司"安全移動到南方一側"
2013 年 5 月 4 日由望月

2013/5/4,東京電力公司發佈電子報,宣佈他們發現了在第3反應爐的極放射性碎片。
在此時,英文版的報告是尚未發佈。
殘骸被發現在北邊的頂部,在用於將操作層。
當他們裝上遠端控制卡車時,他們測量 540 mSv/h。然而它不多遠宣佈他們測量了它的碎片從表面。
13:45,在他們規管在卡車周圍進入,但他們移動到臨時儲存設施的高度放射性碎片上的反應器大廈南側的碎片。
東京電力公司宣佈他們要將它移動到北邊的隔震建築在 5 天內固體放射性廢物貯存設施。

HTTP://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/2013/1227050_5117.html

HTTP://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/2013/1227052_5117.html

日本承諾在建設新的核工廠安全

日本承諾在建設新的核工廠安全
2013/3/5
安卡拉,土耳其 (美聯社) — — 日本首相週五說他的國家已經從福島核災難的教訓,將提供"最高水準的安全"當它建立土耳其的第二個核電廠。

土耳其選擇了日語法語財團興建的一座核反應爐在土耳其的黑海海岸。上週五到安卡拉的安倍晉三的參觀期間簽署了一項協定。

阿部,通過一名翻譯,發言時對記者說:"我們有進行我們的經驗中通過從過去意外和風險的經驗教訓的最高水準的核安全"

土耳其能源部長表示,該國將開始與日本的三菱重工和法國阿海琺的談判。5,000-1 兆瓦產工廠預計花費 $220 億,將在 2023年開機。

俄羅斯構建在 Akkuyu,土耳其的第一家電廠,將在 2019年開始測試生產。

HTTP://www.local15tv.com/news/world/story/Japan-promises-safety-in-building-new-nuclear-plan/t41IU8LF0ki78u-DMNodPw.cspxplan/t41IU8LF0ki78u-DMNodPw.cspx






Japan promises safety in building new nuclear plant

WTF? Japanese Abe promises nuclear safety in Turkey? ........$&-@#%<|*£¥!&%#!.......
 3/5/2013

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — Japan's prime minister said Friday that his country has learned lessons from the Fukushima nuclear disaster and will offer the "highest level of safety" when it builds Turkey's second nuclear plant.

Turkey chose a Japanese-French consortium for the construction of a nuclear reactor on Turkey's Black Sea coast. An agreement was signed during Shinzo Abe's visit to Ankara on Friday.

Abe, speaking through an interpreter, told reporters: "We have carried our experience in nuclear security to the highest level through lessons learned from past accidents and risks."

Turkey's Energy Ministry said the country will begin negotiations with Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and France's Areva. The 5,000-megawatt capacity plant is expected to cost $22 billion and be operational in 2023.

Russia is constructing Turkey's first plant in Akkuyu, which will begin test production in 2019."HTTP://www.local15tv.com/news/world/story/Japan-promises-safety-in-building-new-nuclear-plan/t41IU8LF0ki78u-DMNodPw.cspx









著名日本歌手阪本龍一著力反對日本的核策略

著名日本歌手阪本龍一著力反對日本的核策略
HTTP://aoitoribunko.blog91.fc2.com/blog-entry-88.html

克裡斯 · 巴斯比博士談許多關於此視頻的內容(5 月 1 日)
HTTP://aoitoribunko.blog91.fc2.com/blog-entry-87.html

Famous Japanese singer RYIICHI SAKAMOTO take great effort to oppose nuclear strategy in Japan
http://aoitoribunko.blog91.fc2.com/blog-entry-88.html

Dr. Chirs Busby talks about many things about this video(May 1st)
http://aoitoribunko.blog91.fc2.com/blog-entry-87.html



Fukushima 2013: A Continuing Nuclear Disaster of Global Significance A Nuke Free Future.

http://www.nukefreefuture.com/fukushima2012/, Fukushima 2013: A Continuing Nuclear Disaster of Global Significance
Massive radiation releases continue to spread in Japan and globally via the atmosphere, ocean, precipitation, contaminated food & manufactured goods. By Kia Mistilis. Independent journalist & contributing editor to Nuke Free Future. March, 2013.

