5/2 Discussion on Helen Caldicott's Opinion on the NYT

Hello Helen Caldicott fans.

Videos of Helen Caldicott were posted on TRL facebook community page for a number of times (yes, exactly the same video).  Here's the thread on the article (Opinion) that appeared on the New York Times in the end of April.  For Caldicott's press confrence video, refer to Part1 and Part 2.

Hope you find them helpful--well, at least, able to zip your mouth on TRL page.




Tom Schinaman

TRL and Frank, could you comment on this: "Unsafe at Any Dose--Doctors must do more than treat cancers. We must enter the nuclear debate."? There are some very dire-sounding, sweeping statements in this piece that strike me as running counter to what you've been saying here. While the piece is suspiciously void of citations/evidence supporting these statements, it is still alarming for a layperson to read this kind of thing in the MSM. Thanks very much.

James its the no threshold theory again, yes there is no "safe" level of radiation, but the risks lessen as does the levels of radiation. Also this author is an advocate against nuclear power.

Tokyo Radiation Levels It was written by Helen Caldicott and it's not an article, in the opinion pieces section for a reason. She's a known critic of anything nuclear and she gives false information to make people alarmed. She does things I can't agree with like protesting Australia's only nuclear reactor which is used for producing 100% of Australia's (nuclear) cancer treating medicine and other nuclear medicine (as well as research). I do agree with some of her opinions, especially on depleted uranium munitions used in war. But she's exaggerates to get her point across and it lowers her credibility substantially in my opinions. Please, no more Coldicott posts people as we've discussed her enough in the past.

Having said that Leukemia was the scourge of children after Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing, but they were exposed to a lot higher doses of contaminants. True more was release from Fukushima, but it mostly went out to sea. There's not a lot of balance to her writing.

Tom Thanks James & TRL. I understand that this is an opinion piece, not an article. @TRL, apologies, I haven't seen any of the previous discussions of Caldicott and certainly don't mean to perpetuate her views. I was hoping to hear your view on whether there is a scientific basis for her opinions, but if you've posted this info previously I'll look for it.

Tokyo Radiation Levels That's fine. There is some scientific basis for her views, but she over exaggerates the the proportions involved in this situation. If you eat 100g of plutonium you're probably going to die of cancer (or heavy metal toxicity), but she has said in the past that you will definitely get cancer from just 1 atom of plutonium in your lungs. (we are all exposed to plutonium in the soils all over the world thanks to nuclear test and not everyone has lung cancer).

Anna Tom, here's an interesting article written about Caldicott http://www.monbiot.com/2011/04/04/evidence-meltdown/ shame on the NY Times editors for scaremongering.

Charles Thanks for the balance.

Tokyo Radiation Levels The WHO suggested crisis limit is 2000 Bq/kg for water. Since you would get most of your Cs-137 from water and a human drinks about 3 liters a day + 2 kg for food, then 10,000 Bq a day is likely the limit. I've not been able to find a hard limit or a document giving a max but this is based on normal intake and the WHO limits factor in normal intakes. It's my best guess.

Guille Thanks a lot for your information, you can't imagine how I appreciate your work on facebook... I was just thinking about the 'limit' received by air. Anyway, it seems not to be so high and improving (the whole situation). From Tokyo, I LOVE JAPAN.

5/30 Helen Caldicott Video Discussion Part 2

Hello Helen Caldicott fans.

Videos of Helen Caldicott were posted on TRL facebook community page for a number of times (yes, exactly the same video). Here's a compilation of discussion on her claims--this is the May 30 version. Click HERE for Part 1. Looking for how the TRL community responded on her New York Times opinion article? Click HERE.

Hope you find them helpful--well, at least, able to zip your mouth on TRL page.

Alright, here is part 2.

Darius Smith

This women is highly regarded as the best in her field watch this ....

Dr Helen Caldicott - Fukushima Nuclear Disaster- You won't hear this on the Main Stream News.

Nuclear Facts you'd be more comfortable not knowing from a very clued up professional who will not be bought or intimidated into silence: Dr Helen Caldicott...

