Dr Hida and the Exclusion of Japanese victims of Fallout

The view that the 1945 atomic bombs detonated over Japan did not produce fallout is false. These two bombs are the only which the United States has not released cloud tracking information.

As a consequence, the residual radioactivity within the bombs cities has been ascribed to shorter lived neutron activation products.

Members of the Australian component of the British Commonwealth Occupation Forces of Japan were stationed in Kure and Hiroshima. Their experience of health problems and premature death does not agree with the official stance that the bombings cities were safe.

Here is the record of all cloud chase operations conducted by the United States and released to the public:





FORWARD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

LIST OF CHARTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . .v

CHRONOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

I.TESTS PRECEDING MANNED SAMPLING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Operation TRINITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Operation CROSSROADS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
Sampling CROSSROADS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
Evaluation of CROSSROADS Sampling . . . . . . . 13
(original link: https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/01/13/who-were-the-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-bomb-downwinders-what-paths-did-the-bomb-clouds-take/

Note the gap between Trinity and Crossroads. There is no release of cloud chasing or observation of the paths taken by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki clouds.

At this point the weapon effect being studied here is fallout, not blast. For all intents and purposes, in regard to people who entered the bombed cities after the bomb, and who were not present in the cities at the time of the nuclear detonations, the blast effect and immediate gamma and neutron pulses are irrelevant. The situation post bomb is not exactly the same as the situation for people off site but down winder of reactor disasters. Nuclear authorities condemn people for likening the situation in areas around Fukushima to the situation in the bombed Japanese at the time of detonation. And for associating the explosion of the reactors with the explosion of bombs. As everyone actually knows, the explosion of three reactors were not nuclear blasts, rather the explosions were equivalent or the same as the explosion of radiological weapons. The fire at fuel pool four on 15 March 2011 was a radiological event of global consequences as confirmed by the IAEA. One of the lingering effects of atomic bombs is fallout. One of the effects of reactor explosions is fallout. The composition and amounts of fallout from reactors is different to that produced by bombs. The Japanese government states that the fallout from the Fukushima reactors, citing only the figure for cesium 137 is equal to the fallout from 168 Hiroshima sized atomic bombs. There is no doubt there is fallout present as a consequence of Fukushima’s nuclear disaster.

However, we know that observation aircraft were present in the air over Hiroshima, as established by the following source: http://city.youth-service.com/03database/0106.pdf
Document title and authors: “Height Estimation of Hiroshima A-bomb Mushroom Cloud
from Photos” Masashi Baba, Fumio Ogawa , Shinsaku Hiura and Naoki Asada
Department of Intelligent Systems, Graduate School of Information Sciences, Hiroshima City University, 3-4-1 Ozuka-Higashi, Asa-Minami-ku, Hiroshima 731-3194, Japan.

These authors state: “we have attempted to measure the cloud height from existing photos taken at the time from airplanes and from the ground. First, we determined the precise locations where the pictures were taken. Next, we approximated the three dimensional shape of the cloud using multiple spheroids. Finally, we obtained measurements of the height and
width of the mushroom cloud from the approximated cloud shape. Our experimentalresults suggested that the height reached a maximum of about 16 km.”

The authors inform us of the consequences of previous, inaccurate estimates of the maximum cloud height of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb cloud: “In 1945, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima caused extensive damage. To this day, many people continue to suffer from sequelae related to the event. The affected area has not been specified accurately. There are numerous radiation victims who have never received compensation for their injuries. A weather simulation of the rainfall patterns has been performed in the region where Black Rain fell from the mushroom cloud. In fact, the region estimated by the simulation is narrower than the actual affected area (Maruyama and Yoshikawa 1987). This discrepancy comes from an incorrect presumption of the mushroom cloud height.