F U K U S H I M A D A I C H I N U C L E A R P L A N T >>

Tracking the situation at the stricken nuclear power station: Two years since the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami, the situation at the Daichi nuclear plant remains critical. Fukushima is a continuing nuclear disaster – it did not end when the world’s mainstream media abruptly stopped reporting on it just a few months after it began. Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear engineer with 40 years’ experience, has been monitoring the reactors and radiation releases since March 11, 2011. He posts regular video updates on his NGO website: Fairewinds Energy Education, which explain the unfolding disaster in layman’s terms. He is one of a small handful of independent experts who have stepped into the gap left by the nuclear industry, TEPCO and the Japanese government, to provide the public with accurate scientifically based information and analysis. You can access Arnie Gundersen’s video reports and media interviews here. Gundersen told Al Jazeera in June 2011 that “Fukushima is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind.”

A triple meltdown occurred 1-2 days after the earthquake & tsunami hit: When the earthquake hit, the plant lost power and water used to cool the reactors stopped circulating. Back up diesel generators located in the basements failed when the tsunami flooded the buildings. Without power to cool the water which controls the temperature of the fuel rods, the fuel melted, turning into molten lava and breaching the steel containment vessels at the reactors’ floor. Gundersen’s reports confirm that a triple meltdown occurred within 24-48 hours after the plant lost power. (Keep Reading...).http://www.nukefreefuture.com/fukushima2012/









 

Science with a Skew: The Nuclear Power Industry After Chernobyl and Fukushima

http://www.japanfocus.org/-gayle-greene/3672, .

Gayle Greene

It is one of the marvels of our time that the nuclear industry managed to resurrect itself from its ruins at the end of the last century, when it crumbled under its costs, inefficiencies, and mega-accidents. Chernobyl released hundreds of times the radioactivity of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs combined, contaminating more than 40% of Europe and the entire Northern Hemisphere.1 But along came the nuclear lobby to breathe new life into the industry, passing off as “clean” this energy source that polluted half the globe. The “fresh look at nuclear”—in the words of a New York Times makeover piece (May 13, 2006)2—paved the way to a “nuclear Renaissance” in the United States that Fukushima has by no means brought to a halt.
That mainstream media have been powerful advocates for nuclear power comes as no surprise. “The media are saturated with a skilled, intensive, and effective advocacy campaign by the nuclear industry, resulting in disinformation” and “wholly counterfactual accounts…widely believed by otherwise sensible people,” states the 2010-2011 World Nuclear Industry Status Report by Worldwatch Institute.3 What is less well understood is the nature of the “evidence” that gives the nuclear industry its mandate, Cold War science which, with its reassurances about low-dose radiation risk, is being used to quiet alarms about Fukushima and to stonewall new evidence that would call a halt to the industry.

Consider these damage control pieces from major media:

• The “miniscule quantities” of radiation in the radioactive plume spreading across the U.S. pose “no health hazard,” assures the Department of Energy (William Broad, “Radiation over U.S. is Harmless, Officials Say,” NYT, March 22, 2011).

• “The risk of cancer is quite low, lower than what the public might expect,” explains Evan Douple, head of the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF), which has studied the A-bomb survivors and found that “at very low doses, the risk was also very low” (Denise Grady, “Radiation is everywhere, but how to rate harm?” NYT, April 5, 2011).
• An NPR story a few days after the Daiichi reactors destabilized quotes this same Evan Douple saying that radiation levels around the plant “should be reassuring. At these levels so far I don’t think a study would be able to measure that there would be any health effects, even in the future.” (“Early radiation data from near plant ease health fears,” Richard Knox and Andrew Prince,” March 18, 2011) The NPR story, like Grady’s piece (above), stresses that the Radiation Effects Research Foundation has had six decades experience studying the health effects of radiation, so it ought to know.

