[ RadSafe ] Mangano - Disease and death toll from Fukushima radiation needs careful, patient, tracking

Wed Sep 5 14:01:45 CDT 2012

The problem seems to be that Public Health agencies [with some supposed 
level of credibility ] in the US are unwilling to state or summarize  info 
to the general public via some media outreach program in a creative way, 
about the lack of harm from some trivial source of radiation exposure. 
Actions like this by regulators would be criticized as advocacy, despite 
there being clear evidence of the negative effects of fear prompted by false 
information.  Corporations don't like to get involved in a fight like this, 
preferring to keep their heads down while maintaining that someone else 
should "fight the fight".

Some years ago while actively working in the nuclear power field, I had 
presented a paper about this syndrome,  titled: "Nuclear Power and Public 
Information -- Suicide on the Installment Plan".  However, I was able to get 
involved in efforts like this, only because I was  not on staff at some 
nuclear utility at the time and I was acting as a private citizen. The 
preceding talk was delivered by  invitation to speak before the New England 
Chapter of the ANS following a cutting satire I had written about the health 
hazards of "strepdukakis anti-nucleosis"   which was published widely in New 
England based newspapers, and national publications like the HPS Newsletter 
and the ANS "Backscatter" humor column.  This satire obviously goes back a 
few years to when MA Govenor Dukakis was running for President in 1988. This 
satire got under the skin of key national energy advisors to Dukakis, but 
that is another story. It was a lot of fun. While humorously stated, the 
comments made were cutting and impactful.

The CDC's National Center for Environmental Health will generally evaluate 
some potential rad risk when they get sufficient funding and pressure. 
However, this action to evaluate a rad risk is often based on what I see as 
situational ethics. And once a determination is made that there is no 
indication of harm [but of course they would highlight that there are 
uncertainties which might not exclude some small level of harm] a larger 
study would be necessary.

There is also an obvious symbiotic relationship between many radiation 
regulatory agencies and scaremongers,  since when distorted and obviously 
false claims are made [vs.  the huge body of knowledge about radiation 
biofects based on more than a $billion of research on environmental and 
health effects]   sometimes funds are authorized by legislators to carry out 
some study which increases budgets and staff for the Agencies involved. 
What is the incentive for regulatory groups to actively try and put out 
accurate information on the absence of harm?

No Public Health agency seems willing to clearly state the absence of risk 
in claims about radiation risk, and if  they have such data  they are 
totally unwilling or inept in communicating this information to this effect 
to the public in any impactful manner.

Stewart Farber, MSPH
SAFarber at optonline.net

============================

-----Original Message----- 
From: Dixon, John E. (CDC/ONDIEH/NCEH)
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 12:54 PM
To: Mattias.Lantz at physics.uu.se ; The International Radiation Protection 
(Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Mangano - Disease and death toll from Fukushima 
radiation needs careful, patient, tracking

All,
I am concerned about this RADSAFE thread.

At the present time, there have been NO deaths (and diseases) directly 
attributable to the radiation and radioactive contamination released from 
(and present at) the damaged Fukushima reactor plants. The Japanese people 
have more serious matters with which to contend (e. g. 20,000 + deaths from 
the tsunami). Physiological effects can also result from the very real 
physical threats present, as well as from psychological stress (more from 
these stressors than from the low levels of radiation/radioactivity which 
are still present in the area).

Since all probabilistic deleterious effects from low dose/dose rate 
radiation take TIME to manifest in humans AND it has been about 18 months 
since the releases occurred, I would expect that no relevant scientific 
significant "study" (especially the DATA) yet exists. At present, most of 
the work done on this topic is, at best, speculation.

John E. Dixon, CHP

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu 
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Lantzelot
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:11 PM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Mangano - Disease and death toll from Fukushima 
radiation needs careful, patient, tracking

If anybody is interested I have put up a scrutiny of Mangano's latest joke 
on the NPYP web site:
Blog post with general comments:
http://nuclearpoweryesplease.org/blog/2012/08/29/joseph-mangano-never-stops-and-he-never-gets-it-right/
More detailed look into the numbers:
http://nuclearpoweryesplease.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=757

/Mattias Lantz

--
Mattias Lantz - Researcher
??? ?????
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Division of Applied Nuclear Physics
Uppsala University, Box 516
SE - 751 20, Uppsala, Sweden

On 08/19/2012 05:25 AM, Roger Helbig wrote:
> Suggest that professionals make news media aware of all the
> shortcomings of Mangano's past research and claims - he has
> established himself with the help of Janette Sherman as an expert on
> Chernobyl just like Busby has -
>
> Roger Helbig
>
> Christina MacPherson posted: "[in the 12 months after Fukushima]  an
> excess of 38,700 Japanese deaths, with no obvious cause. Nobody should
> yet race to conclusions that 38,700 Japanese died from Fukushima
> exposure in the first year after the disaster.   The final element
> nee"
>
> Disease and death toll from Fukushima radiation needs careful, patient, 
> tracking
>
> by Christina MacPherson
>
> [in the 12 months after Fukushima]  an excess of 38,700 Japanese
> deaths, with no obvious cause.
>
> Nobody should yet race to conclusions that 38,700 Japanese died from
> Fukushima exposure in the first year after the disaster.
>
> The final element needed before conclusions are made is patience;
> vital statistics must continue to be tracked, and compared with
> radiation exposures to the Japanese people.
>
> [In 2009] A team of Russian researchers, led by Dr. Alexey Yablokov,
> published results of 5,000 reports and articles on Chernobyl - many in
> Russian languages never before made public. Yahlokov's team concluded
> that near Chernobyl, increases in disease sand deaths were observed
> for nearly every human organ system.
>
> Let the Counting Begin Fukushima's Nuclear Casualties
> http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/15/fukushimas-nuclear-casualties/
> by JOSEPH MANGANO, 15 Aug 12 It's been nearly 18 months since the
> disastrous nuclear meltdown at Fukushima.  There have been many
> reports on the huge amounts of radioactivity escaping into the air and
> water, unusually high levels in air, water, and soil - along with
> atypically high levels of toxic chemicals in food - that actually
> "passed" government inspection and wasn't banned like some other food.
>
> Conspicuously absent are reports on effects of radiation exposure on
> the health of the Japanese people.  Have any health officials publicly
> announced post-March 2011 numbers on fetal deaths, infant deaths,
> premature births, birth defects, cancer, or other health conditions?
> The answer so far is an emphatic "no."
>
> The prolonged silence doesn't mean data doesn't exist.  Japanese
> health officials have been busy with their usual duties of collecting
> and posting statistics on the Internet for public inspection.  It's
> just that they aren't calling the public's attention to these numbers.
> Thus, it is the public who must find the information and figure out
> what it means.  After locating web sites, translating from Japanese,
> adding data for each of 12 months, and making some calculations,
> mortality trends in Japan after Fukushima are emerging. Read more of
> this post
>
> Christina MacPherson | August 16, 2012 at 4:03 am | Categories:
> health, Japan, Reference | URL: http://wp.me/phgse-73G
>
> http://nuclear-news.net/2012/08/16/disease-and-death-toll-from-fukushima-radiation-needs-careful-patient-tracking/
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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 