mercoledì 12 novembre 2014

43 Groups Insist UN Stop Lying About Fukushima

November 9, 2014

A Letter Hand-delivered to the UN and UNSCEAR, Requesting Revision of UNSCEAR Report And a New UN Mandate for UNSCEAR 

http://fukushimavoice-eng2.blogspot.jp/2014/11/a-letter-hand-delivered-to-un-and.html

On October 24, 2014, at the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly being held in New York City, representatives from Physicians for Social Responsibility (USA) and Human Rights Now (Tokyo, Japan) hand-delivered a letter to the chairperson of the 4th Committee and the Secretary of UNSCEAR.  The letter, co-signed by 43 civil society groups from 9 countries, including 21 Japanese groups, requested revision of the 2014 UNSCEAR report on Fukushima accident as well as a new UN mandate for UNSCEAR.


Date: 24 October 2014
To:       Members of the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly 69th Session,
Members of UNSCEAR, and
Members of the UN General Assembly:
Re:       Civil Society groups request revision of the recent United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) Report: “Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and tsunami.”
      The 2011 Fukushima disaster made UN oversight of the adverse effects of ionizing radiation an issue of utmost global importance.  The goals and criteria of oversight should be the protection and promotion of the human right to health and well-being, which encompasses an environment as free from exposure to man-made ionizing radiation as possible.  We, the undersigned, urge the 4th Committee to examine critically both the scientific conclusions in the UNSCEAR report[i] and the scientific evidence omitted from the report.

     Physicians from 19 national affiliates of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), including Physicians for Social Responsibility (USA) and IPPNW Germany, have authored/issued/published a Critique of the UNSCEAR report[ii] which calls into question the presumptions and data used by UNSCEAR, and the consequent interpretations and conclusions.  This Critique demonstrates how UNSCEAR systematically underestimates and downplays the health effects of the Fukushima disaster.

     We appreciate the significant efforts made by UNSCEAR committee members to evaluate the extensive and complex data concerning the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe.  However, their conclusion that there is “no discernable effect”, now or in the future, defies common sense and undermines the credibility of UNSCEAR.  The Critique notes that based on the UNSCEAR report itself, it can be expected that about 1,000 excess cases of thyroid cancer and between 4,300 and 16,800 other excess cancer cases would occur in Japan due to Fukushima radioactive fallout.  We believe that these are very discernable effects for the individuals, families and communities experiencing these cancers, as well as those individuals who will experience other form(s) of radiation induced illness.

     Furthermore, the conclusion by UNSCEAR of ‘no discernible health effect’ is misleading the Japanese government to not implement countermeasures for individuals to avoid additional exposure and to have thorough monitoring of health effects, thereby causing serious human rights violations. 

     This catastrophe was not a singular event that has come to an end, but rather it is an unfolding event with an unknown endpoint.  Radioactive elements continue to leak into the biosphere and individuals continue to be exposed to ionizing radiation because they live in contaminated areas, consume contaminated food and water and inhale contaminated air.  Additionally, most of the health effects from Fukushima will take decades or generations to be expressed.  Thus the UNSCEAR report at hand should be considered a preliminary or initial assessment of the health effects of Fukushima. Ongoing and improved monitoring and updating of the assessment is required for a long time to come.  The 2014 UNSCEAR report is a beginning, not an end.
     We ask that the Fourth Committee take two actions regarding the UNSCEAR report:
     1)  Return the report to UNSCEAR for revision based on the Critique, taking into consideration the points of concern raised in the Critique, and that UNSCEAR broaden the composition of the committee to include as full-fledged members scientists who are critical of nuclear activities.