• British journalist George Monbiot, environmentalist turned nuclear advocate, in a much publicized debate with Helen Caldicott on television and in the Guardian, refers to the RERF data as “scientific consensus,” citing, again, their reassurances that low dose radiation incurs low cancer risk.4
Everyone knows that radiation at high dose is harmful, but the Hiroshima studies reassure that risk diminishes as dose diminishes until it becomes negligible. This is a necessary belief if the nuclear industry is to exist, because reactors release radioactive emissions not only in accidents, but in their routine, day-to-day operations and in the waste they produce. If low-dose radiation is not negligible, workers in the industry are at risk, as are people who live in the vicinity of reactors or accidents—as is all life on this planet . The waste produced by reactors does not “dilute and disperse” and disappear, as industry advocates would have us believe, but is blown by the winds, carried by the tides, seeps into earth and groundwater, and makes its way into the food chain and into us, adding to the sum total of cancers and birth defects throughout the world. Its legacy is for longer than civilization has existed; plutonium, with its half life of 24,000 years, is, in human terms, forever.
What is this Radiation Effects Research Foundation, and on what “science” does it base its reassuring claims?

*******

The Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission (ABCC), as it was originally called, began its studies of the survivors five years after the bombings. (It was renamed the Radiation Effects Research Foundation in the mid seventies, to get the “atomic bomb” out, at around the same time the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was renamed the Department of Energy (DOE). Japan, which has the distinction of being twice nuked, first as our wartime enemy then in 2011 as our ally and the recipient of our GE reactors, has also been the population most closely studied for radiation-related effects, for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings created a large, ready-made population of radiation-exposed humans. “Ah, but the Americans—they are wonderful,” exclaimed Japan’s radiation expert Tsuzuki Masao, who lamented that he’d had only rabbits to work on: “It has remained for them to conduct the human experiment!”5
The ABCC studied but did not treat radiation effects, and many survivors were reluctant to identify themselves as survivors, having no wish to bare their health problems to US investigators and become mired in bureaucracy and social stigma. But sufficient numbers did voluntarily come forth to make this the largest—and longest—study of radiation-related health effects ever. No medical study has had such resources lavished on it, teams of scientists, state of the art equipment: this was Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) funding. Since it is assumed in epidemiology that the larger the sample, the greater the statistical accuracy, there has been a tendency to accept these data as the gold standard of radiation risk.

ABCC examination of Hiroshima victim
The Japanese physicians and scientists who’d been on the scene told horrific stories of people who’d seemed unharmed, but then began bleeding from ears, nose, and throat, hair falling out by the handful, bluish spots appearing on the skin, muscles contracting, leaving limbs and hands deformed. When they tried to publish their observations, they were ordered to hand over their reports to US authorities. Throughout the occupation years (1945-52) Japanese medical journals were heavily censored on nuclear matters. In late 1945, US Army surgeons issued a statement that all people expected to die from the radiation effects of the bomb had already died and no further physiological effects due to radiation were expected.6 When Tokyo radio announced that even people who entered the cities after the bombings were dying of mysterious causes and decried the weapons as “illegal” and “inhumane,” American officials dismissed these allegations as Japanese propaganda.7
The issue of radiation poisoning was particularly sensitive, since it carried a taint of banned weaponry, like poison gas. The A-bomb was not “an inhumane weapon,” declared General Leslie Groves, who had headed the Manhattan project.8 The first western scientists allowed in to the devastated cities were under military escort, ordered in by Groves. The first western journalists allowed in were similarly under military escort. Australian journalist Wilfred Burchett, who managed to get in to Hiroshima on his own, got a story out to a British paper, describing people who were dying “mysteriously and horribly” from “an unknown something which I can only describe as the atomic plague… dying at the rate of 100 a day,” General MacArthur ordered him out of Japan; his camera, with film shot in Hiroshima, mysteriously disappeared.9
“No Radioactivity in Hiroshima Ruin,” proclaimed a New York Times headline, Sept 13, 1945. “Survey Rules out Nagasaki Dangers,” stated another headline: “Radioactivity after atomic bomb is only 1000th of that from luminous dial watch,” Oct 7, 1945.10 There were powerful political incentives to downplay radiation risk. As State Department Attorney William H. Taft asserted, the “mistaken impression” that low-level radiation is hazardous has the “potential to be seriously damaging to every aspect of the Department of Defense’s nuclear weapons and nuclear propulsion programs…it could impact the civilian nuclear industry… and it could raise questions regarding the use of radioactive substances in medical diagnosis and treatment.”11 A pamphlet issued by the Atomic Energy Commission in 1953 “insisted that low-level exposure to radiation ‘can be continued indefinitely without any detectable bodily change.’”12 The AEC was paying the salaries of the ABCC scientists and monitoring them “closely—some felt too closely,” writes Susan Lindee in Suffering Made Real, which documents the political pressures that shaped radiation science.13 (Other good sources on the making of this science are Sue Rabbit Roff’s Hotspots, Monica Braw’s The Atomic Bomb Suppressed, and Robert Lifton and Greg Mitchell’s, Hiroshima in America). The New York Times “joined the government in suppressing information on the radiation sickness of survivors” and consistently downplayed or omitted radioactivity from its reportage, as Beverly Ann Deepe Keever demonstrates in The New York Times and the Bomb.14 Keever, a veteran journalist herself, writes that “from the dawn of the atomic-bomb age,…the Times almost single-handedly shaped the news of this epoch and helped birth the acceptance of the most destructive force ever created,” aiding the “Cold War cover-up” in minimizing and denying the health and environmental consequences of the a-bomb and its testing.
The Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission scientists calculated that by 1950, when the commission began its investigations, the death rate from all causes except cancer had returned to “normal” and the cancer deaths were too few to cause alarm.15
*******
“It’s nonsense, it’s rubbish!” protested epidemiologist Dr. Alice Stewart, an early critic—and victim—of the Hiroshima studies.16 Stewart discovered, in 1956, that x-raying pregnant women doubled the chance of a childhood cancer: this put her on a collision course with ABCC/RERF data, which found no excess of cancer in children exposed in utero to the blasts. Nobody in the 1950s wanted to hear that a fraction of the radiation dose “known” to be safe could kill a child. During the Cold War, officials were assuring us we could survive all-out nuclear war by ducking and covering under desks and the U.S. and U.K. governments were pouring lavish subsidies into “the friendly atom.” Stewart was defunded and defamed.

