(Image source:Los Alamos National Laboratory http://www.lanl.gov/history/photo.php?photo_id=346&story_id=21&page_num=1&row_num=0&photo_num=2 Lanl Caption “Picture of the Fishbowl blugill taken from space”
Wikipedia describes the Fishbowl series of nuclear tests as follows “Operation Fishbowl was a series of high altitude nuclear tests in 1962 that were carried out by the United States as a part of the larger Operation Dominic nuclear test program….” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fishbowl
The Limited Test Ban Treaty came into force as a result of growing public concern around the world that fallout from the tests were harmful. The official position of the nuclear test authorities was one of disagreement with this. Nuclear authorities maintained that the tests were safe, even as they secretly collected human tissue from deceased people around the world. They used this tissue to study the uptake of fission products by people.
Eventually public awareness, led by scientists who disagreed with nuclear authorities, forced the US to propose the Limited Test Ban Treaty forbidding the detonation of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere. The Soviet Union readily agreed. Britain complied. China and France did not.
Prior to being murdered, President Kennedy addressed the American people in regard to the LImited Test Ban Treaty.
Radio and Television Address to the American People
by President Kennedy on the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
July 26, 1963 (Partial quote)
Good evening, my fellow citizens:
I speak to you tonight in a spirit of hope. Eighteen years ago the advent of nuclear weapons changed the course of the world as well as the war. Since that time, all mankind has been struggling to escape from the darkening prospect of mass destruction on earth. In an age when both sides have come to possess enough nuclear power to destroy the human race several times over, the world of communism and the world of free choice have been caught up in a vicious circle of conflicting ideology and interest. Each increase of tension has produced an increase of arms; each increase of arms has produced an increase of tension.
In these years, the United States and the Soviet Union have frequently communicated suspicion and warnings to each other, but very rarely hope. Our representatives have met at the summit and at the brink; they have met in Washington and in Moscow; in Geneva and at the United Nations. But too often these meetings have produced only darkness, discord, or disillusion.
Yesterday a shaft of light cut into the darkness. Negotiations were concluded in Moscow on a treaty to ban all nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and under water. For the first time, an agreement has been reached on bringing the forces of nuclear destruction under international control – a goal first sought in 1946 when Bernard Baruch presented a comprehensive control plan to the United Nations…..
Nevertheless, this limited treaty will radically reduce the nuclear testing which would otherwise be conducted on both sides; it will prohibit the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and all others who sign it, from engaging in atmospheric tests which have so alarmed mankind; and it offers to all the world a welcome sign of hope……
A war today or tomorrow, if it led to nuclear war, would not be like any war in history. A full-scale nuclear exchange, lasting less than 6o minutes, with the weapons now in existence, could wipe out more than 300 million Americans, Europeans, and Russians, as well as untold millions elsewhere. And the survivors, as Chairman Khrushchev warned the Communist Chinese, “the survivors would envy the dead.” For they would inherit a world so devastated by explosions and poison and fire that today we cannot even conceive of its horrors…..
Second, this treaty can be a step towards freeing the world from the fears and dangers of radioactive fall-out. Our own atmospheric tests last year were conducted under conditions which restricted such fallout to an absolute minimum. But over the years the number and the yield of weapons tested have rapidly increased – and so have the radioactive hazards from such testing. Continued unrestricted testing by the nuclear powers, joined in time by other nations which may be less adept in limiting pollution, will increasingly contaminate the air that all of us must breathe.
Even then, the number of children and grandchildren with cancer in their bones, with leukemia in their blood, or with poison in their lungs might seem statistically small to some, in comparison with natural health hazards. But this is not a natural health hazard – and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of even one human life, or the malformation of even one baby – who may be born long after all of us have gone – should be of concern to us all. Our children and grandchildren are not merely statistics towards which we can be indifferent.
Nor does this affect the nuclear powers alone. These tests befoul the air of all men and all nations, the committed and the uncommitted alike, without their knowledge and without their consent. That is why the continuation of atmospheric testing causes so many countries to regard all nuclear powers as equally evil; and we can hope that its prevention will enable those countries to see the world more clearly, while enabling all the world to breathe more easily.