So far, various attempts have been made todetermine the height of the mushroom cloud. We
In 1945, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima caused extensive damage. To this day,
many people continue to suffer from sequelae related to the event. The affected area has not
been specified accurately. There are numerous radiation victims who have never received
In 1945, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima caused extensive damage. To this day,
many people continue to suffer from sequelae related to the event. The affected area has not
been specified accurately. There are numerous radiation victims who have never received
compensation for their injuries. A weather simulation of the rainfall patterns has been performed
in the region where Black Rain fell from the mushroom cloud. In fact, the region estimated by
the simulation is nar”rower than the actual affected area (Maruyama and Yoshikawa 1987). This
discrepancy comes from an incorrect presumption of the mushroom cloud height.
So far, various attempts have been made to determine the height of the mushroom cloud. We
have estimated the cloud height and width using a technique called synthetic analysis (Ogawa et
al 2010). However, in their work, the height was estimated only by visual inspection and
quantitative evaluation of the accuracy was not discussed. In this paper, we have estimated the
height and width of the mushroom cloud using geometric camera calibration methods. Camera
parameters such as the position and the focal length have been determined from the coastline or
the horizon. Subsequently, we have approximated the shape of the mushroom cloud and have
obtained the height and the width of the cloud. compensation for their injuries. A weather simula
tion of the rainfall patterns has been performed in the region where Black Rain fell from the mushroom cloud. In fact, the region estimated by the simulation is narrower than the actual aff
ected area (Maruyama and Yoshikawa 1987). This discrepancy comes from an incorrect presumption of the mushroom cloud height.

The Washington Post confirms the identity of one of the US photographers who monitored and photographed the Hiroshima bomb cloud for an extended period as being “Russell E. Gackenbach, who flew with Corliss aboard Necessary Evil…” Washington Post, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/shortstack/2010/02/author_admits_he_was_duped_by.html

Wikipedia describes the “Necessary Evil” as : “Necessary Evil, also referred to as Plane #91, was the name of a B-29 Superfortress (B-29-45-MO 44-86291, Victor number 91) participating in the atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945.

Assigned to the 393d Bomb Squadron, 509th Composite Group, it was used as a camera plane to photograph the explosion and effects of the bomb, and to carry scientific observers. At the time of the attack the plane was not named and was known only by its 393d Victor number. The mission was flown by crew B-10, with Captain George Marquardt as aircraft commander.

The crew regularly assigned to this airplane in turn flew another on the Nagasaki mission on August 9, 1945, the B-29 Big Stink, though without their aircraft commander, who was ill….” Wikipedia gives the names of the crew as:

“Crew B-10 (normally assigned to Up An’ Atom)

Capt. George W. Marquardt, Aircraft Commander
2nd Lt. James M. Anderson, Co-Pilot
2nd Lt. Russell Gackenbach, Navigator
Capt. James W. Strudwick, Bombardier
T/Sgt. James R. Corliss, Flight Engineer
Sgt. Warren L. Coble, Radio Operator
Sgt. Joseph M. DiJulio, Radar Operator
Sgt. Melvin H. Bierman, Tail Gunner
Sgt. Anthony D. Capua, Jr., Assistant Engineer/Scanner
(Civilian) Prof. Bernard Waldman, Project Alberta, camera operator”


Baba et al in the course of their investigations quote the following individual and his information: “Mr. Gackenbach, the photographer of the images in Figure 2, gave the following testimony regarding the conditions at the time.
1) The photos were taken approximately one minute after the explosion.
2)The altitude was about 30,000 feet (~9.144 km).
3)The camera used for photo was an “Agfa 620”.

Though Gackenbach is listed as the Navigator of the Necessary Evil, and Prof Bernard Waldman as the camera operator, both still and movie film was taken over Hiroshima by the US. As the authors state that Gackenbach took the following photos, it can be confirmed on this basis that the aircraft mentioned throughout the Baba et al paper are in fact United States aircraft and not Japanese aircraft.

It can be confirmed therefore that the United States did undertake cloud monitoring of the Hiroshima Fallout cloud, were aware of weather conditions and wind direction and were in fact in possession of the facts which would allow for an accurate fallout cloud cloud path. This information has never been published by the United States. As a result, as Baba et al confirm: “In 1945, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima caused extensive damage. To this day, many people continue to suffer from sequelae related to the event. The affected area has not been specified accurately. There are numerous radiation victims who have never received compensation for their injuries. A weather simulation of the rainfall patterns has been performed in the region where Black Rain fell from the mushroom cloud. In fact, the region estimated by the simulation is narrower than the actual affected area (Maruyama and Yoshikawa 1987). This discrepancy comes from an incorrect presumption of the mushroom cloud height.”

