[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Radiological Stress Victims
Accepted that many a-bomb survivors have a real 'post-trauma' stress. Not
accepted that this is "radiation stress" as being alluded to here is (at
least some) messages. This is real stress, that may or may not be
"post-trauma" (e.g., does this include people who put their feet in a
fluoroscope in their youth?).
At the center of general "radiation stress" condition is a fear that is
grounded only on the disinformation they are fed by those "under the color
of authority."
And you are absolutely right that if we have an major radiation incident we
will have thousands of "irrationally terrified people."
In one HP meeting several years ago, there were various comments following a
report on Tokaimura characterizing the public hysteria that would occur in
the US if (the non-exposures of) the Tokaimura accident "ever happened
here." But there were no comments on getting out a statement to explain that
there was no public dose / risk. Just as there were no objections by the HPs
about the fraudulent statements by DOE (produced by anti-nukes) that AEC/DOE
workers had died, were dying, and would be dying for decades, from their
radiation doses (among other things, like beryllium) even by the HPs on
whose watch these deadly exposures had been received. (After all, DOE had
ordered silence by the minions in the labs and affiliated institutions.
(Remember the part about "let's not shoot ourselves in the wallet? :-)
Regards, Jim
on 8/8/02 8:45 AM, Bud Yard at Bud.Yard@state.tn.us wrote:
> RADSAFERS,
>
> Please consider the context of the previous writer's comments before
> responding (especially with negative rebuttals).
>
> My reference was a web site that is a joint USA- Japan venture called the
> Radiation Effects Research Foundation.
>
> The citation I referenced is specific to persons affected by the bombs dropped
> on Japan, the reference has nothing to do with occupational exposure, cosmic
> exposures, or other normal exposures. They also have nothing to do with
> spiders, lawyers, or the great conspiracy that some people apparently feel is
> attacking the radiation industry (by the way I am a part of the radiation
> industry).
>
> Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, as referenced in my submittal, is in relation
> to these persons (again- consider the context of the reference I cited) who
> were directly affected by the two Japanese bombing incidents.
>
> In this reference and in other contexts, PTSD is not (as was written by a
> subscriber earlier) "stress induced by the fear of trauma", PTSD is stress as
> a result of trauma. "Post" means after (after trauma in this case).
> Specifically in my reference, "post" means after the trauma of being near or
> affected by a nuclear weapon blast. Stress can be both physical and mental.
> Stress in not, by definition, exclusively psychological.
>
> The original question was "what is radiation stress". On conducting a web
> search, this citation was a match and seemed appropriate to answer the
> question. You will also find that there has been a considerable amount of
> stress placed on populations that have experienced inadvertent releases of
> radiation from compromised medical sources.
>
> For those of us involved in radiological emergency management, we had better
> understand issues like "radiation stress" as part of our knowledge base, or we
> will have some serious catching up to do in the event of an attack on our
> soil. Being unprepared leads to making mistakes, the issues we discuss are
> very serious. People will count on us to mitigate radiation-related situations
> if they ever occur in our regions.
>
> This was not directed at you Barbara, your submittal was simply the last one
> in the chain so far.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charles Richard (Bud) Yard Ph.D., M.P.H.
>
>
>>>> <BLHamrick@AOL.COM> 08/07/02 08:45PM >>>
> In a message dated 08/07/2002 8:18:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> Bud.Yard@state.tn.us writes:
>
>
>> As for the spider thing, if I were exposed (locked in) to a roomful of
>> spiders without my approval and it stressed me out, I would indeed sue the
>>
>
> If I were forcibly locked in a room against my will, spiders or not, I'd be
> suing for damages from the crimes committed against me, kidnapping and
> assault and battery. If, on the other hand, I'm a hydrophobic walking down a
> suburban street and someone's sprinklers come on, and get me wet and I freak
> out, the homeowner should not be liable for my irrational fears. Their
> activity was perfectly legal, socially normal, and not, in fact, physically
> harmful, but for my irrational fear, for which I should be seeking treatment.
>
> I view the "unwilling" exposure to radioactive materials in the same way. We
> have reasonable, enforceable limits in place, and if a user of radioactive
> materials abides by those limits, and their radioactive effluents, in fact,
> cause no harm, but for one's own irrational fear, then, oh well.
>
> Barbara L. Hamrick
>
> ************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
> You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
>
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/