Custom Search

Exclusive: Expert: Americans will likely pay for Fukushima radiation deception

Deborah Dupre, Human Rights Examiner

Officials claim Japan fallout in U.S. are trace levels that are harmless - or are they?

In an exclusive interview with Deborah Dupré, the head of a major radiation and public health organization predicted that Americans will pay a high price for government and media cover-up and deception related to Fukushima radiation, such as telling the public that it only trace levels are reported and that these are harmless. Not only Californians are at risk.

Yesterday, The New York Times article by Matthew Wald reported, "Some researchers argue that all humans are regularly exposed to a low natural level of radiation, and that it is not harmful when below a certain threshold, although fetuses may be an exception."

Jospeh Mangano, MPH MBA is among what Wald described as the "vocal minority" arguing statistical evidence shows higher cancer rates among people exposed to tiny incremental doses.

The multiple Fukushima nuclear reactor meltdowns have increased radiation in United States air, water and milk, yet last month, the EPA shocked many, including some in the science community, with its announcement that it was shifting reporting radiation levels from every day to every three months according to Mangano, Executive Director of the Radiation and Public Health Project.

The EPA's stated rationale was that radiation levels had fallen after peaking right after the multiple meltdowns in Japan began mid-March.

Officials claimed from the start of the Fukushima meltdowns that the radioactive plume traveling from Japan to the U.S. contained harmless "trace" levels of radiation, but no proof exists for this advisory according to Dupré's interview with expert in the field, Mangano, MPH MBA.

On May 12, the EPA discontinued reporting radiation as four Fukushima reactors continued melting down and releasing radiation into the environment, and after Japanese officials stated that they do not expect the situation to be controlled for 6 to 9 more months.

On May 29, a senior TEPCO official admitted it might be impossible to stabilize the crippled plant by the beginning of 2012, yet EPA continued to not report the radiation.

According to Mangano, many experts disagree with the EPA assumption that levels reaching the U.S. are harmless. Those differing and making public statements warning the public include experts such as Karl Grossman, Dr. Helen Caldicott and Greenpeace researchers.

"You have to conduct studies first, before declaring whether this radiation is or isn't harmless," said Mangano.

"The EPA should continue to monitor levels on a daily basis. It's hard to believe they folded down while the meltdowns continue."

Mangano has published 27 journal articles and 3 books on the link between radiation and cancer.

RPHP, of which Karl Grossman is a Board member, is a nonprofit educational and scientific organization, established by scientists and physicians dedicated to understanding relationships between low-level, nuclear radiation and public health. (See: "Exclusive Karl Grossman interview: Fukushima Fallout over US Censored News")

In relation to the public having been told that Fukushima radiation is not harmful, "we need to be asking, 'Where's the proof?' - because there is none," said Mangano.

Radiation has 100 to 200 individual chemicals, each radioactive, each cancer causing, each that does something different to the body -- now in the US food, milk, air and water supply.

Fukushima radiation is getting into the environment through precipitation, the rain according to Mangano. (Also see: Joseph Mangano interview, IntelHub, embedded as Youtube on this page at the left.)

"When radiation gets into the food supply, it gets into the body."

After monitoring Fukushima fall-out, Greenpeace reported on May 26 that contamination is spreading over a wide area and accumulating in sea life, not simply dispersing like Japanese authorities claimed it would.

Finding Above-Normal Levels After Japan

Mangano has examined radiation level data that EPA has made public on its web site.

"They've been slow in providing their data," he says, adding that this data is used because of EPAs extensive system of radiation tracking.

The radiation plume from Japan took less than a week to reach the U.S. according to Mangano. In the week following, he concluded that EPA data showed levels in air and precipitation about 20 times higher than typical levels now. Even more disturbing is the recorded data in Idaho, 100 times higher than normal.

"This is far lower than the area close to Fukushima, but must not be ignored," he said.

Mangano examined historical EPA data, and showed that current levels in air and precipitation is in the same ballpark as when the plume from Chernobyl entered the U.S. in 1986, and when fallout from above-ground atom bomb tests in China in 1976 did the same. He states that after Chernobyl, there were unexpected increases in U.S. infant deaths, infant cancer cases, and babies born with an underactive thyroid gland - all of which can be caused by radiation exposure.

Established Media Raise Questions, Fumble Answers, Yet No Public Outrage

Many reporters have raised the question of whether the U.S. food supply is safe. Ten days after the meltdowns in Japan began, Diane Sawyer sat behind a picture of a glass of milk with the words "Is it safe?" underneath. Sawyer, however, merely recited the EPA assurance that levels were too low to cause harm. Her report also failed to note that the EPA conclusion came from a total of just two samples of milk nationwide, only one of which could detect levels of radioactive Iodine-131.

