Fukushima and the Battle for Truth
Large sectors of the Japanese population are accumulating significant levels of 
internal contamination 
 
by  Paul  Zimmerman

Fukushima’s nuclear disaster is a nightmare. Ghostly releases of radioactivity 
haunt the Japanese countryside. Lives, once safe, are now beset by an 
ineffable scourge promising vile illness and death. 

Large 
sectors of the population are accumulating significant levels of 
internal contamination, setting the stage for a public health tragedy. 

A
 subtle increase in the number of miscarriages and fetal deaths will be 
the first manifestation that something is amiss. An elevated incidence 
of birth defects will begin in the Fall and continue into the indefinite
 future. Thyroid diseases, cardiac diseases and elevated rates of infant
 and childhood leukemia will follow. Over the next decade and beyond, 
cancer rates will soar.

Chernobyl was the harbinger of this heartbreaking scenario. It taught mankind 
the inescapable biological truths that emerge within populations internally 
contaminated by heightened levels of fission products. And yet, 
government and industry schemers attack these truths as unfounded 
scare-mongering. With cold indifference, they deny that Chernobyl was a 
mass casualty event. They turn a blind eye to a huge body of research 
and deviously proclaim that no evidence exists that more than a handful 
of people suffered harm from the Ukrainian disaster. They publish 
propaganda, draped in the guise of science, that dismisses the hazard of low 
levels of internal contamination. Believing their subterfuge to 
have been successful and intoxicated by their hubris, they are already 
positioning themselves to stage-manage the public’s perception of 
Fukushima. 

Japan’s government, its Nuclear Safety Commission, and the Tokyo Electric  
Power Company have already demonstrated that they will do everything in 
their power to keep citizens ignorant of what is taking place. The 
emerging health crisis is scheduled to be erased. Following a 
time-tested blueprint worked out by prior radiation releases around the 
world, data relevant to assessing the medical impact of the accident 
will not be gathered. Radiation doses to the population will be woefully 
underestimated. The hazards associated with low levels of internal 
contamination will be obliterated from all discussions of risk. Academic 
journals that support the nuclear agenda will be flooded with bogus 
studies demonstrating that no health detriment was suffered by the 
population. The heightened incidence of childhood leukemia will be 
attributed to some as yet unidentified virus unleashed by population 
mixing following the evacuations caused by the tsunami. (This theory is 
currently in vogue to deny that the heightened incidence of leukemia 
among children under five years of age living nearby to nuclear reactors is 
radiation induced.)  The birth defects will be summarily dismissed 
as impossible because the risk models upheld by the International 
Commission on Radiological Protection don’t predict them. The 
possibility that the models are fraudulently constructed escapes 
consideration. (See a Betrayal of Mankind by the Radiation Protection Agencies, 
available as a free download at http://www.du-deceptions.com/excerpts.html.)

How is TRUTH to gain ascendancy when blocked by this institutionalized 
matrix of deceit? What agency can possibly take the lead to accurately 
document the full scope of the disaster, identify its victims and those 
at risk, and publish trustworthy public health information? Who is going to 
take responsibility to protect the children? To wait for the 
government to come to the rescue is naive. The history of radiation 
accidents testifies that governments routinely betray their citizens in 
deference to their nuclear weapons program and the nuclear industry. No, only 
one alternative is open to the people of Japan. They must become 
proactive. They must seize the initiative and wrest control from 
government and industry of the “perception” of the catastrophe. 
 

