Nuclear radiation and WOMEN – theme for May 2012
Breast cancer and ionising radiation Ionizing radiation has long been regarded as the most established environmental risk factor for breast cancer…
..Ionising radiation from the nuclear industry affects women especially, because the breast tissue is particularly susceptible to it…..
…Developing fetuses are known to be especially sensitive to radiation
If you live or work close to nuclear power plants, or lived in the era of atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons (1945-1980) you will also have accumulated higher doses of this radiation.
Nuclear power and WOMEN – theme for May 2012
Decisions on nuclear power, nuclear weapons, nuclear wastes are almost exclusively made by men.Yet the brunt of nuclear-caused cancer is suffered by women and children, as is the brunt of nuclear war, and of depleted uranium spread.
Opinion polls over many years, and in many countries, consistently show that women are opposed to nuclear power and nuclear weapons.
More women than men are concerned about health and environmental effects of the nuclear industry.
Yet they are consistently reassured by narrowly educated nuclear physicists, and other technocrats, that nuclear power is safe, and that they have nothing to worry about in regard to ionising radiation.
Decisions on nuclear power and ionising radiation. The nuclear power heirarchy is almost uniformly male, though the nuclear lobby tries hard to pretend that they have equal rights credentials by getting a few token women to show off. And, a favourite male trick, – put a woman in an untenable position – as for example, Anne Lauvergeon was put at the top of France’s rather wobbly pinnacle of nuclear expansionism – AREVA.
The nuclear/uranium industry and WOMEN – theme for May 2012
Australia is sadly lacking in publicising the health effects of ionising radiation. This is of special concern to women, who are more seriously affected by radiation than men are.
A woman is at significantly greater risk of suffering and dying from radiation-induced cancer than a man who gets the same dose of ionizing radiation. This is news because data in the report on the biological effects of ionizing radiation published in 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has been under-reported. It is more often acknowledged that children are at higher risk of disease and death from radiation, but it is rarely pointed out that the regulation of radiation and nuclear activity (worldwide) ignores the disproportionately greater harm to both women and children. http://www.nirs.org/radiation/radhealth/radiationwomen.pdf
In Australia women are rarely heard in the “debate” on nuclear power – and are likely to be ignored or ridiculed when they do speak up. In 1980 Labor quickly ousted the popular Senator Jean Melzer who opposed the uranium industry – Melzer warned of Australia becoming “the world’s quarry and waste dump”.
The world’s most famous and most fully informed speaker on nuclear power is Australia’s Dr Helen Caldicott – truly a world leader, but pretty much ignored in her own country. Our other anti nuclear heroic women, Dianne Stokes, Yvonne Margarula, Jacqui Katona are similarly ignored by the Australian media. But it will not be possible for Australia to continue to ignore the voices of women, who are here, as in all countries world-wide, very strongly participating in the movement for clean energy, and for the abolition of nuclear power and nuclear weapons.
Nuclear power and HEALTH – theme for April 2012
What are the health effects of ionising radiation?
Very high doses of radiation: death within hours or days, due to damage to brain and nerves
High doses: death within weeks, due to damage to the gastrointestinal tract, to the bone marrow, where blood cells are formed.
Lower doses: less severe:radiation sickness (nausea, fatigue and vomiting). Sterility. Some years later – cancer, (especially of thyroid), diseases of digestive organs, bone, & muscle.
Genetic effects: cell damage passed on to later generations
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fact Sheet on Biological Effects of Radiation – Cancers associated with high dose exposure (greater than 50,000 mrem) include leukemia, breast, bladder, colon, liver, lung, esophagus, ovarian, multiple myeloma, and stomach cancers. Department of Health and Human Services literature also suggests a possible association between ionizing radiation exposure and prostate, nasal cavity/sinuses, pharyngeal and laryngeal, and pancreatic cancer.
Uranium Mining and HEALTH – theme for April 2012
Mining is a dangerous industry. The presence of radioactive substances makes it even more so. Despite assurances and safeguards, the nuclear industry cannot stop workers from exposure, illness and even death due to the nature of the element they are working with.
There are also many instances of corporatenegligence and human error leading to workers accidents, and the nature of their work means that many insurance companies may refuse to give them personal or health insurance
The three main dangers to workers are risk of inhaling radon gas, inhaling Uranium dust and external radiation
exposure.