Third, this treaty can be a step towards preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to nations not now possessing them. During the next several years, in addition to the four current nuclear powers, a small but significant number of nations will have the intellectual, physical, and financial resources to produce both nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them. In time, it is estimated, many other nations will have either this capacity or other ways of obtaining nuclear warheads, even as missiles can be commercially purchased today.
I ask you to stop and think for a moment what it would mean to have nuclear weapons in so many hands – in the hands of countries large and small, stable and unstable, responsible and irresponsible, scattered throughout the world. There would be no rest for anyone then, no stability, no real security, and no chance of effective disarmament. There would only be the increased chance of accidental war, and an increased necessity for the great powers to involve themselves in what otherwise would be local conflicts.
If only one thermonuclear bomb were to be dropped on any American, Russian, or any other city – whether it was launched by accident or design, by a madman or by an enemy, by a large nation or by a small, from any corner of the world – that one bomb could release more destructive power on the inhabitants of that one helpless city than all the bombs dropped in the Second World War….. end quote. Source link : http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/JFK072663.html with video of the address.
Four months after this address to the nation, President Kennedy was shot to death in circumstances which remain mysterious. For instance: http://oswaldsmother.blogspot.com.au/2008/08/missing-brain-solved.html
For it’s part in concealing the truth about nuclear fallout to the American people and other reasons relating to a severe conflict of interest, the organiation which took over nuclear matters from the Manhattan Project was abolished. “An increasing number of critics during the 1960s charged that the AEC’s regulations were insufficiently rigorous in several important areas, including radiation protection standards, nuclear reactor safety, plant siting, and environmental protection. By 1974, the AEC’s regulatory programs had come under such strong attack that Congress decided to abolish the agency. The agency was abolished by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, which assigned its functions to two new agencies: the Energy Research and Development Administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (2: Atomic Energy Commission”. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Retrieved 2009-11-16.)
The AEC’s far-reaching powers and control over subject matter which had far-reaching social, public health, and military implications made it an extremely controversial organization. One of the drafters of the McMahon Act, James R. Newman, famously concluded that the bill made “the field of atomic energy [an] island of socialism in the midst of a free-enterprise economy”.
Before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was created, nuclear regulation was the responsibility of the AEC, which Congress first established in the Atomic Energy Act of 1946. Eight years later, Congress replaced that law with the Atomic Energy Act Amendments of 1954, which for the first time made the development of commercial nuclear power possible, and resolved a number of other outstanding problems in implementing the first Atomic Energy Act. The act assigned the AEC the functions of both encouraging the use of nuclear power and regulating its safety. The AEC’s regulatory programs sought to ensure public health and safety from the hazards of nuclear power without imposing excessive requirements that would inhibit the growth of the industry. This was a difficult goal to achieve, especially in a new industry, and within a short time the AEC’s programs stirred considerable controversy. Stephanie Cooke has written that:
“the AEC had become an oligarchy controlling all facets of the military and civilian sides of nuclear energy, promoting them and at the same time attempting to regulate them, and it had fallen down on the regulatory side … a growing legion of critics saw too many inbuilt conflicts of interest”.
An increasing number of critics during the 1960s charged that the AEC’s regulations were insufficiently rigorous in several important areas, including radiation protection standards, nuclear reactor safety, plant siting, and environmental protection.” end quote Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Atomic_Energy_Commission
There is currently a view that the agencies which replaced the AEC have fallen into the same failures and conflict of interest as the AEC. There is distrust, with good reason given FOIA released documents, that the full facts of the Fukushima disaster have not been released to the American people and the world.
The Japanese nuclear authorities have been severely judged by Japanese government investigations for behaving in a manner similar to that of the old AEC. Lies and untruths, omissions and false denials have all been determined to have occurred by the deliberate attempt of nuclear industry and nuclear regulators to hide the truth and cause a perception of diminished disaster in the minds of the people of Japan and the world.
