Monday, April 16, 2012

Propaganda Alert

Keep a lid on it. By: Higson, Don, New Scientist, 02624079, 3/17/2012, Vol. 213, Issue 2856.
OPINION by Don Higson

[excerpt] "What is more, exposures to radiation were nowhere near high enough to cause acute radiation sickness. Importantly, there have been no radiation injuries to children or to other members of the public...."

Don Higson is a fellow of the Australasian Radiation Protection Society and the Institution of Engineers Australia, where he serves as secretary of the Nuclear Engineering Panel. He is also vice-president of the Australian Nuclear Association based in Engadine, New South Wales, and a member of the International Nuclear Energy Academy


Radiation in Japan: Radioactive Cesium from Urine Samples of 10 Children in Fukushima CitY From Sankei Shinbun (6/30/2011):


"A citizens' group in Fukushima Prefecture "Fukushima Network to Protect Children from Radiation" tested the urine samples from 10 children in Fukushima City, age 6 to 16, and announced on June 30 that a small amount of radioactive materials was detected from all samples.


"The highest amount of cesium-134 was from an 8-year-old girl, at 1.13 becquerels per liter. The highest amount of cesium-137 was from a 7-year-old boy, at 1.30 becquerels per liter..."

[end quote from Ex-SKF]

The children of Fukushima prefecture have in fact been poisoned. The tragically named Fukushima Network for Saving Children from Radiation took samples from 10 elementary through high-school children.[i] Analysis ran by an independent French research organization detected cesium-134, of up to 1.13 becquerels per liter in their urine. The un-named organization stated that children living 60 kilometers from the plant suffer from internal radiation exposure. When reporting on this news, the Japanese news agency NHK reassured readers that “The Japanese non-profit Radiation Effects Research Foundation says no health problems due to such radiation levels have been reported, and that people should not be overly concerned.”[ii]
Likewise, on July 6 the Japanese press Kyodo reported that in a March survey of 1,080 children aged 0 to 15 in Iwaki, Kawamata, and Iitate 45% of kids in Fukushima survey had thyroid exposure to radiation[iii] In August, NHK reported that Japan’s nuclear commission had erased children’s exposure data derived from a test of 1,000 children aged 15 or younger who had been screened for radiation affecting their thyroid.[iv] The report stated that one four year old child had a thyroid exposure of 35 millisieverts, but that the amount was “not considered a health threat.” This exposure level accounts only for Iodine-131 and does not incorporate the child’s total exposure to other radionuclides.
Based on these levels of exposure, June 24, Dr. Chris Busby, an internationally recognized expert on the health effects of ionizing radiation and chair of the European Committee on Radiation Risks, issued a public statement recommending evacuation of all people, but particularly children and pregnant women:
"Children and adults living in areas which are contaminated to the extent that the external gamma dose rate at 1m from the contamination surface exceeds 1? Sv per hour should immediately relocate to an uncontaminated area. The continued presence of children in areas where greater than this level of external dose rate exists will have a serious health problems and these may lead to their deaths within the following ten years. Exposure of pregnant mothers to contamination at levels resulting in an excess dose rate at 1m from the ground of 1? Sv per hour [sic] will have a significant effect on the viability of the fetus and the survival and health of the baby.[v]
Busby’s recommendation was ignored by Japan’s political authorities.

[i]              “Radiation Detected in Fukushima Children’s Urine,” NHK (2011, June 30):

[ii]             “Radiation Detected in Fukushima,”

[iii]             “45% of Kids in Fukushima Survey Had Thyroid Exposure to Radiation,” Mainichi (2011, July 5):
[iv]            “Nuclear Commission Erases Children's Exposure Data,” NHK (2011, August 11):

[v]             Chris Busby “Statement of Chris Busby in Relation to Provisional Injunction Against Education Committee of Koryama City, Fukushima to Evacuate the Children for the Radioactively Contaminated Area Being filed on 24th June 2011,” (2011, June 24):



Japan's Fukushima Daiichi ET Audio File
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Emphasis Added

[EXCERPT] MR. LEWIS: Yeah. The DITTRA result was four rem [40,000 microsieverts] to the thyroid of a one year-old [California] child based on one year integration of uptake. They --