Alice Stewart
She persisted in her criticisms of the Hiroshima data which were repeatedly invoked to discredit her findings, pointing out that there was no way the survivors could have returned to “normal” a mere five years after the atomic blasts. This was not a normal or representative population: it was a population of healthy survivors, since the weakest had died off. Her studies of childhood cancer had found that children incubating cancer became 300 times more infection sensitive than normal children. Children so immune-compromised would not have survived the harsh winters that followed the bombings, when food and water were contaminated, medical services ground to a halt, and antibiotics were scarce—but their deaths would not have been recorded as radiation-related cancer deaths. Nor would the numerous stillbirths, spontaneous abortions, and miscarriages (known effects of radiation exposure) have been so recorded. Stewart maintained that were many more deaths from radiation exposure than official figures indicated.
Besides, the survivors had been exposed to a single, external blast of radiation, often at very high dose (depending on their distance from the bombs), rather than the long, slow, low-dose exposure that is experienced by people living near reactors or workers in the nuclear industry. Stewart’s studies of the Hanford nuclear workers were turning up cancer at doses “known to be too low” to produce cancer, too low as defined by the Hiroshima data: “This is the population you ought to be studying to find out the effects of low-dose radiation,” she maintained, not only because the workers have been subjected to the kind of exposure more likely to be experienced by downwinders to reactors and accidents, but also because records were kept of their exposures (the nuclear industry requires such records).