Mining uranium and mineral sands creates radioactive dust and radon gas. When breathed into the lungs, the dust and gas release their radiation at close range where it does the most damage to the lining of the lung and increases the risk of developing cancer. Radiation exposure can affect men and women’s reproductive health and is also associated with lower testosterone levels, chromosomal abnormality, skin, lung, kidney and bone cancer and bronchitis and emphysema.
workers are still expected to tolerate a higher level of exposure than others, between 20 and 5 mSv, compared to 0.1
for everyone else.
Australia and Radioactive Waste – Muckaty dump is NOT needed for nuclear medicine – theme for March 2012
“As health organisations, we are appalled that access to nuclear medical procedures is being used to justify the proposed nuclear waste dump. Most waste from these procedures break down quickly and can be safely disposed of either on site or locally.” − Dr Bill Williams, Medical Association for the Prevention of War
“Linking the need for a centralized radioactive waste storage facility with the production of isotopes for nuclear medicine is misleading. The production of radioactive isotopes for nuclear medicine comprises a small percentage of the output of research reactors. The majority of the waste that is produced in these facilities occurs regardless of the nuclear medicine isotope production.” − Nuclear Radiologist Dr Peter Karamoskos.
“If the plan for a dump in the NT is defeated, medical waste will continue to be stored at the Lucas Heights reactor site operated by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) and, in much smaller volumes, at hospitals. That is no problem since ANSTO and hospitals continue to produce radioactive waste and thus they have an ongoing need for on-site waste stores and waste management expertise regardless of the options for periodic off-site disposal.” – Dr Jim Green
NUCLEAR RADIATION – theme for March 2012
A year on from the Fukushima nuclear disaster, we return to the subject of ionising radiation. A section of the Japanese population now form a kind of giant medical experiment. Rather like the asbestos and tobacco experiments, where, decades later, cancers appeared in the people exposed.
Only there’s a serious difference. In the case of nuclear radiation – there’s no “marker” – no obvious factor, such as being an asbestos worker, or being a smoker.
You can bet that, as Fukushima continues to leak radiation, there will two propaganda techniques from the nuclear lobby.
- Nuclear “experts” will very often continue to completely exclude the subject of radiation , pushing on other supposed advantages of nuclear energy
- Ionising radiation will be portrayed as harmless. This pitch will be sometimes blatant – as in “clean” nuclear energy, often more subtle. They have bought “experts” all over the world, to promote the false idea that ionising radiation is harmless, or even beneficial, to health.
Ionising radiation is the most proven cause of cancer. The nuclear industry from uranium mining through nuclear power, nuclear weapons, nuclear waste. is the planet’s source of ionising radiation. Even medical radiation has its cancer risk. Radioactive minerals left in the ground are a minor source.
Ionising radiation and nuclear medicine – theme for March 2012
The nuclear lobby touts Nuclear Medicine as a justification for nuclear reactors – a sort of “fig leaf” on a dirty and dangerous technology, or a “foot in the door” to introduce nuclear reactors. Nuclear medicine uses various isotopes for diagnosis and treatment. These isotopes can be produced in other ways, so there is no necessity for nuclear reactors.
The Future of Nuclear Medicine Scientists are seeking new methods of finding disease without using radioactive substances or nuclear reactors. Nuclear medicine materials do not have to be produced by reactors.
Cyclotrons and linear accelerators are two alternative technologies. The Canadian government recently decided to move to these nonreactor methods. See:www.triumf.ca/sites/default/files/isotopes-gc-re-eng.pdf
Nuclear Reactors Not Needed to Make the Most Common Medical Isotope, http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/02/nuclear-reactors-not-needed-to-m.html?ref=hp
The nuclear/uranium industry and WATER – theme for February 2012
Effects of uranium mining and nuclear power on water.
Overuse of precious fresh water.One of the greatest dangers of the nuclear/uranium industry is in its use of water. Both uranium mining and nuclear reactors require enormous amounts of water. This is a threat to the world’s scarce resources of fresh water.
Pollution. Both uranium mining and nuclear reactors also pollute water. In uranium mining, water is often used to pour over radioactive dust tailings: radioactive water can leach down into groundwater. In the “in situ leach” process, radioactive water is disposed of into the aquifer.
Nuclear reactors use water for cooling – the resulting hot water is released into the source, river, or coastal sea, to thermally pollute the area, damaging plants and fish.