The accident at Fukushima demands that a peoples’ campaign be initiated to 
produce an honest assessment of the current situation, catalog the 
medical consequences as they emerge, and offer accurate advice as to how 
citizens can protect themselves. Using the internet as a platform, 
scientists from all relevant disciplines must band together with 
interested laypeople with something valid to contribute to create a 
widely distributed open source research project. The evolving online 
encyclopedia will archive all pertinent data and preserve it from future 
tampering. The accident from its inception must be documented. With 
published reports frequently in conflict with one another, all available 
information, whether from government sources, citizen investigators or 
eyewitnesses, must be gathered for future evaluation. Worldwide 
meteorological data since March 11 must be assembled. All official and 
unofficial measurements of radiation in the environment, both in Japan 
and worldwide, must be collected and collated. This is essential 
information required for future epidemiological studies. Contaminated 
agricultural areas must be identified. Samples of all edible material 
for human and animal consumption must be evaluated for safety. As 
suspected radiation-induced illness begins to appear in the population, 
healthcare providers and victims must make public their experiences. 
Initially, this information will be anecdotal but nonetheless 
invaluable. It will identify emerging trends of morbidity and mortality 
and define population subgroups requiring more systematic scientific 
investigation.   Researchers working alone or in groups must seize the 
initiative to pursue study in their fields of expertise and interest. 
(One excellent suggestion by Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition 
for Nuclear Responsibility is the widespread collection of babies’ teeth to 
provide objective data on the geographic dispersion and uptake of 
strontium-90 [1].) Methodologies, data and results need be posted online as 
they become available. Free access to the whole body of work must be guaranteed 
so as to allow scrutiny by people from all over the world. Transparency must be 
paramount. An 
open dialogue will allow divergent points of view to be fairly 
represented. Disagreements over research protocols or the interpretation of 
results will point the way to new avenues of investigation where 
clarification and consensus might be achieved. Objective investigation 
via the scientific method will be the final arbitrator of truth. The 
ultimate goal of this effort will be to produce an unbiased 
determination of the public health consequences of radiation released 
into the environment, assess the accuracy of current standards of 
radiation safety and identify how improvements can be made for the 
common welfare of humanity.

It is urgent that this initiative commence immediately. Data must be 
captured while it is remains untainted. Of particular importance is the 
securing of pre-accident health statistics for the population of Japan. 
Rates for various pregnancy outcomes; the frequency of different types 
of birth defects; the incidence of thyroid diseases, heart diseases, 
cancers and so forth, all must be cataloged. There is good reason why 
this baseline data need be preserved. The history of radiation accidents is 
littered with examples of the outright falsification of data that 
has prevented an honest evaluation of the effects of low levels of 
internal contamination on human health. For instance, evidence exists 
that morbidity and mortality data published by the U.S. Government’s 
Public Health Service was altered in the wake of radiation releases from 
nuclear weapon production facilities and commercial nuclear power 
plants so as to hide cancer deaths in the population [2]. The accident 
at Three Mile Island, persistently painted by government and industry 
spokesmen as a benign event, in fact produced illness and death among 
humans and farm animals downwind [3,4]. After the accident at Chernobyl, 
hundreds of thousands of so-called “liquidators” participated in 
cleanup operations in close proximity to the destroyed reactor and also 
built a concrete sarcophagus around the reactor building to entomb the 
radiation. According to the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), in 
subsequent years this population was reported as having a lower rate of 
leukemia than the general population. Only later did it come to 
light that Soviet doctors were forbidden from recording leukemia in 
their diagnoses [5]. The Wales Cancer Registry was cited by the ECRR as 
excising cases of cancer from its database so as to prevent the 
Sellafield nuclear fuel reprocessing facility in the U.K. from being 
blamed for causing illness to the population. Also mentioned by ECRR was the 
alteration of infant mortality figures in Germany after Chernobyl 
so as to mask the impact of the accident on public health [5].

Mischief has not been confined to falsifying health records. In 1957, a fire 
broke out in the graphite reactor at Windscale, England on the site now 
occupied by the Sellafield facility. The amount of radiation released 
and the incidence of cancer induced in the population of Ireland has 
remained fiercely contentious issues. According to the ECRR, at some 
point after the fire, meteorological records were altered “with the 
apparent motive of concealing the likely location of any effects” [5]. 
Similarly, the Monju prototype fast-breeder reactor in Tsuruga, Japan 
suffered a devastating fire in 1995. Prefecture and city officials found that 
the operator had tampered with video images of the fire to hide 
the scale of the disaster [6].     

If an accurate documentation of the health consequences of Fukushima is to 
succeed, one condition is paramount: the project MUST retain its independence 
from the international agencies that currently 
dominate the discussion of radiation effects. The tacit mandate of these 
organizations is to support nuclear weapons programs and the nuclear 
industry, and they do so by publishing fraudulent scientific studies 
that downplay the hazards to health of radioactive material released 
into the environment. For example, the World Health Organization (WHO), 
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations 
Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and 
other UN organizations jointly published Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, 
Environmental and Socio-economic Impacts [7].  This study is routinely cited as 
proof that Chernobyl had little 
impact on public health. It concluded that only twenty-eight first 
responders died from acute radiation syndrome and 4,000 children 
developed thyroid cancer, fifteen of whom died by 2002. In addition, it 
estimated that an additional 4,000 fatal cancers might arise in the overall 
population. This sanitized version of the 
catastrophe was reached by the devious method of consulting only 350 
sources of information, mostly published in English, while ignoring  
30,000 publications and 170,000 sources of information available in 
languages other than English [8]. A summary of this large body of 
literature, published as Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People 
and Nature, concluded that radiation-induced casualties approached 980,000 [9].