Although media continues to repeat the official line that there is no harmful amount of Fukushima fallout in the US, Mangano says what Americans need to be asking is, "Where's the proof?"

Only in several years will the needed data on disease and death rates be ready for analysis according to Mangano.

The lack of public outrage over Fukushima radiation is as disturbing as EPA denying reports, media complicity, and lack of accurate information about the fallout that has traveled thousands of miles from Japan to the U.S.

"Even the anti-nuclear side has been relatively quiet," Mangano said.

"We need a good system of sampling food."

There are over 100 radioactive chemicals not found in nature only produced in an atomic bomb explosion or when a nuclear reactor operates.

"We need more frequent studies on how much is getting into American bodies, and whether it is harmful," he re-emphasized.

Three other times Americans paid price of radiation untruths

U.S. officials have a history of assuming that relatively low dose exposures to radiation are harmless - only to later admit harm caused, after scientific studies were conducted, noted Mangano. He provided three prime examples of these studies on radiation events, each event resulting in hundreds of thousands of cancer cases and/or deaths after people were told the radiation level was harmless.

Example #1. In the 1950's, pregnant women were routinely given x-rays to their stomachs. Women were told "low-dose radiation is harmless," by medical societies and government officials. British physician Alice Stewart published studies showed that babies irradiated in-utero had a nearly double the risk of dying of cancer by age 10, and her results were matched by other researchers. Not until then did doctors introduce ultra-sound, that emits no radiation, for pregnant women.

Example #2. In the 1950's and 1960's, atomic bomb fallout at the Nevada Test Site filled the air with radioactive chemicals that drifted upward and around the Earth, falling in rain, and found in milk and water. Every state received bomb fallout, according to measurements made by the U.S. Public Health Service. The government declared the amounts to be well below permissible limits, and thus harmless. But in 1997, the National Cancer Institute research estimated levels of one of the chemicals in fallout (iodine 131). Two years later, the Institute of Medicine concluded that up to 212,000 Americans developed thyroid cancer from exposure to iodine from the Nevada nuclear tests.I

Example #3. For years, workers at nuclear weapons plants were exposed to radiation, but told that these relatively low doses were harmless. But in 2000, the U.S. Energy Department released a report concluding that these workers were at higher risk for cancer, based on a number of scientific studies.

Beware of 'official radiation reports'

The EPA maintains a system of measuring radiation levels in air, drinking water, precipitation, and milk in 124 stations in the U.S. The UC Berkeley Department of Nuclear Engineering, performing measurements to track trace amounts of radioactive isotopes in Berkeley that were released from Japan, reported on samplings that indicated no reason for concern. According to Mangano, however, not all 100-200 radioactive isotopes are being tested.

He said that while testing all of them "really isn't necessary," officials "should test some (a dozen?) chemicals, some that decay quickly and some that decay slowly."

Are Californians safe? "Hell no," stated Mangano.

"The numbers may have dropped since March, but the meltdowns are still not controlled, and may not be for months.

"Plus, there is still Japanese fallout in our diet - and any radiation is harmful."

Although the Japanese meltdowns are disastrous, their silver lining is that people learn that nuclear power is a dangerous technology. (See attached Examiner slideshow)

Meltdowns can occur from mechanical failure, acts of terrorism, or natural disasters.

"Fukushima is not the first meltdown, and if we don't learn lessons and take action accordingly," Mangano said, "we are doomed to have other meltdowns affecting future generations."

Learn more: Tooth Fairies and Mangano books

Actor and humanitarian Alec Baldwin and tooth fairies have found a common bond, helping prevent radiation related illnesses. Baldwin is working with RPHP to collect baby teeth from tooth fairies. To document a possible radiation/cancer connection, RPHP conducts research on those teeth and needs only one baby tooth that a child has lost for the "Tooth Fairy Project."

"Every tooth is a clue," urges Baldwin.

He's not the only celebrity involved with tooth fairies. Christie Brinkley has cited RPHP's Tooth Fairy Project as one of her two favorite causes.

Another way to learn more about RPHP's research projects and nuclear energy is by reading Joseph Mangano's books that include:

(2008) Radioactive Baby Teeth: The Cancer Link.
(1998) Low Level Radiation and Immune System Damage: An Atomic Era Legacy
(1996) The Enemy Within: The High Cost of Living Near Nuclear Reactors (Author, Jay Gould and co-author, Joseph Mangano)

http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/exclusive-americans-to-pay-price-of-radiation-untruths?render=print#print

June 1, 2011

Go Back

Four Winds 10 - News