Effects of water scarcity, and hot water on nuclear reactors.. In heat waves, nuclear reactors often will need to be shut down, as their river sources of cooling water become too warm to function as a coolant.
As global warming brings about a rise in average temperatures and ocean levels, inland reactors will increasingly contribute to, and be affected by, water shortages. During the record-breaking 2003 heat wave in France, operations at 17 commercial nuclear reactors had to be scaled back or stopped because of rapidly rising temperatures in rivers and lake. Spain’s reactor at Santa María de Garoña was shut for a week in July 2006 after high temperatures were recorded in the Ebro River.
Paradoxically, then, the very conditions that made it impossible for the nuclear industry to deliver full power in Europe in 2003 and 2006 created peak demand for electricity, owing to the increased use of air conditioning. http://chellaney.net/2011/03/14/paradox-of-nuclear-power-water-guzzler-yet-vulnerable-to-water/
Seawater can be used to cool reactors, but it has to be purified. Corrosive elements in the seawater would otherwise ruin the reactors – so seawater is a last resort for cooling. As in the case of the Fukushima emergency – seawater was used, as ruining the reactors was preferable to a catastrophic nuclear meltdown.
Nuclear Power and WATER – theme for February 2012
Australia is at the forefront of the world’s nuclear fuel cycle. The world’s media seems to cover nuclear issues at the back end – nuclear reactor accidents, used nuclear fuel wastes.
But – at the very front end is the destruction of precious natural resources. Above all, there’s the guzzling of Australia’s fresh water. There is also the degradation of rivers, creeks and groundwater, through radioactive leakage.
Water intake. No mines are more water intensive this the uranium mines. Of these, BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam is the prime guzzler, with its massive daily draught from the Great Artesian Basin
Over recent months, large areas of Australia have experienced extraordinarily large rainfall. This might have lulled Australians in the Eastern States into thinking that we have plenty of fresh water. Australians are amongst the highest consumers of water in the world.
We don’t. Australia is the driest inhabited continent, with one of the lowest rainfalls in the world. Three quarters of Australia is arid or semi-arid. We depend on the Murray River system for 50% of our water use. While surface water systems provide most of Australia’s water intake, undergoud bores alos play a significant role.
The Great Artesian Basin provides the only reliable source of fresh water through much of inland Australia. Water extraction from the GAB is essentially a mining operation, with recharge much less than current extraction rates. Australia’s extraction of water from the Great Artesian Basin (GAB) is estimated to be greater than the inflow to the GAB
Water radioactive pollution. There have been numerous spills and leaks, and seepage from Australian uranium mines, into creeks, river systems and groundwater. (from Nabarlek, Ranger, Olympic Dam. Beverly, Rum Jungle, Radium Hill, Mary Kathleen. League of Individuals for the Environment, Inc.: Uranium Mining: Australia and Globally)
In South Australia, there have been over 20 spills at the Beverley In Situ Leach mine (http://uranium-news.com/category/processes/in-situ-leach/)
NUCLEAR LIES – theme for January 2012
In 2012 in their desperate struggle to keep the nuclear industry alive, corporations, governments, academia and media will trot out the same old lies, plus a few newer ones.
The new ones will be:
1. to downplay the prospects for renewable energy and energy efficiency – lies about costs, about “base load” power.
2. to tout the safety of new nuclear technology, such as “small modular thorium nuclear reactors”.
3. More subtly than lies – the nuclear lobby uses OMISSIONS – watch how in 2012 the topics of Fukushima, and nuclear waste, fade from mention in the media, even though they are still topics of critical importance.
Nuclear Lies Australia – theme for January 2012
For Australia, lying on matters nuclear is a long tradition. Never more so than now, Australia, being a strategic colony of the USA, and a commercial colony of the multinational corporations.
The current nuclear lies and coverups in Australia are in general, the same as in the global lying.
However, there are some lies and coverups that are special to Australia, for example:
- The lie that the uranium industry has a great future – even as uranium prices continue their downward spiral, and nuclear power falters worldwide
- The lie that renewable energy, solar, wind – is just not suitable, ( indeed wind is “unhealthy”), for Australia
- The lie that the planned nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory is needed for “nuclear medicine”
- The continued coverup of plans being hatched by greedy persons to make Australia the repositary for international radioactive wastes – this one includes the lie that Australia needs the full nuclear fuel cycle.