To offer a second example, a number of prestigious institutions have 
published disinformation on the hazards to health of depleted uranium 
weapons. These include WHO, IAEA, the European Commission, the Royal 
Society in the U.K., the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
Registry in the U.S., the Rand Corporation, and the Health Physics 
Society [10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. All concluded that weaponized uranium 
creates no adverse health effects when internalized by soldiers on the 
battlefield and downwind populations. Justification for this conclusion 
came from a survey of the scientific literature regarding uranium 
contamination among workers in the uranium and nuclear industries and 
populations exposed to elevated levels of uranium in their drinking 
water. Historically, the only two types of adverse health effects 
documented among these populations is altered kidney function due to 
uranium’s chemical toxicity and cancer due to uranium’s radioactivity. 
But studies of veterans suffering from Gulf War Syndrome reveals no 
evidence of kidney disease. And according to models promulgated by the 
International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the 
radiation dose from battlefield uranium is too low to initiate cancer. 
The conclusion? Case closed! DU cannot be a factor in the severe 
suffering of veterans or the increased incidence of cancer and birth 
defects in Fallujah and other areas of Iraq. As convincing as the logic 
of these studies attempt to be, they all suffer from fatal flaws. They 
all fail to acknowledge that combustion-derived micro- and nano-sized 
particles of uranium have unique biokinetics when internalized that are 
not comparable to historical types of uranium exposure, and they quit 
cleverly fail to take into account the most up-to-date research on the 
toxicology of uranium. New research conducted since the first Gulf War 
has demonstrated that uranium is genotoxic (capable of damaging DNA), 
cytotoxic (poisonous to cells), mutagenic (capable of inducing 
mutations), teratogenic (capable of interfering with normal embryonic 
development) and neurotoxic (capable of harming nerve tissue).  This 
research has yet to dislodge the stale mantra that uranium is only 
capable of causing kidney disease and cancer. (For a thorough disclosure of the 
fraudulent science used to discount the hazards of DU and a 
summary of recent research on the toxicology of uranium, see this 
author’s “The Harlot of Babylon Unmasked: Fraudulent Science and the 
Cover-Up of the Health Effects of Depleted   Uranium”  in   A   Primer   in   
the   Art   of   Deception   available   at
http://www.du-deceptions.com/[17]. )

Mischief also infects the radiation protection community. The Radiation Effects 
Research Foundation in Hiroshima conducts ongoing medical research on 
the health of the survivors of the atomic bombings at the end of WWII. 
The Life Span Study is the single most important piece of evidence used 
by the ICRP for setting worldwide guidelines for radiation safety. That 
radiation safety for all types of exposure and all manner of 
radiation-induced illnesses relies so heavily on this research is 
incredibly disturbing because the Life Span Study is deeply and 
irreparably flawed. Initiated five years after the bombings, after tens 
of thousands of victims succumbed to unidentified levels of radiation 
exposure, results are hopelessly skewed in favor of finding radiation 
less hazardous than it in fact is.  Further, the study can provide no 
meaningful information on the birth outcomes to fetuses exposed in utero.  More 
problematic is the fact that both the study and the control groups were 
internally contaminated by the black rain that showered down upon 
the destroyed cities after the blasts. This unacknowledged contamination of the 
control group hopelessly compromises any meaningful conclusions 
of the rates of radiation-induced illnesses in the study group. The Life Span 
Study is plagued by numerous other flaws that raise serious 
questions as to why it has become the centerpiece of radiation 
standards. (For further information on this topic, consult Exhibit C in 
the aforementioned free download at 
http://www.du-deceptions.com/downloads/Betrayal_Chap6.pdf.)