     2) We also ask that the Fourth Committee urge the General Assembly to pass a new resolution reframing the 1955 UNSCEAR founding mandate to ensure that the UNSCEAR’s primary scientific mission is to promote and protect public health and the right to health of the most vulnerable individuals.  The Precautionary Principle should be employed to address the short-term and long-term effects of ionizing radiation upon present and future generations as well as the environment.  Likewise, the Precautionary Principle should be employed when determining exposure, cleanup and decontamination regulations and activities after a nuclear disaster, educational measures to minimize and mitigate the risk of individual exposure, and the long-term monitoring of contaminated sites.  A new UN mandate is critical for UNSCEAR Committee members to be able to fully utilize their expertise for the purpose of protecting the lives and health of the global community.
This request is supported by the following organizations:
Physicians for Social Responsibility, USA
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War – Germany, Germany
Human Rights Now, Tokyo, Japan
Peace Boat – US, USA
Niji to midori no kai, Japan
Greens Fukushima, Japan
Workers’ Executive Committee For Anti-nuclear Power Movements, Japan
Kai Fukushima Downwind, Japan
The Nature Conservation of Fukushima, Japan
Friends of the Earth Japan, Japan
Showa Shell Labour Union, Japan
Chernobyl Health Survey and Health-care Support for the Victims - Japan Women's Network, Japan
Nuclear Disaster Information Center, Japan
Japan International Volunteer Center, Japan
Campaign for Nuclear-free Japan, Japan
Fukushima Network for Denuclearization, Japan
Hairo Action Fukushima, Japan
Hairo Fukushima Women Against Nukes, Japan
People in Fukushima-NPP 30km area, Japan
Refugee Living with Fukushima in Niigata Prefecture, Japan
Shinshu 3.11 Network, Japan
National Network of Parents to Protect Children from Radiation, Japa
The Civil Forum on Nuclear Radiation Damages (CFNRD), Japan
Takagi School, Japan
Association de l'Education Environnementale pour les Futures Generations, Tunisia
NGO of “Ecolife”, Azerbaijan
Women in Europe for a Common Future International, Netherlands
Women in Europe for a Common Future, Germany
Women in Europe for a Common Future, France
Irish Doctors' Environmental Association (IDEA), Ireland
Nuclear Information and Resource Service, USA
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, USA
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, New York, USA
Nukewatch/The Progressive Foundation, USA
Nuclear Watch New Mexico, USA
Georgia WAND - Women's Actions for New Directions, USA
Physicians for Social Responsibility – Kansas City, USA
Gray Panthers, USA
Center for Safe Energy, USA
Nuclear Energy Information Service, USA
Shut Down Indian Point Now, USA
International Society of Doctors for the Environment, Switzerland

Beyond Nuclear, USA



[i]  UNSCEAR report “Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and tsunami” at:  http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2013/13-85418_Report_2013_Annex_A.pdf
[ii]  Critical Analysis of the UNSCEAR Report “Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and tsunami: www.fukushima-disaster.de/information-in-english/maximum-credible-accident.html

venerdì 7 novembre 2014

Multigenerational effects of exposure to radiation

Denuclearize or lose our species: Multigenerational effects of exposure to radiation

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/10/23/denuclearize-or-lose-our-species-multigenerational-effects-of-exposure-to-radiation/

by Christopher Busby and Majia Nadesen

“PRESS RELEASE: Atomic Test Veteran Children and Grandchildren affected by fathers’ exposures to internal radiation from Uranium and Plutonium at the test sites”–Christopher Busby
260px-Fukushima_I_by_Digital_Globe
To hear it from Jim Stone, Fukushima poses no serious risk to civilization or to the survival of the human species. The idea is merely a profit-making myth.
“Fukushima was bad, but it is Japan’s problem. All the stories about the Pacific dying are bold faced lies spewed for ratings to generate ad revenue. You still cannot go into many of the nuclear testing zones in Russia because it is too radioactive.
“America was more careful, and does not have similar problems. The 30 KM radius around Fukushima (which extends out 100 km to the North) is Japan’s equivalent of Russia’s old testing zone, which is a big disaster for Japan. But as far as the rest of the world? It is meaningless and will stay that way no matter what happens at Fuku.”
The problem is that real experts on radiation and health, such as Christopher Busby, internationally acclaimed expert on precisely this subject, and Majia Nadesen, who has just published a book about Fukushima, have a very different story for us–one with ominous implications for the future.
Interview with Majia Nadesen on “The Real Deal” (15 October 2014):
New research has disclosed that exposure to radiation turns out to have cross-generational DNA effects that current regulations and policies do not reflect, which was not the result that was expected; and that, if we continue to rely upon nuclear weapons and nuclear energy, the survival of the species is in jeopardy, after all. Read and weep.