It’s not that hard to understand the motivations of prominent Australians who promote these ideas, – fame, power, money , these are great motivators- a few examples are pictured:
Martin Ferguson –political puppet of the nuclear lobby.Ziggy Switkowski -famous as the mouthpiece of the nuclear lobby . Tony Abbott – will doanything to become Prime Minister. Barry Brook - famous as the spokesman for nuclear as the cure for climate change. Julia Gillard – apparently will doanything to stay Prime Minister. Marius Kloppers - famous as the great BHP man presiding over plans for the world’s biggest uranium mine. Paul Howes – anything to have a big career in politics. John White - keen to make an awful lotta money from importing radioactive wastes. Bill Shorten – anything to become Prime Minister
But there are plenty of others – examples – what about washed up old politicians – Alexander Downer, and Prime Ministers Bob Hawke and John Howard?- anything to stay in the public eye.
What about the straight out greed of John White’s other pals, – Hugh Morgan, Ron Walker and Robert de Crespigny. setting up their company to import nuclear wastes, while piously proclaiming it’s for the good of Australia?
Peace – nuclear disarmament – theme for December 2011
Peace on Earth to people of good will
But what is good will? How is it shown? The answer is in respect for one another. 
Respect means listening to the other’s point of view, and clearly saying your own point of view. It means discussion, argument – communication.
It can be difficult and time consuming. It often seems easier to just hit someone, show them who’s boss, as we have seen in countless Hollywood films – where might is right.
Communication is the alternative to war - and people use communication to get along, and resolve differences – at home, in the community, the region – and nationally and internationally.
The world is pretty much at the crossroads now. Some Israeli and USA politicians threaten military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Iran threatens retaliation. North Korea continues to be a nuclear weapons worry and China, India, USA, Russia, UK ramp up their nuclear weapons. Threats, decisions for violent action – it all seems simpler quicker, easier – easier than communication, negotiation, diplomacy.
Peace on Earth – with a nuclear free world – theme for December 2011
Australia can be proud of its history of anti nuclear activism – it has kept 
Australia nuclear weapons free, nuclear power free, and has limited and slowed the uranium industry. Now more than ever, Australia needs its anti nuclear movement, and the Greens party
In both Liberal and Labor parties, machinations go on, behind the scenes, to make Australia a nuclear industry hub, – from uranium quarry right through to nuclear waste dump for the world.
What nice Christmas presents these would make, for their corporate backers!
The Liberals have always been ready to sell out Australia’s clean energy future – and both parties make hypocritical statements about peace, while allowing BHP, ERA, to supplying uranium – fuel for nuclear weapons.
This month, the Labor Party is likely to completely reneg on its commitment
to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, since Prime Minister Julia Gillard dramatically caved in to USA pressure and announced that she wants to
allow uranium sales to India.
Still, Australia’s anti nuclear movement continues – and with it grows the movement, at home and abroad, towards clean, non nuclear, renewable energy
Global movement for clean, non nuclear, energy – theme for November 2011
There is a global zeitgeist, or widespread feeling of enthusiasm for clean energy, and of rejection of the dirty, dangerous, nuclear industry. This can’t be measured, but it does exist. In country after country, while governments are beholden to the nuclear lobby, the people are not fooled.
People are appreciating the value of renewable energy systems, centralised ones, coming through the grid, and decentralised, local, ones, with solar or wind energy coming straight to the user.. Households, businesses, farms benefit also in selling energy back to the grid, through their small local solar or wind technologies. Such small decentralised technologies are being taken up in developing countries, where there is no grid, bringing energy with the FREE fuel of sun and wind.
Even more importantly, energy efficiency and energy conservation are being taken up, as people find that this saves money, too. The culture of endless consumption is now questioned.
World-wide, the public becomes more distrustful of the nuclear industry. Private investment shuns it. People are waking up to the lies of the nuclear lobby: the lie that nuclear power is “clean”, that it’s “safe”, that it’s “renewable”, that it has “no connection” with nuclear weapons.
People are increasingly waking up to nuclear cover-ups, nuclear corruption, and nuclear bribery of politicians. Governments that are beholden to the nuclear lobby are increasingly distrusted. The current wave of opposition to the big corporations includes opposition to the power of nuclear corporations over governments.
The Fukushima nuclear catastrophe continues to influence people away from nuclear power. This , and the global economic problems make the nuclear industry look more and more like a colossal waste of tax-payers’ money. And, underlying this, the continued work of anti- nuclear groups, over decades has pushed on this groundswell of public feeling.