Even though the Japanese people are still today trying to accurately determine the nature and precise parameters of the atomic weapons used against them, it can be expected that the United States has in fact held these facts since 1945. This is my opinion. What is not in doubt is the time it takes for nuclear victims to recieve justice.

Note that the nature of exposure examined by Baba et al is that of exposure to fallout by Black Rain. In 2012, in the wake of Fukushima, the Japanese government rejected the claim by many Black Rain victims, that the Black Rain affected areas of Hiroshima expanded.
This was despite findings to the contrary by the Japanese courts.

It is here that the work of Dr. Hida is very important. For the illnesses he has documented since 1945 and which he continues to treat are not acknowledged by any nuclear authority, yet similar disease patterns are documented in many parts of the world which have been the target of nuclear fallout. Including the US Downwinders. Including the people living down wind of Chernobyl.

The atomic bomb victims Dr Hida treats and advocates on behalf of were in the main, not subject to the blast effects or initial gamma/neutron pulse of the atomic bomb. They were subject only to fallout. They were subject to neutron activation products in cases where they entered Hiroshima City and Nagasaki at the relevant distances. In the suburbs of Hiroshima affected by the Black Rain, the components in fallout as vectored by the Black Rain are the vectors of harm. The illness description presented by Dr Hida and as exhibited by his patients, the fallout survivors, defy those medical definitions provided by nuclear industry, which encourages debate and argument about cancers but which does not provide accurate information about the fate of fallout victims living in the contaminated regions caused by the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.

In addition the myth of little fallout in Japan from the 1945 atomic bombings persis.

There was nothing about the nature of the Hiroshima bomb cloud as photographed above by the US cloud chase and observation B29 “Necessary Evil” which would render it a cloud which did not follow the physical laws of fallout deposition as described in US Armed Forces publications and AEC documents of the era and later.

The evidence is a bomb cloud existed in Hiroshima, the trajectory of which was subject to the same rules as first determined by observation, cloud chasing and ground monitoring at Trinity. This is confirmed by the AFSC HISTORICAL PUBLICATION SERIES 61-142-1 HISTORY OF AIR FORCE
ATOMIC CLOUD SAMPLING cited above and other sources. The evidence is that the height of the detonation (as distinct from the height achieve by the top of the fallout cloud subsequent to its formation) was not calculated to minimise fallout but rather to maximise blast effect so as to present an overwhelming picture of physical destruction.It was within the vast fields of physical destruction that the radiological effects were hidden, to await those who possessed trained eyes to see with. The massive physical destruction however is not a parameter which determines fallout. Fallout may occur with or without vast destruction being caused or evident.

We are left then a profound lack of data by the United States in this matter. This lack of data has persisted since 1945. As a result of this lack of data, the Japanese people have had to recalculate and remeasure their bombed cities and a lobby a national government which has existed as an autonomous one only since 1952, and which, as the previously occupied national authority, fully cooperated with US censorship in these matters.

The fallout survivors of the extended area revealed by later Japanese research were finally rebuffed by the Japanese government in 2012, when the extension of the fallout area of Hiroshima as revealed by modern Japanese research was rejected by the national government in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. This, despite previous success at the local level and within the national court system of Japan. Japan’s highest judges admit that the US fallout data relating to the 1945 atomic bombings of Japan is INADEQUATE AND SHOULD BE CORRECTED.

Further, in rejecting the expansion of the fallout affected areas of Japan, the National government of Japan stated that the survivors of this fallout in the suburbs of Japan (ie survivors who were distant form the bomb detonation) were not suffering radiological effects, but radiophobia and war trauma. Neither of these excludes the biochemical basis for radiation fatigue as admitted by modern radiology and health physics.

The record shows that a large fallout cloud persisted over Hiroshima, and that it could be expected to conform to the documented patterns of movement and deposition as outlined in specialist US Military publications issued from 1946 unitl the present time. The most famous of these publications being ‘Report on Project Sunshine”, 1954. The potential for fallout both within the target cities and at places below the trajectory of the bombs was predictable to the USA and had been since July 1945. A subordinate of Groves, Shields Warren, concerned at the fallout being deposited over populated areas of New Mexico wrote a memo to Groves in which he urged future test shots take place only were a radius of 150 miles around the test site was devoid of people. See: http://www.dannen.com/decision/trin-rad.html for a copy of the actual memo. Where ever nuclear weapons are exploded in the atmosphere occurs, there is fallout. There is no way to prevent this. In the end the US eventually agreed to the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1961. If they had the skill to prevent bomb fallout in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, what skill the US bomb program suddenly forget about in all earlier and later atmospheric bomb detonations? Or could it be there was fallout in Japan 1945, and that the cloud paths left trails of contamination within the cities in paths across Japan?