Monty Hi Darius, No disrespect intended but this is six weeks old and I think many of us here are looking for up-to-date information.

Donna Way to go! Yay to mankind. Idiots just freakin' killed us all!! Now, to just wait for the worst suffering ever. At least she's being HONEST with us! How sad. :(

Jill I don't know if she's being honest with us, but for the many times someone has posted this here, each time we've really, really um... ragged on it.

Daniel I stumbled upon her facebook page the other day. It explained a lot.

James also favorite quote from her video "DONT eat European food!"

Jill See? We're ragging!

Jon Can she back up the 1 million deaths from Chernobyl statement?

Antonio Dr Helen Caldicott doesn't seem to be very good when it comes to providing evidence of what she says, according to this guy: http://www.monbiot.com/2011/04/04/evidence-meltdown/ I don't support his pro-nuclear stance, but the article and the supporting correspondence between them make for a mildly amusing read.

Patrick meant to write has not been disputed ( in my editing admitted stuck there ) by the other side. They just dispute the cause.

Tokyo Radiation Levels Patrick: I believe the criticism of the book you're referring to (which is actually a collection of papers by Yablokov and others translated from Russian) is that they assume all the deaths from some particular cancers and diseases are all a result of Chernobyl. I wouldn't call it a fact that a million deaths are attributed to that. Especially since there was a massive effort in monitoring at risk populations for cancer.

Book: http://www.nyas.org/publications/annals/Detail.aspx?cid=f3f3bd16-51ba-4d7b-a086-753f44b3bfc1

Once again you contradict yourself. "The only real quickie fact seems to be that after Chernobyl there were additional million deaths that statistically should not have been there".

Patrick It's not a contradiction. There are million additional deaths ( even Monbiot did not dispute that ), but we do not know whether they were all, or how many, caused by Chernobyl. By the way, I never contradict myself :-). So: million additional deaths = fact. Cause of those deaths is open to interpretation.

Tokyo Radiation Levels There are not a million additional deaths. The researches of the paper are criticized for over attributing deaths to Chernobyl. If 100 people died in their bed last year and I put out a paper saying 100 people died in bed as a result of Chernobyl, I'm not saying that 200 people died.

@Patrick: "Increased deaths from a wide range of diseases – including many which have no known association with radiation" does not mean 985000 additional deaths. This is the article you're referring to, I take it: http://www.monbiot.com/2011/04/04/evidence-meltdown/

Ken Wow, she said don't eat European food!

Philip I have seen her before - full of inaccuracies and scare mongering. But let's look first at the (disputed) one million number: That works out to 40,000 / year over the past 25 years since Chernobyl, which is about a third higher than the annual death toll on US roads. Maybe we should shut down the US road system too. Chernobyl and Fukushima have added another carcinogen to the environment, along with the tons of chemicals, exhaust fumes, coal trailings, medical radiation. Her approach to exposing the dangers of nuclear power is not nearly as effective as it would be if she were reasoned and proportionate.

Me She said, "Don't eat European food." Now she's saying, "Dont' eat Japanese food?" Then maybe she'll start saying, "Don't eat Asian food." After all that, what's left is some bits of normal food from the rest of the world with growing number of genetically modified crops and food grown with a lot of fertilizers and insecticide. She's a doctor, what will she say on that? (Being sarcastic)

Jill Do not eat or drink ANYTHING, it will kill you! *wink*

David ‎"Don't eat European food" means she has hopelessly lost the plot... which is a real shame because what it serves to do is discredit some very interesting, and probably valid, scientific research which suggests that the environmental and medical cost of Chernobyl was and remains a great deal worse than official stats and which if it weren't for her BS might be gaining more traction and making the anti-nuclear case more bullet proofフォームの終わり

4/21 Discussion on Helen Caldicott Video

Hello Helen Caldicott fans.

Videos of Helen Caldicott were posted on TRL facebook community page for a number of times (yes, exactly the same video). Here's a compilation of discussion on her claims--this is the April 21st version. For part 2 (May 30 version), click HERE or "May 30." Looking for how the TRL community responded on her New York Times opinion article? Click HERE.