New Study questions Japanese data underpinning current radiation risk model


by Christopher Busby

The results of a study of the health of children and grandchildren of British servicemen stationed at the atomic weapons test sites at Maralinga in Australia and Christmas Island in the Pacific will be published in the open peer-reviewed journal Epidemiology this week. Christopher Busby and Mireille Escande de Messieres conducted a case-control and cohort study of 605 children and 749 grandchildren of members of the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association (BNTVA) and compared congenital defects and cancer incidence with 311 control children and 498 control grandchildren of age-matched individuals. Results showed that, compared with controls:
  1. There was three times the number (105) of miscarriages in wives of veterans.
  2. There was 9.7 times adverse congenital conditions (57) in veteran children.
  3. There was 8.4 times adverse congenital conditions (46) veteran grandchildren.
  4. These rates were confirmed also by comparison with national EUROCAT data.
  5. The existence of the same highly statistically significant rate in both generations points to genomic instability as likely cause, a trans-generational genomic switch discovered after Chernobyl and shown in animal studies to affect many generations.
  6. The cause is argued to be Uranium, the main atom bomb constituent, which rained out at the test sites as sub micron particles in “black rain”. Recent research shows Uranium causes genomic effects at very low radiation doses because it binds to DNA and amplifies the radiation damage both through proximity and in other ways.
  7. Black rain of Uranium was also a feature of the Hiroshima Atomic bomb and Uranium has been measured several kilometers from the Hiroshima epicenter. The authors re-analyse adverse birth outcome rates in the official Hiroshima database and show that rates in the control groups defined in the study as “zero dose” have twice the rate than all Japan for the post A-bomb period.
  8. The Ministry of Defence, in arguing recent court cases rely upon the fact that dosimeters at the test sites show low doses. However these devices do not register Uranium or other alpha emitters. Uranium was not looked for at the sites.
  9. The study findings are supported by similar genomic effects found in Iraq populations exposed to Depleted Uranium particles (e.g. Fallujah sex-ratio, cancer and birth defects), USA and UK Gulf veterans, Uranium miners and workers and Navajo and other local populations living near Uranium waste tailings. All of these groups show chromosome defects consistent with their exposures to Uranium.
Speaking from Riga, Latvia, Dr Busby remarks: This multi-generational effect is an unexpected finding. There are implications for the current radiation risk models which legally underpin all nuclear power development and also the use of radioactive weapons. Although weakly radioactive, when ingested and inhaled Uranium has properties which enable it to directly damage DNA in ways that are not incorporated into current legislation. Uranium was not measured at the test sites and is not routinely measured near nuclear sites or in the environments either.

Fukushima: Dispossession or Denuclearization?