Having to rely on scientific and media reports, I have two choices. 1. Believe nuclear authorities who repeat the 1960s line that the Fukushima fallout is safe and, like the bomb fallout as claimed by the AEC, merely a handy radioactive tracer for the planet. Or do I believe those scientists who provided proof to the Conference
on the Transport of Strontium and Calcium Across Biological Membranes, Cornell University, 1962 (a conference on the impact of fallout upon people around the world) that nuclear fallout is an ADDITION to natural radio nuclides.
Therefore, in this additive view, the total dose is what counts, whether the contribution from fission fallout (bombs or reactors) results in increased dose to lifeforms, not less.
That the statement “Fukushima fallout is safe for 50km off the coast, the Cs** is less than the potassium 40 naturally in the ocean.”
The fact is potassium 40 is not radio cesium, it has different radio chemical and biological properties. Another fact is the Fukushima emission ADD TO THE RISK, they do not diminish the risk. Even if, 50 km off shore, the summing dose is resultant from Fuk < than natural dose it is still an increase in potential total dose.
Lastly, the Fukushima facility is still emitting. Authorities claim they do not know the disposition of the coriums.
That being the case, how expert are the experts who claim all is well for the Fukushima emissions are less than the total burden the earth has suffered increasing since 1945. Including since March 2011?
Not very expert at all. Not merely because they disagree with President Kennedy, but also because they are firing Cold War fallout is good bullshit from the wrong book depository window. Such marksmen rely on the fact that they believe we, the people, have the memory capacity of a bluegill goldfish in its bowl. Each lap being a new experience for the critter.
I am not a goldfish. Though sadly, I share the same “bowl”, the bowl ignorant illumined ones consider their shit to be of benefit to the likes of such as I.
Crap to that.
“Operation Fishbowl Bluegill Mk2.”
Sadly the US Congressional view is to subtract, rather than to add, man caused radio chemical pollution from that which pre- exists.
Hence: “Congressional Research Service. Effects of Tohoku Tsunami and Fukushima
Radiation on the U.S. Marine Environment Eugene H. Buck Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Harold F. Upton Analyst in Natural Resources Policy August 17, 2012 ”
The massive Tohoku earthquake and tsunami of March 11, 2011, caused extensive damage in
northeastern Japan, including damage to the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power installation,
which resulted in the release of radiation. Some have called this incident the biggest manmade
release ever of radioactive material into the oceans. Concerns arose about the potential effects of
this released radiation on the U.S. marine environment and resources.
Both ocean currents and atmospheric winds have the potential to transport radiation over and into
marine waters under U.S. jurisdiction. It is unknown whether marine organisms that migrate
through or near Japanese waters to locations where they might subsequently be harvested by U.S.
fishermen (possibly some albacore tuna or salmon in the North Pacific) might have been exposed
to radiation in or near Japanese waters, or might have consumed prey with accumulated
High levels of radioactive iodine-131 (with a half-life of about 8 days), cesium-137 (with a half-
life of about 30 years), and cesium-134 (with a half-life of about 2 years) were measured in
seawater adjacent to the Fukushima Dai-ichi site after the March 2011 events. EPA rainfall
monitors in California, Idaho, and Minnesota detected trace amounts of radioactive iodine,
cesium, and tellurium consistent with the Japanese nuclear incident, at concentrations below any
level of concern. It is uncertain how precipitation of radioactive elements from the atmosphere
may have affected radiation levels in the marine environment.”….”Barring
another unanticipated release, radioactive contaminants from Fukushima Dai-ichi should be
sufficiently dispersed over time that they will not prove to be a serious health threat elsewhere,
unless they bioaccumulate in migratory fish or find their way directly to another part of the world
through food or other commercial products.”….The North Pacific Current is formed by the collision of the Kuroshio Current, running northward
off the east coast of Japan in the eastern North Pacific, and the Oyashio Current, running
southward from Russia (Figure 1). As it approaches the west coast of North America, the North
Pacific Current splits into the southward California Current and the northward Alaska Current.