“the human body absorbs iodine and caesium readily. "Essentially all the iodine or caesium inhaled or swallowed crosses into the blood," says Keith Baverstock, former head of radiation protection for the World Health Organization's European office, who has studied Chernobyl's health effects.” (


Old model assumed only cells directly subject to radiation were damaged
New model emphasizes how low-dose radiation can cause indirect damage to cells through the bystander effect and through genomic instability. The effects of low-dose ionizing radiation are variable and can reduce DNA repair mechanisms, operate lethally on cells or some instances activate them depending upon type of radiation, chemical environment, etc.
In recent years, several lines of evidence have been accumulating that low-dose effects of ionizing radiation involve formerly unexpected cellular phenomena such as non-targeted and delayed radiation effects. These effects clearly contradict the classical paradigm of radiation biology saying that all radiation effects on cells, tissues and organisms are due to the direct action of radiation on DNA…. As another low-dose non-linear radiation response can be added the phenomenon of low-dose radiation hypersensitivity (LDRH) [68] and [69] that has been observed in many cell types. It manifests itself by high lethality

Dietrich Averbeck, a, Towards a New Paradigm for Evaluating the Effects of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis Volume 687, Issues 1-2, 1 May 2010 pages 7-12


The demonstration of a bystander effect in 3D human tissues and, more recently, in whole organisms have clear implication of the potential relevance of the non-targeted response to human health. The observations that the progeny of non-targeted cells show an increase in genomic instability as evidenced by an increase in delayed mutations and chromosomal aberrations many generations afterwards indicate the need for a comprehensive assessment of the bystander issue, particularly among genetically susceptible populations….” (

Low-Dose radiation suppresses the body’s adaptive response against genomic instability
Huang L, Kim PM, Nickoloff JA, Morgan WF. 2007. Targeted and nontargeted effects of low-dose ionizing radiation on delayed genomic instability in human cells. Cancer Research 67:1099–1104


In a recent paper (Wakeford et al 2009 Leukaemia 23 770–6) we  estimated the proportion of childhood leukaemia incidence in Great Britain attributable to natural background radiation to be about 20%. In this paper we employ the two sets of published leukaemia risk models used previously, but use recently published revised estimates of natural background radiation doses received by the red bone marrow of British children to update the previous results. Using the newer dosimetry we calculate that the best estimate of the proportion of cases of childhood leukaemia in Great Britain predicted to be attributable to this source of exposure is 15–20%...”

Mark P Little1,4, Richard Wakeford2 and Gerald M KendallUpdated estimates of the proportion of childhood leukaemia incidence in Great Britain that may be caused by natural background ionising radiation Journal of Radiological Protection Volume 29 Number 4 467 10.1088/0952-4746/29/4/001


Academy of Sciences Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2 (2006)
"The committee concludes that the current scientific evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that there is a linear, no-threshold dose-response relationship between exposure to ionizing radiation and the development of cancer in humans."

Physicians for Social Responsibility concurs there are no safe doses of radiation. Decades of research show clearly that any dose of radiation increases an individual’s risk for the development of cancer.


The apparent lack of people suffering from "acute radiation syndrome" in no way precludes many deaths and illnesses from occurring as a result of exposure to Fukushima radiation. 


  1. This is truly an excellent synopsis.

    Here are a few more examples which conclude there is no safe dose of radiation:

    (1) "Radiation is Never Safe -- "There is no safe level of radiation," said Dr. Jeff Patterson, immediate past president of Physicians for Social Responsibility, a radiation exposure expert"

    (2) "Nuclear radiation: There is no safe dose" By Romeo F. Quijano, M.D.

    (3) Even the EPA's site says:
    "EPA makes the conservative (cautious) assumption that any increase in radiation exposure is accompanied by an increased risk of stochastic effects."

    (4) Even the IAEA admits:
    "...a study of the biological effects of radiation doses received by the survivors of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki suggested that exposure to low-level radiation was more likely to cause harm than previously estimated."

    (5) Regarding hormesis:
    "THE HORMESIS SCAM" by Dr. Karl Grossman Scam - Radiation is Good for You?

  2. Thank you very much for the additional testimonials!