by Majia Nadesen

We pose the question starkly: Humanity must choose between denuclearization or dispossession.
Front cover (Majia)We document that nuclear power and weapons are connected and their complex fundamentally dispossesses citizens of liberal guarantees, including rights to property, free speech, and the pursuit of happiness.
We explore crisis management of the Fukushima disaster to demonstrate dispossession of rights of property, free speech, and the pursuit of happiness, through examples that include lost livelihoods and Fukushima children’s rising rates of thyroid cancer, among other topics: See Oiwa, Yuri (2014, August 24), Thyroid cancer diagnosed in 104 young people in Fukushima. The Asahi Shimbun,
We examine the history of radiation health effects to demonstrate historical conflicts between nuclear industry safety-guidelines and scientific studies of the biological effects of “internal emitters,” which are ingested and/or inhaled radionuclides.
We describe distortions in nuclear industry safety models deriving from invalid modeling techniques.
We demonstrate that nuclear power is market distorting because it externalizes its true costs and relies extensively on generous government subsidies.
We show that governments too often prioritize nuclear interests over democratic principles and practices: For example, we investigate media and popular resistance within Japan to the newly passed “state secrets” law, which is seen by many as directly threatening free speech and public health: See Toshihiro Okuyama and Hiroo Sunaoshi (2013, December 17) State secrets law raises concern about safety of nuclear power plants. The Asahi Shimbun,
We disclose strong public support in Japan and elsewhere for decentralized alternative energy production and we describe oligarchic energy industries’ efforts to maintain centralized control when challenged by the decentralizing production tendencies of alternative energy, such as solar: See Ex-Japanese PM on How Fukushima Meltdown was Worse than Chernobyl and Why He Now Opposes Nuclear Power. (2014, March 11). Democracy Now.
We are concerned that in the absence of public activism the choices made by governments and industry will prioritize short term profits and vested interests. “Dispossession” is the cumulative effect of these decision criteria in action.
Nuclear remains seductive in our Hobbesian world of vying nation-states, despite myriad acknowledged hazards, including aging and decaying infrastructures, recurrent nuclear “accidents,” unceasing contamination, and terrorism. Nuclear seduces even when its effluents threaten the ecosystem and, perhaps, even the human genome.
Fukushima steaming photo
Fukushima Steaming? August 13 2014
Vested nuclear interests reign, but democracy is not yet vanquished. We see public demand for systematic denuclearization as critical for long-term human sustainability. The time for political action wanes as scientists predict nuclear power plant accidents will occur with regular frequency: See Severe nuclear reactor accidents likely every 10 to 20 years, European study suggests (2012, May 22). Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Mikhail Gorbachev noted in his Memoirs that prior to the Chernobyl disaster there had been 151 significant radiation leaks at nuclear power plants around the world.[i] He warned that one or two more accidents would produce contamination far worse than after a nuclear war.[ii] With Fukushima we are living in a highly contaminated age as research subjects with no options to discontinue the experiment.
Change in energy policy is necessary for human sustainability. If we do not denuclearize, we are going to be dispossessed.
WHO WE ARE
Back cover (Majia)We are a diverse group of scholars living on four continents. What unites us is our vision for a sustainable future based in decentralized, sustainable energy.
Contributing editors to Fukushima: Dispossession or Denuclearization? are Antony Boys, Andrew McKillop, Majia Nadesan and Richard Wilcox. Harvey Wasserman, Christopher Busby, Paul Langley, Adam Broinowski, Christian Lystbaek, and The Fukushima Five contribute chapters. Cover artwork by William Banzai7.
Proceeds from the book: Proceeds from the book will be donated to the Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial Team, a team of lawyers who are fighting in the courts in northern Japan to have children in Koriyama City, quite badly contaminated with radiation after the March 11, 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster, evacuated to safe areas at government expense.

References
[i]  M. Gorbachev (1995) Memoirs. (London: Doubleday), p. 191.
[ii]  C. Neef (24 March 2011) ‘This Reactor Model Is No Good’ Documents Show Politburo Skepticism of Chernobyl’, Spiegel.

Christopher Busby is an internationally acclaimed British scientist, a member of the Royal Society of Medicine and of the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology, known especially for his studies of the negative health effects of very low-dose ionising radiation.

Majia Nadesen is a professor of communication in the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences in the New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences and an expert on the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe. Her previous books include Fukushima and the Privatization of Risk.

Soglie per la mutazione indotta dalle radiazioni?

  Articolo di revisione Soglie per la mutazione indotta dalle radiazioni? Il dibattito Muller-Evans: un punto di svolta per la valutazione d...