Although these currents have the potential for bringing radiation from Japan’s Fukushima Dai-
ichi nuclear accident to U.S. waters, their flow is slow, and no radiation above background levels
has yet been detected in marine waters under U.S. jurisdiction. Regardless of the slow flow,
radioactive contaminants with long half-lives (e.g., cesium-137, with a half-life of about 30 years)
could still pose concerns if transported over long distances by ocean currents. ”
(Map from the paper cited)
continuing quote: “Radioisotope concentrations at offshore sampling points decreased with time; by
early April 2011, at sampling points about 30 km east of Fukushima Dai-ichi, concentrations were
between 5 and 18 Bq/l for iodine-131 and between 1 and 11 Bq/l for cesium-137. The highest
concentrations, found closest to the coast, were about 38 Bq/l for iodine-131 and 4.5 Bq/l for
cesium-137.8 The occurrence of cesium-137 is of greater concern because of its much longer half-
life. The natural radioactivity of seawater is 13 or 14 Bq/l, of which 95% comes from potassium-
40.9 Experts cite this incident as the largest recorded accidental release of radiation to the ocean.10
Ken Buesseler, Michio Aoyama, and Masao Fukasawa, “Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants on Marine
Radioactivity,” Environmental Science & Technology, v. 45 (December 1, 2011): 9931-9935.)
(included in the cited Congressional report)
Continuing the quote: “Concerns
Are There Implications for U.S. Seafood Safety?
It does not appear that nuclear contamination of seafood will be a food safety problem for
consumers in the United States.19 Among the main reasons are that
• damage from the disaster limited seafood production in the affected areas,
• radioactive material would be diluted before reaching U.S. fishing grounds, and
• seafood imports from Japan are being examined before entry into the United
States. ” Source 19 is:
For additional information, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Seafood Safe and Unaffected by Radiation Contamination
from Japanese Nuclear Power Plant Incident; U.S. Monitoring Control Strategy Explained, available at
The question has to be asked is this another repeat of the routine of information distortion perfected by nuclear authorities which caused, due to public outrage the original civilian nuclear authority in the USA, the AEC? Given the reports of radioactive fish within US waters, given the distrust and with holding of information by US and Japanese authorities, given the repeated assurances by “nuclear experts” around the world, including Pam Sykes and Barry Brooks of Adelaide that the emissions are good for human health because they are “like vitamins” (Sykes, Finders University http://blogs.flinders.edu.au/flinders-news/2011/07/14/radiation-response-a-meltdown-in-reason/ Published by Flinders University Marketing July 2011.Quote “We need radiation in our environment, just as we need vitamins and minerals.”), I would consider that Edward Teller has been exhumed is again uttering bullshit to ensure, not the safety of people, but the safety of the nuclear programs of USA and Japan.
The alternate view is well explained by Andrew at Nuclear Crimes. Infant deaths did not reduce during the nuclear pollution of the test era, the era aimed at “normalising” nuclear pollution to pave the way for nuclear energy in the popular mind. The infant mortality rate increased to 1940s levels for the duration, falling again after the implementation of the LTBT.
Many people urge careful thought about the consumption of sea food from waters affected by Fukushima. Nuclear industry has fucked in it, and the releases continue.
Up to you, its a free country. If Cs and Sr are vitamins, I will drink my Toyota sump oil.
Please note that the primary source for this post is a report which forms part of the US Congressional Record.
If that source is insufficient for you, migrate to North Korea. The download link for the complete document is
The official view is that fish subject to the Fukushima contaminated biosphere are safe to eat. Is this correct or not? What do you know, think and believe? And if you don’t know, who do you believe and why?
Be a good citizen and eat your Bluegill without question? For an American, (I’m an Australian and down here, so it’s a bit more anarchic) is that using your Rights and Obligations?
Death and taxes are inevitable. Nuclear bullshit is not. If they started telling the truth for a change, well, maybe I’d be less cynical.