Given the actions taken in areas many miles from Trinity Site by Shields Warren on the orders of General Groves, given the detailed cloud chasing undertaken in regard to Trinity, given the emergency “city” set up at a distant military facility by Groves in case towns miles from Trinity had to be evacuated, it is rational to think that the test shot at Trinity provided a routine for atomic bomb detonations which the USA would also implement in relation to the bombs it would detonate over Japan. A land which the US was to occupy from 1945 until 1952. Tracking of the fallout clouds was the least which was done at every other nuclear bomb detonation conducted by the United States. In August 1945, as seen above, US aircraft hung around Hiroshima and Nagasaki without challenge from Japanese forces and documented the bombs. What stopped the US from tracking the clouds? Nothing. The precedent had been established at Trinity and still, I believe, US cloud track data from 1945 is missing from the public record. This ommission aid the myth that no fallout fell upon Japan in 1945.

End of Part 1

I have described the August – September 1945 Japanese surveys of Hiroshima which resulted in the discovery and mapping of fission products in Hiroshima elsewhere. One of the most accessible text is that written by Prof. Sakae Shimizu and published in 1982. Like all of the other Japanese survey documents, Shimizu’s report was confiscated by the US Occupation Forces. Shimizu’s original September 1942 has never been returned and the last I heard it remained uncatalogued and mixed in with Unit 731 (!) documents at the Librarey of Congress in the USA.

From the 1970s the USA began returning Japanese Human Body Parts, soil samples and some previously confiscated documents. From that time on a series of Japanese surveys of the fallout fields in Japan were undertaken. A couple of these are list below:

On May 1973, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs held a ceremony for
the return of Hiroshima and Nagasaki A-bomb records confiscated by the U.S.
during Occupation (1945-52). (Source: Atomic Bomb Museum – “The Pursuit
of Peace”. http://www.atomicbombmuseum.org/5_timetable.shtml)

In 2003 Yoko Fujikawa, Kiyoshi Shizuma and Satoru Endo, of the Research
Reactor Institute, Osaka, reported their study of samples of previously
returned 1945 Hiroshima soil. Their paper, entitled “Investigation of the Fate of U-235 from the Hiroshima A Bomb”, is available at:


On 9 August 1945 Yoshio Nishina and his companions from the Institute of
Physical and Chemical Research collected soil samples in Hiroshima. These
samples were used in the 2003 study. The Hiroshima Peace Memorial
Museum account of the collection of the soil samples is given at:
http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/virtual/VirtualMuseum_e/exhibit_e/exh0307_e/exh03074_e.html http://irpa11.irpa.net/pdfs/7c4.pdf

Those who say that the bombed cities did not suffer neutron activation product creation and did not suffer fallout are incorrect.

Since the 1970s, a number of surveys have been conducted in Hiroshima and Nagasaki which confirm the presence of fallout due to deposition from the August 1945 atomic bombs. Some of these surveys include:


Cesium-137 in Placentae, Urine, Food and Rain in Hiroshima. Papers, Health Physics. 22(3):251-256, March 1972. Takeshita, K.; Antoku, S.; Sunayashiki, T.; Tabuchi, A. Health Phys. 1989 Dec;57(6):1013-6.

Fallout in the hypocenter area of the Hiroshima atomic bomb.Shizuma K, Iwatani K,
Hasai H, Hoshi M.Faculty of Engineering, Hiroshima University, Japan.
Health Phys. 1990 May;58 (5):591-6.

Measurement of 239Pu in soil and plants in the Nishiyama District of Nagasaki. Okajima S, Shimasaki T, Kubo T.Atomic Disease
Institute, Nagasaki University School of Medicine, Japan.
J Radiat Res (Tokyo). 1991 Mar;32 Suppl:32-9.

