[ RadSafe ] RadSafe Digest, Vol 614, Issue 1

Fri Apr 29 12:13:09 CDT 2011

For those who may be interested,  I presented a briefing on Japan Nuclear Fears to the Secretariat staff of the Health Physics Society and my briefing materials are available, including a book chapter on the Psychology of Radiation Safety at http://radiationcounseling.org/docs/JapanNuclearFears.pdf

Any comments are welcomed.

Ray Johnson, MS, SE, PE, FHPS, CHP.
Director, Radiation Safety Counseling Institute
16440 Emory Lane
Rockville, MD 20853

ray at radiationcounseling.org
301-370-8573

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of radsafe-request at health.phys.iit.edu
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 12:40 PM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: RadSafe Digest, Vol 614, Issue 1

Send RadSafe mailing list submissions to
        radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://health.phys.iit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        radsafe-request at health.phys.iit.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
        radsafe-owner at health.phys.iit.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of RadSafe digest..."

Important!

To keep threads/discussions more easily readable PLEASE observe the following guideline when replying to a message or digest:

1. When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of radsafe digest ..."
2. Do NOT include the entire digest in your reply. Include ONLY the germane sentences to which you're responding.

Thanks!_______________________________________________

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Psychic effects of radiohysteria? (Franz      Schoenhofer)
      (Stabin, Michael)
   2. Re: Arnie Gundersen - Another One Who Interviews on       Russia
      Today and Floods the Net (Franz Sch?nhofer)
   3. Re: Psychocological effects of radiohysteria (Dan W McCarn)
   4. Re: NCR nonsense (Sandgren, Peter)
   5. Re: NCR nonsense (Conklin, Al  (DOH))
   6. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Franz Sch?nhofer)
   7. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Franz Sch?nhofer)
   8. Re: Arnie Gundersen - Another One Who Interviews on
      RussiaToday and Floods the Net (Franz Sch?nhofer)
   9. Re: NCR nonsense (Franz Sch?nhofer)
  10. Is there a way to quantify the effect of the fear and stress
      caused by the fear mongering (Clayton J Bradt)
  11. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Richard Gallego)
  12. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Richard Gallego)
  13. Re: Is there a way to quantify the effect of the fear     and
      stress caused by the fear mongering (Franz Sch?nhofer)
  14. Re: Is there a way to quantify the effect of the fear     and
      stress caused by the fear mongering (Doug Aitken)
  15. Forwarded to the list (Jeff Terry)
  16. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Steven Dapra)
  17. Question regarding explosion characterization. (Robert Bradley)
  18. Re: Arnie Gundersen - Another One Who Interviews on Russia
      Today and Floods the Net (Steven Dapra)
  19. Arnie Gundersen in the popular press (thread re-named)
      (Steven Dapra)
  20. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Richard Gallego)
  21. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Richard Gallego)
  22. Court Hears Arguments on Los Alamos Plutonium Lab (Maury Siskel)
  23. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Steven Dapra)
  24. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Bill Prestwich)
  25. Usa of CT Scans in the Disaster in Alabama (Dan W McCarn)
  26. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Richard Gallego)
  27. Re: Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl (Richard Gallego)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 12:21:49 -0500
From: "Stabin, Michael" <michael.g.stabin at Vanderbilt.Edu>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychic effects of radiohysteria? (Franz
        Schoenhofer)
To: "radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu" <radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID:
        <AE2199B600823B4A9CC19B6E88BE050213405A23B2 at its-hcwnem04.ds.Vanderbilt.edu>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

> So my question to RADSAFE is, whether there are any investigations known about the psychological effects of the sensational exaggerations of the massmedia and the constant absurd indoctrination with fear for life and health.

Not to my knowledge, either, but this is a study that is badly needed. I have suggested at times over the years that much of the fear and hysteria promoted by some with an agenda for funding low-dose investigations or transmitted (I think more rarely than created) by the media may be responsible for real cases of harmful stress, possibly cancers (I'm not entirely joking here) and other maladies. Someone should fund this. I often complain to my friends about weekly that a new study has appeared that proved something so completely obvious and stupid that it was a crime for it to receive funding while other worthy research is refused for funding. An example (true) - they showed people pictures of other people and fed them drinks over time, and voila, after a few drinks people found the people in the photos more attractive. Anyone who has visited a tavern is familiar with this phenomenon (nicknamed the 'Coyote Ugly' effect). A recent one found that men watching newscasts with att
 ractive female hosts picked up somewhat fewer details about the news presented than those who watched the same newscast with an unattractive female or a male host. No! Really? Even if this were not ridiculously obvious, it still does not warrant funding, what is the value of this information? The idea that Franz suggests needs to be funded. If anyone finds a study, I would be very keen to see it. If anyone thinks it could be funded I would be thrilled to see a joint US-European effort to obtain the data! If we could prove that mass media false hysteria causes cancer, there would be a class action suit that about 4 billion people could join.

Mike

Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP
Associate Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Vanderbilt University
1161 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37232-2675
Phone (615) 343-4628
Fax?? (615) 322-3764
e-mail???? michael.g.stabin at vanderbilt.edu
internet?? www.doseinfo-radar.com

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:33:38 +0200
From: Franz Sch?nhofer <franz.schoenhofer at chello.at>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Arnie Gundersen - Another One Who Interviews
        on      Russia Today and Floods the Net
To: "'The International Radiation Protection \(Health Physics\)
        MailingList'"   <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID: <DCF2204466B44A529DFC2F76FAB18DEF at pc1>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Tom,

This are just other claims by completely laypeople, neglecting the most
basic principles of nuclear reactions, but gaining attention by the mass
media,  because they satisfy the need of readers and spectators for some
adrenaline.

I suppose that with the term "fuel storage" the usual storage pond for used
fuel rods is addressed. I have seen several such in many parts of the world.
There are - contrary to some mass media reports - no fresh and unused fuel
rods stored in such a pond, actually, as I remember, any contact with steam
or water is strictly prohibited for unused fuel rods. The fuel rods cooled
in the storage ponds are used ones, which means that their content of U-235
is heavily depleted. The original unused fuel rods with slightly enriched
uranium cannot trigger a nuclear reaction or explosion. Sophisticated
techniques are necessary to start a chain reaction. Even more this is true
for used fuel rods with considerably lower U-235 concentration - otherwise
they would be still used and their potential would not be disregarded!
People who think of a nuclear reaction from used fuel have obviously read to
much about criticallity accidents with highly enriched or bomb-grade fuel!!!

Therefore I believe that these news are the same bogus as 90% of the
distributed news about the Fukushima accident. It is in the interest of mass
media, "environmentalist" groups and especially groups who employ the horror
stories commercially (Greenpeace).

I suppose that there are much more competent persons on RADSAFE on that
topic - I am not a mathematician, not a biologist, not a psychologist, but a
very simple chemist, who has worked for more than 30 years with
radiochemistry and radioactivity. I therefore ask you humbly to excuse my
lack of knowledge.........

Best wishes!

Franz

Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
MinRat i.R.
Habicherg. 31/7
A-1160 Wien/Vienna
AUSTRIA

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] Im Auftrag von Tom Simpson
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. April 2011 14:43
An: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Betreff: Re: [ RadSafe ] Arnie Gundersen - Another One Who Interviews on
Russia Today and Floods the Net

Arnie Gundersen has been all over the web and the news sharing his
opinions on just what is going on.

I am not a nuclear engineer, but most of what he says seems plausible
enough to me.  The actual claim was that a hydrogen gas explosion in
Unit 3's fuel storage pond banged enough fuel rods into each other to
initiate a prompt criticality, which resulted in another
near-simultaneous blast, which made for a much larger event than it
otherwise would have been.

The question I have of Mr. Gundersens and his assertion is, assuming we
did have a prompt criticality in part of the fuel stored there, how does
that result in such a violent explosion? That would get us a lot of heat
and radiation, for sure, but how does that translate into an explosion
unless there is some other vector present like water to flash into steam
(and it does not look much like a steam explosion to me)?

-Tom

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:51:07 -0600
From: Dan W McCarn <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychocological effects of radiohysteria
To: "'The International Radiation Protection \(Health Physics\)
        MailingList'"   <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID: <C4CE0074B7F540AA835BA833255F0633 at DocHolidayII>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Mike:

Several years ago I wrote in RadSafe about a Russian study that my old IAEA
Russian boss, Alexander Nechaev (St. Petersburg) referred to on the
psychological effects of the Chernobyl accident.  The study compared all
medical issues of relocated residents from within the 30 km exclusion zone
to residents remaining along the boundaries of the zone.  The results
demonstrated that the relocated individuals suffered from several diseases
at a significantly higher rate than the people who remained in the area.
These include in order of importance 1) Suicide; 2) Drug / Alcohol abuse; 3)
Diabetes; 4) Heart Disease and 5) Stroke. Note that cancer is not in this
list!

I will try to get / find the paper (in Russian).

Dan ii

--
Dan W McCarn, Geologist
108 Sherwood Blvd
Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
+1-505-672-2014 (Home ? New Mexico)
+1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Stabin, Michael
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:22
To: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychic effects of radiohysteria?
(FranzSchoenhofer)

> So my question to RADSAFE is, whether there are any investigations known
about the psychological effects of the sensational exaggerations of the
massmedia and the constant absurd indoctrination with fear for life and
health.

Not to my knowledge, either, but this is a study that is badly needed. I
have suggested at times over the years that much of the fear and hysteria
promoted by some with an agenda for funding low-dose investigations or
transmitted (I think more rarely than created) by the media may be
responsible for real cases of harmful stress, possibly cancers (I'm not
entirely joking here) and other maladies. Someone should fund this. I often
complain to my friends about weekly that a new study has appeared that
proved something so completely obvious and stupid that it was a crime for it
to receive funding while other worthy research is refused for funding. An
example (true) - they showed people pictures of other people and fed them
drinks over time, and voila, after a few drinks people found the people in
the photos more attractive. Anyone who has visited a tavern is familiar with
this phenomenon (nicknamed the 'Coyote Ugly' effect). A recent one found
that men watching newscasts with attractive female hosts picked up somewhat
fewer details about the news presented than those who watched the same
newscast with an unattractive female or a male host. No! Really? Even if
this were not ridiculously obvious, it still does not warrant funding, what
is the value of this information? The idea that Franz suggests needs to be
funded. If anyone finds a study, I would be very keen to see it. If anyone
thinks it could be funded I would be thrilled to see a joint US-European
effort to obtain the data! If we could prove that mass media false hysteria
causes cancer, there would be a class action suit that about 4 billion
people could join.

Mike

Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP
Associate Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Vanderbilt University
1161 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37232-2675
Phone (615) 343-4628
Fax?? (615) 322-3764
e-mail???? michael.g.stabin at vanderbilt.edu
internet?? www.doseinfo-radar.com

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 12:18:54 -0400
From: "Sandgren, Peter" <Peter.Sandgren at ct.gov>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] NCR nonsense
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
        List"   <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID:
        <CDBC44AFEF0BD4429D22D868CF722F27D5F3580F13 at DOIT-EX702.exec.ds.state.ct.us>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Is NCR a religious site?  Our state filtering system blocks me from viewing this (which may be for the best) with the reason "religion."

Peter N. Sandgren
Connecticut Emergency Mgmt. Homeland Security
Radiological Planning (REP)
GIS Coordinator
25 Sigourney St., Hartford, CT 06106
phone 860-256-0875; fax 860-256-0819
peter.sandgren at ct.gov

Lorem ipsum

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Miller
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:22 PM
To: RADSAFE
Subject: [ RadSafe ] NCR nonsense

The article is B.S., but the blog entries are good.

 <http://ncronline.org/news/global/nuclear-power-warnings-are-clear>
http://ncronline.org/news/global/nuclear-power-warnings-are-clear

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:17:07 -0700
From: "Conklin, Al  (DOH)" <Al.Conklin at DOH.WA.GOV>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] NCR nonsense
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
        MailingList"    <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID:
        <4BB6F4B160DF2B48B7B811DE62D3B74503EB49F1 at dohmxtum31.doh.wa.lcl>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"

NCR = National Catholic Reporter.

Al Conklin
Lead Trainer and Health Physicist
Radiological Emergency Preparedness Section
Office of Radiation Protection
Department of Health
office: 360-236-3261
cell: 360-239-1237
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Sandgren,
Peter
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 9:19 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] NCR nonsense

Is NCR a religious site?  Our state filtering system blocks me from
viewing this (which may be for the best) with the reason "religion."

Peter N. Sandgren
Connecticut Emergency Mgmt. Homeland Security
Radiological Planning (REP)
GIS Coordinator
25 Sigourney St., Hartford, CT 06106
phone 860-256-0875; fax 860-256-0819
peter.sandgren at ct.gov

Lorem ipsum

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Miller
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 9:22 PM
To: RADSAFE
Subject: [ RadSafe ] NCR nonsense

The article is B.S., but the blog entries are good.

 <http://ncronline.org/news/global/nuclear-power-warnings-are-clear>
http://ncronline.org/news/global/nuclear-power-warnings-are-clear

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:39:05 +0200
From: Franz Sch?nhofer <franz.schoenhofer at chello.at>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl
To: "'The International Radiation Protection \(Health Physics\)
        MailingList'"   <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>,
        <radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID: <A19C8B4FBCFF41089CFB7991A9CC120F at pc1>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="iso-8859-1"

Leo and RADSAFErs,

I do not have access to the literature you gave, but I heavily doubt your
statement, that "the number of excess induced abortions in Europe due to
this fear has been estimated in the tens of thousands, and even higher".

Some people, one of the most noisy is Chris Busby, have claimed very high
numbers of abortions. Recently there was one of his unbelievable claims even
on RADSAFE, where he cites "Countries having been most affected by the
Chernobyl contamination". I missed Austria among them, which was one of the
by far most affected countries, not because of direct precipitation
contamination, but because of contamination of food. Well, this is Chris
Busby at his best. Why does he still get space on RADSAFE?

In the course of my work for the official first report on the consequences
of Chernobyl on Austria I tried to find some data about abortions. I could
not get any, neither through official nor unofficial channels, simply
because there were none about additional abortions.

Since the cited papers are not available to me, I do not want to question
the data, but I clearly can state the following:

Greece was very little affected by the Chernobyl contamination, local small
enhancements of background radiation were found as everywhere in Europe, but
there was nothing of concern.

Regarding Denmark I am much more suspicious. Like other parts of Europe
(Netherlands, Hungary, and many parts of other countries) Denmark was not
the slightest bit affected by the Chernobyl accident (they might have found
some traces). Therefore the abortions were not at all justified because of
radiation fear. It might have been used to justify officially and mentally
the abortion. It might have been used as an auxilliary argument. I was
rather shortly after the accident at a conference in Lund, Sweden, which had
to be turned halfways into a "Chernobyl conference", because so many
scientists involved in this accident were present, but I could not feel any
real concern either in Danish, Swedish or any other participants.

If the data were correct, then the question is still unanswered, why women
chose abortion, though there was no reason to suspect damage to fetusses.

How easy would be this world for scientists without journalists trying to
distribute the most horrifying stories to enhance their impact factor!

Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
MinRat i.R.
Habicherg. 31/7
A-1160 Wien/Vienna
AUSTRIA

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] Im Auftrag von Leo M. Lowe
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. April 2011 20:34
An: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu
Betreff: [ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl

Hello Rich,

Relative to your question copied below, one measure of the real
impacts of the fear and stress caused by Chernobyl is the number of
induced abortions brought about by perceived potential birth
defects.  The number of excess induced abortions in Europe due to
this fear has been estimated in the tens of thousands, and even
higher.  For example, see:

1.  Trichopoulos et al "The victims of Chernobyl in Greece: induced
abortions after the accident" Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1987;295;1100.

  2. LB Knudsen "Legally-induced abortions in Denmark after
Chernobyl" - Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy (1991) 45:229-231.

These were real lives lost, just out of fear of what could happen
from "radiation".  Better information given to those exposed
post-Chernobyl about the real risks of radiation could have saved
many of these lives.

L. Lowe
____________________________________________________________________________
____
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:09:42 -0700
From: "Richard Gallego" <rich at tgainc.com>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Busby and Kaku - Two Scientific Alarmists -
To: "'The International Radiation Protection \(Health Physics\)
        MailingList'"   <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>

Is there a way to quantify the effect of the fear and stress caused by the
fear mongering of articles like these? The Los Angeles Times had an article
this past Sunday on Chernobyl and it appeared that suicide and depression
were not insignificant effects of the accident. One has to wonder what
effect these exaggerated and erroneous proclamations have on the people
living close to the damaged reactors.

Rich Gallego

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 20:39:05 +0200
From: Franz Sch?nhofer <franz.schoenhofer at chello.at>
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychological Impacts of Chernobyl
To: "'The International Radiation Protection \(Health Physics\)
        MailingList'"   <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>,
        <radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
Message-ID: <A19C8B4FBCFF41089CFB7991A9CC120F at pc1>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="iso-8859-1"