Fukushima-derived radionuclides in the ocean and biota off Japan
Ken O. Buesselera,1, Steven R. Jayneb, Nicholas S. Fisherc, Irina I. Rypinab, Hannes Baumannc, Zofia Baumannc, Crystaline F. Breiera, Elizabeth M. Douglassb, Jennifer Georgec, Alison M. Macdonaldb, Hiroomi Miyamotod, Jun Nishikawad, Steven M. Pikea, and Sashiko Yoshidab
Edited by Karl K. Turekian, Yale University, North Haven, CT, and approved February 24, 2012 (received for review December 19, 2011)
The Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami of March 11, 2011, resulted in unprecedented radioactivity releases from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plants to the Northwest Pacific Ocean. Results are presented here from an international study of radionuclide contaminants in surface and subsurface waters, as well as in zooplankton and fish, off Japan in June 2011. A major finding is detection of Fukushima-derived 134Cs and 137Cs throughout waters 30–600 km offshore, with the highest activities associated with near-shore eddies and the Kuroshio Current acting as a southern boundary for transport. Fukushima-derived Cs isotopes were also detected in zooplankton and mesopelagic fish, and unique to this study we also find 110mAg in zooplankton. Vertical profiles are used to calculate a total inventory of ∼2 PBq 137Cs in an ocean area of 150,000 km2. Our results can only be understood in the context of our drifter data and an oceanographic model that shows rapid advection of contaminants further out in the Pacific. Importantly, our data are consistent with higher estimates of the magnitude of Fukushima fallout and direct releases [Stohl et al. (2011) Atmos Chem Phys Discuss 11:28319–28394; Bailly du Bois et al. (2011) J Environ Radioact, 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2011.11.015]. We address risks to public health and marine biota by showing that though Cs isotopes are elevated 10–1,000× over prior levels in waters off Japan, radiation risks due to these radionuclides are below those generally considered harmful to marine animals and human consumers, and even below those from naturally occurring radionuclides.
Radio cesium in the biosphere, including sea water, is the result of historic releases, including previous accidents due to nuclear industry and nuclear military releases (nuclear tests). At the very least the above abstract tells me the Fukushima disaster has taken at least the waters off Japan back to the era of atmospheric nuclear testing, an era ceased by the Limited Test Ban Treaty. To re-quote Kennedy in his explanation of the need for the treaty :
” the number of children and grandchildren with cancer in their bones, with leukemia in their blood, or with poison in their lungs might seem statistically small to some, in comparison with natural health hazards. But this is not a natural health hazard – and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of even one human life, or the malformation of even one baby – who may be born long after all of us have gone – should be of concern to us all. Our children and grandchildren are not merely statistics towards which we can be indifferent.”
President John F. Kennedy.
Conversely, the nuclear industry view is that if a victim cannot prove in a court of law the actual of disease which has, among its causes, radiogensis, then it is safe. For the plaintiff will loose. And the nukers will not have to pay.
See Karen Silkwood : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Silkwood
Is TEPCO and JGov and NRC any better than Kerr-McGee in the matter of open disclosure given the laws which prevent such disclosure (eg the Atomic Energy Act).
Is this industry a protector of democracy or a threat to it and the planet?
The subject people may well be viewed as fish in a bowl, but we have memories and the capacity and ability to argue with those authorities who are supposed to act upon our behalf and who are paid by us to do so. They should do their jobs fearlessly and honestly. Otherwise, again, abolish the bastards to the basement of history as the AEC was.
The characteristics of radioactive particles reflect the properties of the source material, which allows
for the performance of forensic analysis… Even individual nuclear fuel particles, released
uncontrolled into the environment in a severe nuclear accident, may represent an acute health hazard….