Worker with radioactive waste at Hanford
In the Hiroshima and Nagasaki studies, by contrast radiation exposure was estimated on the flimsiest of guesswork. The radiation emitted by the bombs was calculated according to tests done in the Nevada desert and was recalculated several times in subsequent decades. Researchers asked such questions as, where were you standing in relation to the blast, what was between you and it, what had you had for breakfast that morning, assuming that the survivors would give reliable accounts five years after the event.
“Bible arithmetic!” Stewart called the Hiroshima data: “it has skewed subsequent calculations about the cancer effect of radiation, and not only the cancer effect, but many other effects –immune system damage, lowered resistance to disease, infection, heart disease, genetic damage. These are serious misrepresentations because they suggest it’s safe to increase levels of background radiation.” In fact, as the Hiroshima studies went on, they turned up numerous radiation effects besides cancer17—cardiovascular and gastrointestinal damage, eye diseases, and other health problems—which bore out her prediction. Stewart was also proved right on the issue of fetal X-rays, though it took her two decades to convince official bodies to recommend against the practice, during which time doctors went right on X-raying pregnant women. It took her another two decades to build a case strong enough to persuade the US government, in 1999, to grant compensation to nuclear workers for cancer incurred on the job.18 (It helps, in this area, to be long-lived, as she commented wryly).
Twice, she has demonstrated that radiation exposures assumed “too low” to be dangerous carry high risk—two major blows at the Hiroshima data. Yet this 60-year old RERF data set continues to be invoked to dismiss new evidence—evidence of cancer clusters in the vicinity of nuclear reactors and findings from Chernobyl.
*******
More than 40 studies have turned up clusters of childhood leukemia in the vicinity of nuclear facilities, reckons Ian Fairlie, an independent consultant on radioactivity in the environment and a former member of the Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters (an investigatory commission established by the U.K. government but disbanded in 2004). Fairlie describes this as a “mass of evidence difficult to contradict”19—yet it continues to be contradicted, on the basis of the Hiroshima studies. Generally when a cancer cluster is detected in the neighborhood of a reactor, the matter gets referred to a government committee that dismisses the findings on the grounds that radioactive emissions from facilities are “too low” to produce a cancer effect—“too low, according to RERF risk estimates.20
But in 2007, something extraordinary happened, when a government-appointed committee formed in response to the pressure of concerned citizens turned up increased rates of childhood leukemia in the vicinity of all 16 nuclear power plants in Germany. The Kinderkrebs in der Umgebung von Kernkraftwerken study, known by its acronym KiKK, was a large, well-designed study with a case-control format (1592 cancer cases and 4735 controls). The investigators—who were not opposed to nuclear power—anticipated they’d find “no effect... on the basis of the usual models for the effects of low levels of radiation.”21 But they found, to their surprise, that children who lived less than 5 km from a plant were more than twice as likely to develop leukemia as children who lived more than 5 km away. This was inexplicable within current models of estimating radiation risk:22 emissions would have had to have been orders of magnitude higher than those released by the power stations to account for the rise in leukemia. So the investigators concluded that the rise in leukemia couldn’t have been caused by radiation.

The findings are not inexplicable, explains Fairlie, when you understand that the data on which risk is calculated, the Hiroshima studies, are “unsatisfactory.”23 Fairlie’s criticism of these data echoes Stewart’s: “risk estimates from an instantaneous external blast of high energy neutrons and gamma rays are not really applicable to the chronic, slow, internal exposures from the low-range alpha and beta radiation from most environmental releases.”24 (my emphasis) Fairlie points out a further problem with the Hiroshima data: its failure to take into account the dangers of internal radiation. As Sawada Shoji, emeritus professor of physics at Nagoya University and a Hiroshima survivor, confirms, the Hiroshima studies never looked at fallout: they looked at “gamma rays and neutrons emitted within a minute of the explosion,” but did not consider the effects of residual radiation over time, effects from inhalation or ingestion that “are more severe.”25 The distinction between external and internal radiation is important to keep clear. A bomb blast gives off radiation in the form of high-energy subatomic particles and materials that remain as fallout in the form of radioactive elements such as strontium 90 and cesium. Most of this is likely to remain on the ground, where it will radiate the body from without, but some may be ingested or inhaled and lodge in a lung or other organ, where it will continue to emit radioactivity at close range. Nuclear proponents cite background radiation to argue that low-dose radiation is relatively harmless, asserting (as Monbiot argued against Caldicott) that we’re daily exposed to background radiation and survive. But this argument misses the fact that background radiation is from an external source and so is a more finite exposure than radioactive substances ingested or inhaled, which go on irradiating tissues, “giving very high doses to small volumes of cells,” as Helen Caldicott says. (Caldicott explains, when physicists talk about “permissible doses,” “[t]hey consistently ignore internal emitters — radioactive elements from nuclear power plants or weapons tests that are ingested or inhaled into the body,… They focus instead on generally less harmful external radiation from sources outside the body.”26).......keep reading.....http://www.japanfocus.org/-gayle-greene/3672,