Studies of radioactivity produced by the Hiroshima atomic bomb: 2. Measurements of fallout radioactivity.Hasai H, Hoshi M, Yokoro K.Faculty of Engineering, Hiroshima University, Japan.

137Cs Concentration in Soil Samples from an Early Survey of Hiroshima Atomic Bomb and Cumulative Dose Estimation from the Fallout. Papers, Health Physics. 71(3):340-346, September 1996.
Shizuma, Kiyoshi; Iwatani, Kazuo; Hasai, Hiromi; Hoshi, Masaharu; Oka, Takamitsu; Okano, Masaharu

Nippon Genshiryoku Kenkyujo JAERI,Conf(2003) Uranium isotope analyses of soil samples collected from Nisshoen, Hiroshima-Implication on the fate of U-235 discharged from the Hiroshima A-bomb Accession number;03A0757641 Author; FUJIKAWA Y(Kyoto Univ., Osaka, Jpn) SHIZUMA K(Hiroshima Univ., Higashihiroshima, Jpn) ENDO S(Hiroshima Univ., Higashi-hiroshima, Jpn) IKEDA E(Kyoto Univ., Osaka, Jpn) FUKUI M(Kyoto Univ., Osaka, Jpn) Journal Title;Nippon Genshiryoku Kenkyujo JAERI,Conf Journal Code:L2150A ISSN: VOL.;NO.;PAGE.314-319(2003)
Figure&Table&Reference;FIG.5, REF.8 Pub. Country;Japan Language;English.

I conclude that the evidence shows nuclear fallout fell upon the cities which suffered atomic attack in 1945.

I conclude further that no US nuclear weapon deviates in its behaviour to such a degree that the military documents describing the creation and behaviour of nuclear fallout clouds cease to apply. Such would require a new manual and technical description for such weapons.

No manual exists for nuclear weapons which do not generate fallout.
As far as published by the United States.

If the United States had solved the problem of fallout in 1945, then it would still be testing atomic bombs in the air today, whilst the bombs behaved in a manner the US claimed for the bombs used against Japan, that, without depositing fallout over the local area, the breoad, the national area and the international level.

I do not believe the bombs used against were unique. Rather they were prototypes which were improved upon. All such weapons generate fallout contaminated fields both locally and over a broad area.

I find there was fallout in Japan in 1945 and that the USA and its Allies have not been open in this matter.

As the authors listed above prove by scientific analysis that fallout residues are in evidence in the cities subject to atomic attack in 1945, did the fresh fallout – much more radioactive than its residual remains proven to exist in the later surveys listed above show.

The Atomic Bomb Casualty Committee and its successor organisation had a singular focus – the study of the survivors of the ATOMIC BOMB DETONATIONS.

Where people were in areas not affected by blast, heat and immediate radiation, but who were none the less living in more distant but still fallout affected surburbs, there has grown up, I am led to believe, a incongruence between the effects stated to have suffered by bomb survivors and those effects suffered by the survivors of the fallout fields.

And here things become blurred. For many reasons.

They have been blurred for decades and they are blurred in a manner similar to the blurring of the effects of Chernobyl. The official pronouncements do not match the experience of the dwellers of the fallout fields in the former Soviet Republics. Local doctors report chronic ill health which deviate from the official view that cancer is the only outcome from exposure to chronically contaminated environs.

And chief amoung the chronic illness is a state of unwellness, of suspectibility to infectious illness. And in the case of Chernobyl, the local doctors report small babies, and genetic abnormalities.

But a chief symptom in this constellation of bodily effects is fatigue. It pre exists the recurrent infections. Is there anything in the modern medical literature which admits a mechanism for radiation fatigue?

I have in fact already listed then in earlier, related posts, and I shall link them here





. http://www.cfids-cab.org/MESA/Pall.pdfhttp://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/15/17/5534.full.pdf

Two articles which report the chronic ill health evident in inhabitabited areas chronically contaminated by the Chernobyl fallout are:

https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/pbs-news-hour-revisiting-chernobyl-non-cancer-illness-assoc-w-rad/ USA source.

UK source.

Did this corollary of illness strike people in Japan ? Is there evidence of an environment in Japan which was similar to that experienced by the Chernobyl downwinders?