Hope you find them helpful--well, at least, able to zip your mouth on TRL page.

Alright, here is part 1.

Maria Aki Dougherty

GLOBAL RESEARCH. Dangers of Nuclear War. Press conference by Helen Caldicott in Montreal. March2011

Press conference by Helen Caldicott in Montreal: The Dangers of Nuclear War. March 18 2011.

Please watch, something you won't see on mainstream news.

Frank Sanns There are so many false statements in this video, I do not even know where to start. It is over sensational journalism.

Maria Aki I'm glad that you say so.

Frank Sanns She also finished it off nicely with her slip of a little misandry in the quote: "the reptilian mid-brain of some men's brains is pathological" .

Maria Aki not nice... mean. Hoping for the best.

Tokyo Radiation Levels Does it make you scared? Scared of nuclear energy and all the horrors it brings? That's what Caldicott basically does. Plays on your fears to push her anti-nuclear agenda. Basically, it's mostly a gross exaggeration without supporting facts. She say "you get a lump in your breast, how can you say it's not from Sr-90 you ate in a fish 20 years ago?". This is vague and sounds scary, but it's just playing on your fears. Like Frank said, too many false statements.

Frank Sanns @Maria, I did not mean an insult to you but this video is not based on scientific facts. Sure there are some facts mixed into there but this is classic smoke and mirrors. Let me give you an example, she mentions that cesium and strontium are around for 600 years. They have a 30 year half life. In 30 years there is half, 60 years a quarter, 90 one eight, 120 one sixteenth, 150 one thirty second up to 600 years which is around one millionth the starting amount. She is exaggerating the truth to make the numbers sound like forever. An the isotopes that she mentions that have millions of years of half life do not emit much radioactivity at all so they are no more dangerous than other heavy metals. Then she says don't eat any food in Europe. Chernobyl was in 1986, did the population of Europe disappear? No, last I looked it was fairly well populated.

Maria Aki Dougherty No, I meant that she is mean... I want to know what you have to say. I am not afraid. This is what is circulating on facebook. Don't really know what to think.  I am glad that you both are telling me that this is a gross exaggeration. Thank you.

Lynn Brogan Sounds like gross exaggeration to me too -compare wth other information about Tokyo radiation levels.If we believe this woman Japan would not have recovered from the atom bombs dropped in world war two

Chris I think most strongly anti-nuclear activists like to stir the pot at times like this... she is well-known for doing all she can to dirty an already taboo subject in nuclear energy so I wouldn't take anything from her on this subject as being gospel ��Ｓ � C � � ��� ��� ;mso-font-kerning:0pt'>
About internal dose and exposure the Europeans (1997): http://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/2/187.full.pdf

WHO report on chernobyl from 1986:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull283/28302792729.pdf

Paper critical of IAEA (2006):
http://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/2/187.full.pdf

Decidedly anti nuclear:
Fallout and genetic effects:
http://www.ratical.org/radiation/Chernobyl/RIGEinEuroandCNPPc.pdf

Health effects of Chernobyl slide:
http://www.chernobylcongress.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/fairlie.pdf

Tokyo Radiation Levels I just want to add that this is completely my opinion. I've read up on this quite a bit and I've come to this conclusion on my own. I don't want to mislead anyone into making a decision based solely on what I think. I'm also not saying this because I doubt myself either, but I just want to not pass myself off as THE definitive expert on this.

Romain Fair enough :-). I am no expert either. But it is by always listening and criticize each other in a positive manner that we can reconsider our position and understand things better, as long as it is driven by logic. Btw, I have read that radiation in building is 40% of the amount you would get outside. I am really wondering how they get those values considering the half-distance for gamma rays in material. Honestly, a 80% seems a lot more logical to me for typical Japanese houses. (some wood, very light metal plate, etc...) compared to a concrete based building (even in thise case, it really depends on the position of your apartment inside the building)