This month
For international news, go to nuclear-news ion for Western Australia’s energy future
http://ifyoulovethisplanet.org/?p=5755 Mary Olson on how women are more vulnerable to atomic radiation
- Muckaty Gathering 25 May 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1J9q-OeEO4 - NuclearKop http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpMhhzkeYjk
Anti nuclear action below: - more info at Action Australia « Antinuclear and at Event details « Antinuclear
- http://www.communityrun.org/petitions/put-the-brakes-on-toxic-trucks-no-nuclear-waste-at-muckaty
- Online Petition - against the proposed national radioactive waste dump at Muckaty Station in the Northern Territory http://www.gopetition.com.au/petitions/no-nuclear-waste-dump-at-muckaty.htmlUranium Free WA Sign the online charter saying no to uranium mining in Western Australia http://ccwa.org.au/takeaction/uraniumnotforsaleSIGN THE PETITION TO STOP LYNAS RARE EARTH EXPORTS TO MALAYSIA http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/ban-rare-earth-exports/
EVENTS
- May 29 – Melbourne - Amnesty International panel on weapons and war .
- May 29 – 30 Melbourne - Wind Farms conference
- May 30 Darwin - expert Panel on Nuclear Waste Dump plan for Muckaty
- June 2 - Nuclear Abolition Day
- June 13 - Melbourne -Lizards Revenge -Shut Roxby Down
- June 14 Melbourne Beyond Zero Emissions ZCA 2020 plan.
- June 19 - Melbourne Public meeting US FORCES IN AUSTRALIA: SECURITY OR THREAT? USforcesflyer-2.pdf
The Nuclear/uranium industry and WOMEN - theme for May 2012
Deceptive information given to women about breast cancer. Women are repeatedly told about “genetic causes”, about “risks of obesity:. about “diet factors”, about “not having babies”, or “having a baby at a later age” even about “stress” – as causes of breast cancer. The not so subtle message is that it is THEIR FAULT – a problem caused by the individual woman, so – the only preventive actions must be those made by individual women.
The facts are otherwise. The single most proven cause of breast cancer is ionising radiation. After that, other environmental causes exist, amongst the wash of chemicals, and synthetic hormones, that pervade our environment. After that – probably some hereditary susceptability, amongst some women.
Why is this so? One could conclude that breast cancer is a growth industry. There’s money at every point in this sorry cycle – from the radiation from nuclear fuel through to the medical radiation used to detect and treat breast cancer. There is no money clearly involved in shutting down a toxic industry, and preventing millions of breast cancers.
How does ionising radiation cause breast cancer? Ionising radiation comes in several forms. for example, Gamma rays, x-rays, and some sub-atomic particles such as alpha particles and protons In ionising radiation, a tiny electron is released from an atom, and enters a body cell, hitting the DNA in the cell’s nucleus, and damaging it. The damaged DNA sends out ‘wrong’ messages telling the cell to divide in an uncontrolled manner – cancer develops.
“...the time between radiation exposure and breast cancer development is longest in young women and shortest for older women; young children do not show a detectable elevation in breast cancer occurrence for some 35 to 40 years after exposure. Radiation-induced breast cancers appear to occur later in life during the same ages when breast cancer rates, in general, begin to increase. It appears that a single exposure of sufficient dose during early life can increase breast cancer risk even 50 years later...
the relationship between radiation dose and breast cancer risk can be described by a straight line which implies that no matter how low the dose, there is some small risk associated with the exposure.…
The risk of subsequent breast cancer from very high doses is lower than that which might be expected from the effects of lower doses. This is because radiation at high doses is an effective killer of cells and dead cells are not able to develop into cancer…..
Young girls are at highest risk …when a young girl is exposed to radiation, she will have menstrual cycles for several decades that might enhance the development of any underlying damage caused by the radiation. There is evidence to suggest that exposure to the immature breast during early development, and around the age of beginning menstruation, carries a higher risk than at other times of a woman’s life.
It is unclear how radiation exposure of the breast during pregnancy affects a woman’s breast cancer risk. However, a recent study of women treated for Hodgkin’s disease concluded that pregnancy might be a time of increased sensitivity of breast tissue to the cancercausing effects of radiation……”
.” John D Boyce, Jr, DSc, Scientific Director,Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors in New York State.. Ionizing Radiation and Breast Cancer Risk
