Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
The Corrupted Hiroshima Life Span Study

The Corrupted Hiroshima Life Span Study

Ratings: (0)|Views: 289 |Likes:
Published by pzimmer3
This document is an excerpt from the book "A Primer in the Art of Deception" describing how the study of the survivors of the bombing of Hiroshima is a deeply flawed scientific enterprise.
This document is an excerpt from the book "A Primer in the Art of Deception" describing how the study of the survivors of the bombing of Hiroshima is a deeply flawed scientific enterprise.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Science
Published by: pzimmer3 on Mar 17, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





 A Primer in the Art of  Deception
The Cult ofNuclearists, Uranium Weaponsand Fraudulent Scienceby Paul Zimmerman
Copies ofthis book can be ordered at www.du-deceptions.comor by contacting the author at either du-deceptions@yahoo.comor P.O. Box 145, Lyndonville, NY 14098
What follows is an excerpt from
 A Primer in the Art ofDeception
. The chapter in which itappears is entitled
The Most Heinous Crime in History: The Betrayal ofMankind by the Radiation Protection Agencies.
The Corrupted Hiroshima Life Span Study
By far, the most important ofthe six studies listed above is the Life Span Study(LSS)ofthe Japanese survivors ofthe bombing ofHiroshimaand Nagasaki. Ifyou open anytextbook on radiation safety, what you will find is a statement saying that what is knownabout the effects ofionizing radiation on populations is largely based on the data from Japan. The results ofthis study carry tremendous weight in the field ofradiation protec-tion. Currently accepted ideas ofthe risks to health from radiation exposure are based pri-marily on the results ofthis study. Consequently, the health ofall ofmankind is at stake,grounded on the reliability ofthis one study. Needless to say, the accuracy, validity and reli-ability ofthe Life Span Studyis open to question.The country that dropped the atomic bomb is the same country that funds and con-trols the Life Span Study. In 1950, five years after the bombing ofHiroshima, an excessiveincidence ofleukemiabegan appearing in the exposed population. In response, theGovernment ofthe United States established the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission(ABCC) with the mandate ofmonitoring the health ofthe surviving population. In 1975,control ofthe study was passed to the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) in Japan. Continued funding is divided between the government ofJapan and the govern-ment ofthe United States through the National Academy ofSciences under contract withthe Department ofEnergy.To fully appreciate the controversy that has arisen over the Life Span Study, it is nec-essary to revisit the horrific events ofHiroshimaand its aftermath. At 8:16:02 AM on themorning ofAugust 6, 1945, the “Little Boy” atomic bomb explodedover Hiroshima. Atthe moment ofdetonation, a flash ofgammaradiation and neutrons showered the targetarea and irradiated the entire population. In a microsecond, a thermal pulse baked thecity and ignited a conflagration, and a pressure wave smashed most structures tosmithereens. Exact casualty figures are not known. Perhaps 100,000 people died fromcombined injuries from the direct effects ofthe blast: immense quantities ofirradiation,
 A Primer in the Art ofDeception
burns, and a vast array oftrauma injuries. It is estimated that by the end of1945, totalcasualties had climbed to 140,000 people. By 1950, the death toll had reached over200,000. What had once been Hiroshimawas left in radioactive ruin. