For the Record on Nukes and Deaths from Radiation Pollution (Tell Obama: No New Nukes)

[Liberation Angel]

Obama has indicated that he is supporting new nuclear power plants via US Taxpayer subsidies to the Nuclear Industry. The first plants to get such support in Georgia have been making the Savannah River one of the most toxic rivers in the nation (and is representative of environmental racism as many poor people of color (as well as poor whites) fish in that river mostly oblivious to the deadly toxins in the fish).

I offer a study which industry shills and promoters will claim is flawed and biased but which I submit is unbiased and based on solid scientific data.

I urge you all to read it and its conclusions which claim that the nuclear industry (both weapons AND commercial power generation) have produced tens of millions of cancers, birth defects, infant deaths, spontaneous abortions since the inception of the Nuclear Age.The usual suspects will attack it, but even if 1/10th of what these studies say is accurate (and I believe they are fully accurate and I worked in the nuclear industry myself, albeit briefly, and have worked wityh whistleblowers and downwinders) then MILLIONS of people are dying and are affected in many ways.

Here are elements of the executive summary:

10. The committee concludes that the present cancer epidemic is a consequence of exposures to global atmospheric weapons fallout in the period 1959-63 and that more recent releases of radioisotopes to the environment from the operation of the nuclear fuel cycle will result in significant increases in cancer and other types of ill health.

11. Using both the ECRR's new model and that of the ICRP the committee calculates the total number of deaths resulting from the nuclear project since 1945. The ICRP calculation, based on figures for doses to populations up to 1989 given by the United Nations, results in 1,173,600 deaths from cancer. The ECRR model predicts 61,600,000 deaths from cancer, 1,600,000 infant deaths and 1,900,000 foetal deaths. In addition, the ECRR predict a 10% loss of life quality integrated over all diseases and conditions in those who were exposed over the period of global weapons fallout.

http://www.euradcom.org/2003/execsumm.htm


New studies on uranium and other updates of the studies and research of the European Committee on Radiation Risk may be found here:

http://www.euradcom.org/

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DCKit]

2. Like DDT, "So safe, you can eat it." Fearmonger. n/t

[Liberation Angel]

3. If people had the facts on how many are getting and dying of cancer from the nuke industry

they would not support it at all.

[DCKit]

8. Mmmmmmm. DDT. I was being snarky.

Now you've got two kicks and a rec from me, what more do you want?

I grew up not too far from TMI and am well aware of the cover-up in Middletown. Thirty-four years later and information is still hard to come by.

[Go2Peace]

11. Yep, think about Depleted Uranium and cancer and almost no coverage... Same thing

The nuclear industry and the DOE have worked together for years to hide the facts about this technology, just like the tobacco industry did. They misreport incidents, they fight any effort by citizens, they fight any scientific effort and overload with biased "reports", and they pay lobbies to work on legislatures like the Pharmacutical industry does with Doctors.

It's no wonder the common person is confused, but those of us who have been paying attention over the years know the truth and are aware of the lies used to cover it up.

[Pavulon]

20. The common person reads usa today and loves palin

the rest of us read real sources and follow scientific evidence. This is hack work posted by a little crusader. The evidence is quite clear if you choose to read it.

http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

You know what if you are dying ten million times over of malaria in africa DDT is a pretty good thing. DU is a political issue, see all the bosnian deformed babies and massive cancer, oh fuck, no.. that is because it is all cock and bull and the WHO says so.

And unlike falluja we really used DU there.

[bvar22]

4. K&R...back UP to +4

There are people at DU who don't want YOU to have this information.

[Sugarcoated]

16. It's starting to look that way to me, too.

[frebrd]

5. Kicked & Recommended! n/t

[Liberation Angel]

14. THX

nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. Nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants aren't really the same thing.

Now are they?

[Statistical]

7. To those who don't read closely. "nuclear projects" include atmospheric weapon testing.

It is like saying Hydrogen Fuel Cell vehicles are bad because Hydrogen bombs kill people.

[nemo137]

9. I find the conflation between Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Power misleading.

You know, calling both "nukes," combining numbers like this.

But what do I know, I'm some kind of nuke shill.

[Liberation Angel]

15. There is ONE Nuclear Industry poisoning us: they make weapons AND power plants

what is misleading about that?

Radiation from BOTH accumulates in our blood and bones and teeth and organs and kilsls us and our babies.

Shill on if you must

[Cleobulus]

22. And heavy metals from coal smoke accumulate in our bodies as well...

but that's the coal industry there. Why pick on one and not pick on the other?

[Liberation Angel]

23. Because man made radiation from nuke plants mutates babies in utero and kills them

either before or after birth.

I oppose both nukes and coal.

We are in a state of emergency and relying on either is stupid, shortsighted, dangerous and just makes the corporate fascists richer and more powerful and more deadly.

But mutating our children's genes FOREVER spoiling our gene pools and mutating our dna is the WORST.

It damages humanity FOREVER.

and it stays deadly for hundreds of thousands of years.

www.radiation.org

www.nirs.org

These sites have the data on what radiation does to us from nuclear power plant emissions and effluents into our air and water

[Cleobulus]

26. First off, coal also can spew out radioactive byproducts, and birth defects...

are the most common symptom of heavy metal(mercury) poisoning. So again, why pick on one and not the other?

[JoeyT]

10. At least this time I didn't have to read the study.

I offer a study which industry shills and promoters will claim is flawed and biased but which I submit is unbiased and based on solid scientific data.

translates roughly into: What I'm linking to is utter nonsense, but I'm going to preemptively claim anyone that disagrees with it is being paid to lie about it because I can't defend my position and neither can the people that created the study. Peer reviewed journals are for sissies.

10. The committee concludes that the present cancer epidemic is a consequence of exposures to global atmospheric weapons fallout in the period 1959-63 and that more recent releases of radioisotopes to the environment from the operation of the nuclear fuel cycle will result in significant increases in cancer and other types of ill health.

I thought it was supposed to be from HFCS and genetically modified crops? Or microwaves, cellphones, plastics, Big Pharma, or whatever else we're supposed to be terrified enough of that we don't demand real evidence of the harm. I wish people would make up their minds.

[Liberation Angel]

13. Radiation exposure synergistically ADDS harm to toxic chemicals, plastic, pesticides etc.

My point is that cancer causing radiation exposure from the nuclear industries makes our environment much more harmful and the lives of our children (and us) that much more vulnerable and endangered.

Synergy makes it all worse as the internal radiation damages our immune systems and breaks down and mutates the cells in our organs and body making us all more prone to illness and death.

Especially children and babies in utero.

But what's wrong with THAT????

[Liberation Angel]

12. Funny +8 recs but my poll on new nukes shows DU majority supports nukes

just sayin'

How's about some no nuke love on my poll in GD?

[Sugarcoated]

17. This is okay with people these days

It never used to be.

[Sugarcoated]

18. Kick for info that needs to be seen

[Pavulon]

19. You know MIT has a paper on this, not pimped by hacks. you cant even post one name

from tmi. not a single body. eventually a ban would work for people who continue to post hack sources. see bullshit is countered by truth.

http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

[Cleobulus]

21. Do you have any idea what pollutants in coal smoke do to the human body?

Not just heavy metals but even some radioactive contaminants are present in that. I wonder how many people die a year from that? Anyone have a study?

[Sugarcoated]

25. Both are bad

Let's start putting our money into alternatives that don't kill us and the environment.

[Cleobulus]

27. There are no alternatives to replace coal, except for nuclear...

not at this time, anyways.

[spoony]

24. Okay, I'll tell Obama not to do any more atmospheric nuclear weapons testing

I didn't know he was pushing for that, but hell he's been doing some weird shit.