"Fallout"

["Weiner, Ruth" <rfweine@sandia.gov>]

I did watch part of "Fallout" last night; my husband watched it all, as he
has a greater tolerance for TV.  At best, I can say it wasn't entirely
unbalanced; e.g., they did have a WWII veteran who said he was glad he
didn't have to be in the invasion of Japan, and his life was probably saved.
They did spend a lot of time on Operation Smokey (as I think it's called),
which was egregious and the army's preparation of the troops was pretty
sickening.  However, the Operation Smokey veteran interviewed seems to have
survived to a ripe old age.They did show the first Atoms for Peace
conference, but no uses of atoms for peace. There was a bit about St.
George, Utah, and someone there who was exposed who then had a Down's
Syndrome baby, with a pretty clear cause and effect implication.

I would say that the sins were largely sins of omission.  Was the army
deliberately trying to fool the soldiers by saying that dusting them off
after Operation Smokey would get rid of radioactive material, or did they
really think that was good enough, or was it an economic exigency?  How much
was known at the time about long-term carcinogenic effects, given that BEIR
III was published about 20-25 years later?  After all, we did stop
atmospheric testing, at least partly because of experiences like a shifting
wind blowing a radioactive cloud over St. George (of which much was made),
but that was mentioned indirectly only in passing.  

I really bridle at the considerable footage of Japanese bomb survivors.
Yes, war is hell.  Yes the Japanese civilians suffered.  But we have not had
a nuclear war since, and the non-proliferation effort is led, I believe, by
the U. S.  If the Japanese had had an atom bomb, would they have hesitated
to use it?

I hope this letter is not off-topic.  I believe the focus of "Fallout" was
skewed, and gives an unbalanced impression to those who have absolutely no
memory of WWII or of atmospheric testing.  Although we should not hide the
mistakes and excesses of those early days, they should be presented in as
complete a context as possible.  I would urge RADSAFERs to write their
opinions to PBS.

Clearly only my own opinion.

Ruth F. Weiner, Ph. D.
Sandia National Laboratories 
MS 0718, POB 5800
Albuquerque, NM 87185-0718
505-844-4791; fax 505-844-0244
rfweine@sandia.gov


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html