I believe so. The areas are defined as the black rain affected areas of Hiroshima, but in reality are not confined to the narrow Japanese government definition of the area.

What have these areas of Europe and Japan in common? They are areas of sources of internal contamination. The areas are untouched by blast. In fact, they are remote from the blast sites by some distance. The Chernobyl blast and fire ensured the lofting of an immense cloud of core material. The Atomic bombs generated highly radioactive residue in concentrated form which even over an extended area posed the hazards as foreseen by Einstein in his 1939 letter to Roosevelt.

Though the radioactivity of the atomic bomb fallout rapidly declines, the early fallout is prodigious in its danger. Once one has recieved the dose, the dose remains recieved. There is no way to remove that recieved dose. The lifetime dose continues to accrue on top. Living in a decreasing radiation field does not result in subtraction from the lifetime dose, the lifetime dose, obviously continues to accrue at the rate set by the actual expsoure.

Shimizu became ill in September 1945 after surveying Hiroshima. He was bed ridden for a month. He had been subjected to fresh neutron activation products and his own research confirms, he was also exposed to beta emitters, largely, fallout.

Many people did not survive their entry into the bombed cities as they sought loved ones. Even though they did not witness the bombs, they died in the fallout and activation product zones. And though the official US record of the black rain is most reluctant, in fact people sickned and died from the black rain, miles from the hypo centre.

On this point, a recent telephone conversation with Avon Hudson is instuctive. As we discussed the plight of Australian nuclear veterans Avon explained that the government health survey completed here in 2006 lumped nuclear veterans together. Those who had duties in the blast and close in fallout areas, those who stood with their backs to the blast a few miles from the bombs, were lumped in with those who never left Maralinga village. For sure, they are all nuclear veterans in my eyes.

But among themselves, the veterans see two groups. Those who saw the bombs and those who didnt. Those who saw the bombs and then went into the hot zones. Those who stayed further out.

It is a similar situation of sub sets of cohorts as evidenced in Japan in 1945. Those who saw the bombs, and those who didnt.

Avon, citing data originated from the original sources documents by Major Alan Batchelor indicates that while the whole group – the combined group- of nuclear veterans suffer a 14 % or more (depending on type) additional risk of cancer over non nuclear veterans, as found by the government health survey, that figure for those who witnessed the bombs and who went into the hot zones is closer to an additional risk factor of 60%

Though in any case the Australian government flatly refuses to accept the bombs caused any additional risk, falling back on the factors of petrol fumes in the desert, smoking and booze as the causes. In the 1950s, the Australian lifestyle was pretty uniform. The “New Australians” were few actually at that time, and the british consumption habits of smoke booze and petrol exposure was pretty uniform. So the theory of the government of what, apart from the bomb exposure, caused the nuclear veterans to be the nuclear veteran cohort was the bombs, Mr Howard.

However I will say this: It is my experience, largely from speaking to nuclear veterans from time to time, that when I ask them about their health, they are have been for years, tired and ill.

The ones who have actually died, and did die at the time remain an important subject to remember and investigate.

So, apart from the Japanese bomb “veterans” who survived, is their a group of people who survive who did not witness the bomb but who lived among the fallout and neutron activation products ? Yes there is. Are they well ? Largely, No.

What is the nature of their illness? What was and what are the components of it?

The historical record holds clues. Hersey for example published his account, “Hiroshima” in 1946. He recounts how the Japanese doctors passed notes to each other, pocketing them and binding them into little booklets, which described the diseases the Occupying force censored.

The Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum reports similar things.

People died not from the direct effects of the bomb, but after entering the hot zone days, weeks and months after the bombs. Australian troops entered Hiroshima in 1046. One widow has recieved compensation from the Australian government due to the death of her husband, who, the court accepted, had suffered terminal illness later in life.

By and large, long before the onset of terminal disease, the men who returned to Australia from service in radiation affected areas of Japan feeble in health. Over the years their health did not improve, but worsened. They carried two things. A tendency toward ill health, and an apparent vulnerability to cancers. By the 1990s, the Atomic ExServicemens’ Association (the only Australian east coast group to admit the Hiroshima Occupation force members among the nuclear veteran ranks) inform me that 90% had died. A large part of the tragedy is the diminished quality of life they endured for decades, as a result of their Hiroshima/Kure service.

