Feel free to change the title page as you see fit. This has no “copywrite” – the info should get OUT! Attribution at some point is nice…
It is really weird – but we cannot prove what starts a particular cancer – but it is possible to show in experiments that a single hit of a radioactive particle on a single cell can start a cancer… so yes, the more radiation that is around, the higher the chances – but there is nothing that says there HAS to be a lot of radiation for a cancer to start…
ALARA stands for “AS LOW AS REASONABLY ACHIEVABLE” – and applies to radiation doses to workers and the public from commercial nuclear industrial activities. Some sites are better at applying this concept than others!
Radiation has no smell, no taste, no sound, and is not visible to the eyes… one has to use a detector of some kind – and those measurements are limited in their precision and apply only to the area measured. Radioactivity in food and water are very difficult to detect unless highly concentrated.
THIS series of SIX slides is a schematic of the release from the Chernobyl nuclear power station, April 26 1986 – May 6 (11 days) 1986.After people “get” what they are looking at you can run the next slides relatively FAST like an animation.I like to do it FORWARDS and then BACKWARDS (like KiloWatt Ours – where the mountains get put back together) and then forward again… The release of radioactivity from Chernobyl (one reactor) exceeded all the nuclear weapons tests combined.
THIS Is the result of the plume and the wind in the immediate area of the reactor – marked with a STAR in Ukraine – almost on the border with Belarus. This area has the most concentrated radioactive contamination of land and water – some of it is permanently CLOSED to human habitation – probably more should be. HOWEVER only 1/3 of the total radioactive particles fell here.
And this shows all of Europe. Two Thirds of the radioactivity from Chernobyl was deposited outside the immediate area. Parts of Scotland (more than 1200 miles away from the reactor) were so highly radioactive that lamb / sheep’s wool, meat and milk could not be used.
On the left axis a age 0 – meaning birth, or before – GIRLS have twice the risk level as boys.
Inside this book are page after page of tables, reporting relative risk of cancer from various angles and studies. One of these compares men to women over all types of cancers and ages and in those numbers is the finding that women get cancer 50% more than men and also die of it 50% more than men when the level of radiation is the same. That means in a large group of people exposed to radiation, 2 men get sick and die while at the same level 3 women will get sick and die. The BEIR VII report does not discuss this difference between the genders in the text of the report. This finding is significant, and should be the basis for better protection for women – and men – but it also warrants more research. BEIR VII looks primarily at the data from the survivors of the two atomic bomb attacks (the USA dropped these instantly deadly bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945). The cities were vaporized, but amazingly, some people who were there survived…The study tracking their lives and deaths began 5 years later. Because of the gap, it is obvious that the group that survived to be studied were hardy, and likely, to some degree more resistant to radiation’s devastating effects to the immune system and other impacts besides cancer.
Women and children are not protected because the same dose of radiation produces more harm, illness and death when compared to adult males at the same level. The finding that male infants suffer less harm than female infants suggest that the difference is in some mechanism in the induction of cancer pictured here. Other health impacts include infertility, miscarriage, spontaneous abortion, reduced immune function, and auto-immune syndromes.
ONE WEEK after the Fukushima nuclear disaster began.
Atomic Radiation Is More Harmful To Women and Children_Mary Olson_NIRS
Atomic Radiation is MoreHarmful to Women and Children Mary Olson Nuclear Information & Resource Service www.nirs.org
No Safe Dose of Radiation• All it takes is a single living cell and a single emission from a radioactive nucleus to start a fatal cancer• Does cancer result from every dose?No, but death is possible from a dose so small it is not measurable – or other impacts such as loss of an embryo
No Safe Dose is not a folk song• EPA Standards explicitly state “there is no safe dose”• US Nuclear Regulatory Commission – Chapter 10 of the US Code of Regulations, part 20 and an additional regulation called ALARA reflect this• National Academy of Sciences Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR I – VII) affirm “No Safe Dose”• ! And data from human populations supports
Nuclear Energy is thought of as “CLEAN”Only because DIRTY radiation is INVISIBLE
Nuclear Factories have Routine Releases of RadioactivityPeople can get sick from these BUTOn a BAD DAY the whole world can get contaminated with radioactive fall-out
APRIL 26 1986 – CHERNOBYL EXPLODES and FIRE STARTSNote Spain on lower left, Scandinavia center top, “Black Tornadois the PLUME of HIGHLY RADIOACTIVE FUEL PARTICLES
40% of Europe contaminated above 4,000 Bq / meter2
Radiation impacts our cellsIonizing radiation part of the electromagnetic spectrumCharged and energized subatomicwaves (X-rays, Gamma) andparticles (beta, alpha, neutron)Can damage living cells and tissues
At very high doses, radation damage can be seen Radiation burn from accident or malfunction
At Lower doses it takes a microscope but we can see Radiation Induced Chromosomal Aberrations Common from high-end of “low-dose” spectrum
US and international radiation standards assume that the individualgetting the “dose” is an adult male. Turns out they are the mostresistant part of the lifecycle to radiation. Women and children arenot protected to the same level by these standards.
Life-cycle “dose – response” curve to ionizing radiation
PROTECT FIRST, STUDY SECOND – WE DON’T YET KNOW WHYGIRLS AND WOMEN ARE MORE VULNERABLE TO RADIATION –BUT WE KNOW ENOUGH NOW TO DEMAND BETTER PROTECTION
Eating, drinking, breathing in radioactivity is very different thangetting an X-ray. All the radioactivity results in radiation exposure –and continues until it (hopefully) leaves the body.
Visible damage to lung tissue from Plutonium On alpha emitting particle will result in an extremely low dose to body - - but VERY HIGH dose to tissue
National Academy of Science:Biological Effects of Ionizing RadiationBEIR VII Phase 2
Regulation of Ionizing RadiationUS Nuclear Regulatory Com. EPA -- Superfund• 3.5 fatal cancers in every • 1 cancer in a million 1000 (men) exposed • 1 cancer in 100,000• = 1 death in every 286 men • 1 cancer in 10,000• JAPAN –• 2000 millirem/ year goal for school children – from time in school only• 2 rems = 1 in 4 children getting cancer
We can be pro-nuclear: the best nuclear reactor is a nice safe93 million miles away – requires no cooling water, wastedisposal or special security. THE SUN!