The Japanese have been victimized by nuclear horror more than any other 
people on Earth. Today they are immersed in an imperceptible tragedy 
that will slowly but inevitably bring disease and heartbreak to 
millions. In response to this crime, a rare and courageous opportunity 
exists. By undertaking a national campaign to honestly document the 
disaster that is engulfing them, they can  lead all of humanity to break 
through the quagmire of deception and deceit that has allowed nuclear 
weapons and reactors to flourish. Truth finally has an opportunity to 
triumph over falsehood. In some small but significant way, this would be 
fitting repayment for the malevolence of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and 
Fukushima. 


Paul Zimmermanis the author of A Primer in the Art of Deception:  The Cult of 
Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science.  A more technical, fully 
referenced presentation of the fraudulent nature 
of current radiation standards and the coverup of the effects of 
depleted uranium weapons can be found within its pages. Excerpts, free to 
download, are available at www.du-deceptions.com.

Notes
 

[1]  Gordon Edwards. Tepco Confirms the Presence of Radioactive Plutonium and 
Strontium 
Contamination. Email newsletter from Gordon Edwards of the Canadian 
Coalition of Nuclear Responsibility (http://www.ccnr.org/). September 4, 2011. 
[2]  Jay Gould, Benjamin Goldman. Deadly Deceit: Low Level Radiation, High 
Level Cover-Up. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows; 1990.
[3] Sue Sturgis. “Fooling with Disaster? Startling Revelations About Three 
Mile Island Raise New Doubts Over Nuclear Plant Safety.” Counterpunch. April 
3-5, 2009. http://www.counterpunch.org/sturgis04032009.html
[4]  Katagiri Mitsuru, Aileen M. Smith. Three Mile Island: The People’s 
Testament. (1989), a series of interviews with approximately 250 Three Mile 
Island (TMI) area residents from 1979 to 1988. 
http://www.tmia.com/witness,  http://www.tmia.com/node/118
[5]  European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR). Recommendations of the 
European Committee on Radiation Risk: the Health Effects of 
Ionising Radiation Exposure at Low Doses for Radiation Protection 
Purposes. Regulators’ Edition.  Brussels; 2003. www.euradcom.org. 
[6]  Hiroko Tabuchi. Japan Strains to Fix a Reactor Damaged Before Quake. New 
York Times. June 17, 2011.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/world/asia/18japan.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all
[7]  The Chernobyl Forum. Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, Environmental
and Socio-economic Impacts. Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency; April, 
2006.http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Booklets/Chernobyl/chernobyl.pdf
[8]  Janette D. Sherman. Chernobyl, 25 Years Later. CounterPunch. March 4-6, 
2011. http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/03/04/chernobyl-25-years-later/
[9]  A. V. Yablokov, V. B., Nesterenko and A. V. Nesterenko. Chernobyl: 
Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and Nature.  The New York Academy of 
Science. 2009. 
http://books.google.com/books/about/Chernobyl.html?id=g34tNlYOB3AC 
[10]  World Health Organization (WHO). Depleted Uranium: Sources, Exposure and 
Health Effects. Department of Protection of the Human Environment. 
WHO/SDE/PHE/01.1. Geneva: WHO; 2001.
[11]  International Atomic Energy Agency. Features: Depleted Uranium.
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/features/du/du_qaa.shtml 
[12]  European Commission, Directorate General of Environment. Opinion of the 
Group of Experts Established According to Article 31 of the Euratom Treaty: 
Depleted Uranium. March 6, 2001.
[13]  Royal Society. Health Hazards of Depleted Uranium Munitions: Part I. 
London: Royal Society, March 2002. 
http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2001/10023.pdf
        Royal Society. Health Hazards of Depleted Uranium Munitions: Part II. 
London: Royal Society, March 2002. 
http://royalsociety.org/policy/publications/2002/health-uranium-munitions-ii/
[14]  Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Toxicological 
Profile for Uranium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 1999.
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp.asp?id=440&tid=77 
[15]  Naomi H. Harley, Ernest C. Foulkes, Lee H. Hilborne, Arlene Hudson, C.R. 
Anthony. A Review of the Scientific Literature as it Pertains to Gulf War 
Illnesses: Volume 7 - Depleted Uranium. Santa Monica: Rand National Defense 
Research Institute; 1999. 
[16] Health Physics Society.  http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q746.html 
[17]  Paul Zimmerman. A Primer in the Art of Deception: The Cult of 
Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science. 2009.  
http://www.du-deceptions.com/  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



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

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to