And so, as the reader will see, a uniformity to the suffering among victims of both bomb fallout and reactor fallout. Though, like the TEPCO workers, it is the bomb survivors who suffer a range of effects, and who might die, on the numbers, first, the fallout only survivors suffer too, and have just cause.

In addition, any illness of the body, any chronic condition, is refuted by the experts for the definition of radiation sickness includes the caveat that it must be caused by whole body external dose.

This is an inadequate definition, and for those invovled and whose health and quality of life and ability to work has been threatened or destroyed, the conventional official view is thus a profoundly ignorant one. Made worse by politicians who set the rules with no sense of global view.

Living with extreme fatigue and suspectibility to infectious disease, a suspectiblity to metabolic disease, must sound boring to those who set the rules. It is easier to consult DSM IV and label such surviviors as “mentally weak” than it would be for the policitians in charge (so they claim) of nuclear industry to look again at the medical record.

Let’s do that. Let’s act for a split second as if in this matter elected officials did their job and actually did some investigation.

Let’s start in 1941. I go back this far because the objection will be, from modern radiology, that radiation fatigue requires a treatment dose level external exposure. However, at the dawn of nuclear medicine, three substances were being administered to people suffering various lethal and painful afflictions. And, following the discovery of the neutron in 1932 (Chadwick) artificial substances were created by cyclotron. Iodine 131 (Seaborg, Hamilton), Phosphorous 32 (John Lawrence, L. A. Erf) Strontium 89. (Charles Pecher)

The patients were all volunteers. War and the Manhattan Project has not intervened in the early days.

The setting of the optimal dose – the dose most beneficial and least immediately harmful – was fraught. There were failures. None the less, in the course of investigations Pecher in conjunctions with Paul Aebersold asked the question. The significant question, to what external x ray whole body is an injection of a millicurie amount of Strontium 89. A potent, monochromatic beta emitter which decays to a stable decay product, an isotope of Ytrrium. Simple to calculate the dose. They provide an answer as to what value, what multiplier, Sr89 possesses compared with exernal x whole body.

Pecher describes the result he and Aebersold oberserved and calculated when translating the effectivesness of Sr89 as an internal emitter into whole body X ray equivalent dose :

“Pecher wrote: “the problem has been studied with respect to: (1) the distribution of irradiation after the administration of radioactive strontium, (2) the method of administration of radio-strontium, (3) the chemical toxicity of strontium on the tissues, (4) the effect of radioactive strontium on the tissues, and (5) the dosage of the substance.” [19] “ The effect of radio -strontium has been studied in mice, rabbits, and human beings…..Under the treatment of large doses of radioactive strontium (59 to 200 microcuries) to mice, a definite leucopenia has been observed. Two weeks after the administration of approximately 180 microcuries to each of five mice, their average white cell count was 4200 cells per cm., whereas the normal value for mice is approximately 14,000. Nevertheless, the effect on the blood picture is much smaller than that of a similar amount of radiophosphorus.
Some transitory leucopenia and anemia observed in a patient with metastatic prostate carcinoma and in another………… after a total administration of 8 and 5 millicuries of radio-strontium, respectively, must be attributed to the treatment….Dosage: The dosage of radio-strontium when administered therapeutically is still a difficult and largely empirical problem. The idea has been to give as much strontium as possible without producing any serious damage to the marrow… Important information has been given by the radioactivity determination on the tissues of an adult female who died 3 days after the intravenous injection of a simple dose of 0.3 millicurie of Sr lactate (170mgm. Sr, August 19, 1940). The activity of the bones ranges from 0.05 to 0.15 microcuries per gram wet weight….Similar values were observed in a patient with multiple myeloma who died two months after receiving 1.7 millicuries of radio-strontium per gram of tissue in one day gives approximately the same ionisation as a dose of 37 r of X rays, according to Dr. Aebersold, we may calculate that the total dose given to the bones if no Sr was eliminated from the skeleton would be equivalent to 500 to 1,500 r. These values are obviously much too high since strontium is continuously eliminated from the skeleton, as is evident from the other autopsy data. We may assume that an amount of radiation equivalent to 200 to 600 r is given to the bony tissues when 1 millicurie of Sr is intravenously injected in an adult. This rough calculation is only interesting as an indication of the order of the magnitude of the dose of radio-strontium that should be necessary to obtain a therapeutic effect on bone tumours. ” End Quote.

“Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and
Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment
of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation Laboratory of the
University of California, Berkeley, University of California Publications in
Pharmacology. Editor: C. D. Leake, G. A. Allen, T.C. Daniels, M.H. Soley. Volume 2
No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text. Submitted by Editors July 21, 1942,
Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge
University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C. D. Leake, editor.” Published

This publication remains copyright property of the University of California, and it is quoted here only for study purposes in the public interest.

As the full text is not available online, the precusor article by Pecher is and can be obtained from the publishers here: http://ebm.rsmjournals.com/content/46/1/86.abstract

(This openness regarding Pecher’s work is refreshing and should have coninued from 1945 not 1973.)

In short then, Pecher with Aebersold report that “We may assume that an amount of radiation equivalent to 200 to 600 r is given to the bony tissues when 1 millicurie of Sr is intravenously injected in an adult. This rough calculation is only interesting as an indication of the order of the magnitude of the dose of radio-strontium that should be necessary to obtain a therapeutic effect on bone tumours.”

Ok. as the strontium 89 Pecher used is 28,000 times more radioactive than the equivalent mass of radium, which physical amount of Strontium 89 internalised into the body would be sufficient to produce the syndrome known to modern radiology as “Radiation Fatigue” due to cytokine release as a result of the internal exposure.

Can anyone answer this question minus the nuker voodoo?

Over what time span living in a fallout field would sufficient insult result in constant cytokine release and result inflamatory responses produce chronic ill health?

We ordinary people look at Australian nuclear veterans and other nuclear victims and see a set of symptoms. We look at Japan post 1945 and see the same. We look at the people of Chernobyl and see the same. We look at Nevada and Utah and see the same.

We turn to the modern medical record and find a rational description of the same underlying condition as explained by radiology and oncology.

We turn again to the old medical record and find that a vanishing (how big is a millicurie of Sr89 ? it is absolutely weening. Can you see it? ) small physical amount when placed inside the body irradiates to the same dose value as “200 to 600 r” . Now the r unit as used under E.O. Lawrence at the old Crocker lab is not the rem, it is not the rad, and quite possibly it is not the roetgen either. I will leave that to the esteemed radiologists who are so quick to race to open DSM IV in their descriptions of people who show symptoms of ill health and fatigue after being forced by circumstance and governments to live in supposedly “low level” fallout fields.

And who are quite quick to ascribed “radiation fatigue” only in the medical setting and only where the dose vector is external x. The response of the initially well is masked when serious disease becomes present. So it is difficult. However, if psycho babble is the preferred option of the world nuclear organisation and its agents, so be it. However, after starting my investigations into fallout at the request of the National Secretary of the Australian Atomic ExServicemens’ Association, I can now report with some certainty, yea, fallout is pretty bad Terry old son. It can make people sick.

I would ask people to think. Do radiologists acting for any government, especially at this time, the Japanese government, have the right to publically misuse DSMIV and the priniciples of psychiatry prior to properly consulting the medical history of the physical effects of internal emitters as reported in the pre war US experimental medical record? I think not.

I think what is happening is an abuse of medicine, from Nevada, to French Polynesia to
Australia, to Chernobyl and Japan.

Now, what does a medical doctor on the scene since August 1945 have to say about the victims of fallut present in Japan since that time?

What does Dr Hida say?

I have dealt with the example of 1 fission product. There are many. The concommittment dose adds to the accumulated dose. As the fallout field diminishes in power, the rate of accretion diminish, but the accumulated dose still grows, though at slower rate. Ignoring a global syndrome which I will show exists in significant fallout fields around the world, nuclear authorities give pronouncements of safety in those areas even as people sicken, and suffer chronic ill health. And this reality is hidden by the imposed debate about when we die and how. About risk while the actuality of a greatly diminished lives and quality of live exists around the world.

Noone was supposed to live permanently on the nuclear battlefield but this is what vasts tracks of the planet have been turned into. Deserts of deceit.

%d bloggers like this: