[ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
Jeff Terry
terryj at iit.edu
Wed Jun 22 18:51:36 CDT 2011
I think that close enough was postulated.
http://arsjaad.com/2011/03/25/illuminati-setup-japans-earthquake-tsunami-nuclear-reactor-disaster/#hide
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 22, 2011, at 6:33 PM, Jerry Cohen <jjc105 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> i am surprised that nobody has, as yet, suggested that the tsunami was caused by
> the nearby
> presence of nuclear reactors. I can't think of a possible mechanism for such an
> occurance, but to the true believer in the evils of nuclear power, that would
> not be important.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Perle, Sandy" <sperle at mirion.com>
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Sent: Wed, June 22, 2011 12:34:45 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>
> Chris,
>
> One must also consider the issues that he referenced since there is more than
> just the effects from the reactors. However, if one can exclude all of those
> factors, which I doubt, and there is a 30% or higher incidence based on
> historical statistics, then I would have no problem agreeing with you. The issue
> in the head is reliable data, epidemiology and a sound foundation. This is often
> not reality when looking at these cohorts. As I stated earlier, I am not simply
> going with the notion that 100% nuclear is always the right way when considering
> cause/effect, but rather evaluate the data and then make the best decision
> available. One must consider all of the facts. Let's see where the data takes
> us, as long as it takes to make sure that the data is accurate and the
> appropriate data is being used in the analysis, without playing statistical
> games.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sandy
>
> -----------------------------------
> Sander C. Perle
> President
> Mirion Technologies
> Dosimetry Services Division
> 2652 McGaw Avenue
> Irvine, CA 92614
>
> +1 (949) 296-2306 (Office)
> +1 (949) 296-1130 (Fax)
>
> Mirion Technologies: http://www.mirion.com/
> "Protecting people, property and the environment"
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Busby, Chris
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 11:19 AM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>
> Dear Sandy,
> The way this works is through epidemiology.
> So what I predict is this:
> The deaths in Fukushima say within 100km from the site will be statisticallly
> significantly higher than the deaths in Osaka. I am predicting greater than 30%.
> This means that something caused this increased mortality. The rate before the
> Fukushima releases will be roughly the same in Fukushima as in Osaka or in all
> Japan. It will be a simple matter then to associate the deaths/ cancer
> incidence/ infant mortality with the exposures. OK? If you fine they are the
> same, no difference, I will apologise for my error. If you find that what I
> predict is true, then you must do the same.
> C
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Perle, Sandy
> Sent: Wed 22/06/2011 15:41
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>
> Chris,
>
> My opinion, purely opinion, is that there are probably more deaths from various
> incidents such as Chernobyl, but percentage wise, not significant. However, when
> someone states that there have been nearly a million deaths from Chernobyl,
> anyone who can think for themselves has to ask, what credible data is there to
> justify such a claim. I don't see it and the general scientific community don't
> accept it, even those who may be considered liberal or conservative on the
> subject of dose, effect and prognosis. You quote individuals who have made
> statements in the past that are simply not credible. To quote them on future
> incidents and accept their current projections, well, not realistic. This
> reminds me of a murder trial where there is significant evidence, such as DNA,
> unquestionably reliable. Then you have the defense witness who contradicts
> everything, and the defense banks on the jury being swayed based on the
> individual's qualifications. The facts get lost. The jury can be swayed. That is
> what I see with the various groups that you reference. Their track records is
> just not that great, nor credible.
>
> You say that we have to wait for the Fukushima deaths. Well, I can assure you
> 100% there will be deaths in Fukushima, whether there was an accident or not.
> Some die from natural causes, some from genetic causes, some from lifestyle
> selections. They will all die. Did they die from Fukushima. No. Will they all be
> counted as deaths from Fukushima. Yes. Is that credible? How will you and your
> colleagues define what is Fukushima related or not. Individuals who have died in
> the last month, did they die from Fukushima? I seriously doubt that. How about
> in a month, 6 months, a year, 5 years?
>
> In the end, you'll hold your opinion and I'll hold mine. Mine is like my
> politics. I don't follow like sheep. I make my own educated decisions. In some
> cases I agree with the conservatives, some with the liberals and mostly
> moderate. I don't follow the trend, I assess each case individually. Same here.
> If there are issues in my profession, I speak out, just go back the 15 or so
> years I've been on radsafe. I call it like I see it. Am I always of the correct
> opinion? No. but I learn when facts, irrefutable facts are presented.
>
> The Chernobyl and Fukushima numbers thrown out, not a chance!
>
> Regards,
>
> Sandy
>
> -----------------------------------
> Sander C. Perle
> President
> Mirion Technologies
> Dosimetry Services Division
> 2652 McGaw Avenue
> Irvine, CA 92614
>
> +1 (949) 296-2306 (Office)
> +1 (949) 296-1130 (Fax)
>
> Mirion Technologies: http://www.mirion.com/ "Protecting people, property and the
> environment"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Busby, Chris
> Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 7:12 AM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>
>
> The easy way out is to discount any study that you dont agree with as not being
> credible.
> There really is no answer to that.
> Thats what UNSCEAR do, ignore any study that disagrees wth their position.
> But thats not science.
> And why, for example, is my meta analysis study of infant leukemias after
> Chernobyl not credible?
> I cant remember you answering that question way back when I started this
> discourse?
> And Tondel's study of Sweden after Chernobyl?
> Or the many studies of nuclear site child leukemias? e.g. KiKK.
> There are plenty more.
> But I think you will just have to wait now for the Fukushima deaths.
> Sincerely
> Chris
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Perle, Sandy
> Sent: Tue 21/06/2011 21:20
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>
> Chris,
>
> There will always be some entity that over estimates or under estimates any
> situation. I don't recall any credible study that concludes there have been any
> significant deaths documented in the numbers you state below. Now if someone
> wants to include any death that occurs in a geographical area as a result of
> Chernobyl, they can make whatever conclusion that they want to. However, there
> is absolutely no credible evidence to support this contention, even remotely.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sandy
>
> -----------------------------------
> Sander C. Perle
> President
> Mirion Technologies
> Dosimetry Services Division
> 2652 McGaw Avenue
> Irvine, CA 92614
>
> +1 (949) 296-2306 (Office)
> +1 (949) 296-1130 (Fax)
>
> Mirion Technologies: http://www.mirion.com/ "Protecting people, property and the
> environment"
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Busby, Chris
> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 9:45 PM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List; The
> International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>
>
> Well, so far on the basis of death toll, you will excuse me if I say Chernobyl
> outweighs all of these by orders of magnitude. I know you guys think only a few
> firemen died, but this isnt so.. Alexey Yablokov is right. Gogman calculated
> 980,000 in 1990. All the studies have been done. Here is my paper on the issue.
> Cheers
> Chris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Jeff Terry
> Sent: Mon 20/06/2011 23:24
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>
> Well, if we are using radiation related fatalities to date as the metric in
> Fukushima, we cannot leave out:
>
> "Jackass" co-star dies in car crash in Pennsylvania as its one fatality exceeds
> the radiation tally in Fukushima.
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/sns-rt-us-jackass-dunntre75j4u2-20110620,0,5962651.story
>
>
> Jeff
>
> On Jun 20, 2011, at 4:01 PM, Brennan, Mike (DOH) wrote:
>
>> Here are some from Wikipedia. I am not saying these are the biggest,
>> as they only cover a brief slice of time, are mostly Northern
>> Hemisphere, and are mostly catastrophic events, as opposed to long
>> term health crushers like Black Lung Disease (so if you are going to
>> say, "but Fukushima potentially will have long term effects," I
>> suspect I could come up with 10 of those without much problem, too.)
>>
>> December 3, 1984: The Bhopal disaster. Estimates of its death toll range from
>> 4,000 to 20,000. The disaster caused the region's human and animal populations
>> severe health problems to the present.
>>
>> April 16, 1947: Texas City Disaster, Texas. A minimum of 578 people lost their
>> lives and another 3,500 were injured as the blast shattered windows from as far
>> away as 25 mi (40 km). Large steel pieces were thrown more than a mile from the
>> dock. The origin of the explosion was fire in the cargo on board the ship.
>> Detonation of 3,200 tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer aboard the Grandcamp led
>> to further explosions and fires.
>>
>> 1932-1968: The Minamata disaster was caused by the dumping of mercury compounds
>> in Minamata Bay, Japan. The Chisso Corporation, a fertilizer and later
>> petrochemical company, was found responsible for polluting the bay for 37 years.
>> It is estimated that over 3,000 people suffered various deformities, severe
>> mercury poisoning symptoms or death from what became known as Minamata disease.
>>
>> August, 1975 The Banqiao Dam flooded in the Henan Province of China
>> due to extraordinarily heavy rains, killing over 26,000
>>
>> April 26, 1986: Chernobyl disaster. At the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in
>> Prypiat, Ukraine a test on reactor number four goes out of control, resulting in
>> a nuclear meltdown. The ensuing steam explosion and fire killed up to 50 people
>> with estimates that there may be between 4,000 and several hundred thousand
>> additional cancer deaths over time. Fallout could be detected as far away as
>> Canada. The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, covering portions of Belarus and Ukraine
>> surrounding Prypiat, remains poisoned and mostly uninhabited. Prypiat itself was
>> totally evacuated and remains as a ghost town.
>>
>> January 15, 1919: The Boston Molasses Disaster. A large molasses tank burst and
>> a wave of molasses rushed through the streets at an estimated 35 mph (56 km/h),
>> killing 21 and injuring 150. The event has entered local folklore, and residents
>> claim that on hot summer days the area still smells of molasses.
>>
>> March 25, 1911: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in New York City. This was a
>> major industrial disaster in the U.S., causing the death of more than one
>> hundred garment workers who either died in the fire or jumped to their deaths.
>>
>> March 10, 1906: Courrières mine disaster in Courrières, France. 1,099 workers
>> died, including children, in the worst mine accident ever in Europe.
>>
>> October 21, 1966: Aberfan disaster was a catastrophic collapse of a colliery
>> spoil-tip that occurred in the Welsh village of Aberfan, killing 116 children
>> and 28 adults.
>>
>> September 21, 2001: Toulouse, France. An explosion at the AZF fertilizer
>> factory killed 29 and injured 2,500. Extensive structural damage to nearby
>> neighbourhoods.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Busby, Chris
>> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 1:39 PM
>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
>> List
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>>
>>
>> What industrial catastrophes are bigger than Fukushima?
>> I cant think of one. But maybe there is one. Certainly not 9.
>> I mean Industrial right. Not earthquakes and stuff like that.
>> If we call the atmospheric tests an industrial catastrophe then that one
>> certainly.
>> Also the use of uranium weapons in GW2.
>> But thats probably not as bad in terms of health effects as Fukushima will be.
>> You wait.
>> Chris Busby
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Brennan, Mike
>> (DOH)
>> Sent: Mon 20/06/2011 21:35
>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
>> MailingList
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>>
>> While I don't choose to guess at the amount of activity released at either
>> Chernobyl or Fukushima beyond "a whole hell of a lot", I don't think I agree
>> that Fukushima has or will result in "higher collective exposure". Firstly,
>> there was some hours between the end of criticality and the beginning of release
>> at Fukushima. This means that many of the isotopes with the shortest half-lives
>> had enough time to decay away before release began, unlike Chernobyl. Second,
>> at Fukushima the first portion of the release, which is potentially the hottest,
>> was blown out to sea, as opposed to at Chernobyl, where there was inhabited land
>> in every direction (some, obviously, more densely inhabited than others).
>> Third, a significant portion of the released activity is in water, going to the
>> ocean, where the impact on human health will be limited.
>>
>> I am not for a moment saying that Fukushima isn't a disaster. I am not even
>> saying that it is unreasonable to compare it to Chernobyl. Heck, I am not even
>> saying that something can't happen and make Fukushima worse than it is.
>> However, I don't believe that it is useful to engage in hyperbole.
>>
>> This morning a concerned citizen sent me an article from Al Jezeera in which an
>> activist claimed, "Fukushima is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the
>> history of mankind". It certainly is not, and probably isn't in the top ten.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Busby, Chris
>> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 11:15 AM
>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
>> List; The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
>> MailingList
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
>>
>>
>> My estimate is
>> Chernobyl
>> about 10^19 Bq
>> Fukushima about 10^19Bq but more local so density greater and higher
>> collective exposure due to Tokyo Hiroshima more difficult, maybe 10^14
>> including the Uranium But I agree, not eas
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list