…Their identification and detection in the environment represents a technical, analytical and
even philosophical challenge for radiation protection. …the problem that highly active particles may be
present in the air although the external dose rate is below the recommended operative action level is not
only theoretical.” (Source: Pollanen, R. “Nuclear Fuel Particles in the Environment – Characteristics, Atmospheric Transport and Skin Doses”, STUK – Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, University of Helsinki, Department of Physics, Academic Dissertation, presented May 28, 2002. ISBN 951-712-528-3)
This STUK dissertation is now an IAEA publication. Pity they have not read it. Dilution is a concept which assumes external exposure only. It is irrelevant in relation to highly radioactive particles resident in tissue. 1 part per billion in sea water becomes in the case of Sr89 an immense emitter 28,000 times more radioactive than radium. We know the small fraction of a gram of radium which caused so much suffering and death among radium painters in the 20s and 30s and later. Divide that amount by 28,000 and that’s the amount of Sr89 (multiplied by alpha to beta Q) needed to produce the same in a school of squid, or some unlucky soul who internalises it like some unwitting employee of Radiation Co.
I add this: I was trained as a radiological Safety NCO in the Australian Army. This was in addition to my mundane duties as a technical clerk and storeman. I was trained that my twice daily sweeps of the building for radiation counts with an alpha detector was NOT to determine external hazard. The purpose was to determine and locate alpha emitting flecks resultant from radium decay. These, I was told, presented as an internal hazard if taken into the body. The drill when such a fleck was located was to clean it up.
If nuclear industry persists in its phoney baloney about external hazard only and the lie that reactors are safer than bananas, I will continue to disbelieve any word it utters. For most of what I have heard since March 2011 has been, according to the military text book I have (and which I typed), in contradiction to the facts. An internalised Cs** fleck or Sr** fleck or Pu** fleck is NOT like a CT Scan. A CT scan is 1. External 2. Momentary 3. Controlled. 4. Has a medical purpose in which it is determined benefit outweighs risk 5. Requires patient consent in response to a diagnosed medical need.
On the other hand, nuclear pollution produces medical need, it does not solve medical need, it has no individual consent and is caused by people who apply laboratory discoveries at the industrial level operating on a profit/subsidy/share value basis rather than according to purely Health Physics dictates which mandates that radioactive sources MUST REMAIN SEALED. Fukushima is one vast continuing unsealing of massive amounts radioactive souces.
If Fukushima was a lab, it would be delicenced and its managers prosecuted.
It is quite useless for laboratory radio chemists at Chalmers University and elsewhere to try to tell me Fukushima nuclear power plant complies with the regulations they themselves must obey. Nuke plants are industrial/military facilities. As the coming election results in Japan will show, a primary purpose for the existence of the Japanese nuke plants is not to enable the boiling of kettles in kitchens in Japan. It is to create military substances.
If Chalmers University radio chemistry lab had caused this it would be an international pariah.
Yet it defends the unsealing of sources on a massive scale at Fukushima.
Barry at Adelaide University says the answer is little plastic bags. Well, off you go Barry, with several container ships full of little plastic bags, and gather the shit back up. Pam will help you.
And another thing: You experts out there being paid to inform us, don’t just mention the primary fission products. Mention, in passing at least the decay cascade. OK?
Start obeying the rules, and I might show you some respect. So far – zip from me. Which really is pretty sad. Isn’t it?
KEEP YOUR SOURCES SEALED. NO EXCUSES. AND NONE OF THIS: “Minimisation is a type of deception involving denial coupled with rationalisation in situations where complete denial is implausible. It is the opposite of exaggeration.”
“The explosion of the reactors was completely normal and safe”.
SBS voice over by a Canberra “expert” in March 2011.
Now, excuse the rest of the world for thinking the extreme opposite in the face of such blatant bullshit. It was a massive unsealing of sources and was explosively and thermally dispersed. And it is still continuing to some extent.
Who knows where the coriums are and their exact disposition ? Come experts, hands up. We pay you to know this stuff.
Not a nice polite person am I? Truth does not result from personality or from sophisticated pretense. Often the converse is true.
This graph shows the increase in disease due to fission fallout in a population which had previously
enjoyed a disease rate below that of the national average. After decades of nuclear activity are there any such control populations left which actually the effect of nuclear emissions? Probably not. And probably, in the great scheme of things, that’s taken as a divine sign by nuclear industry to keep going.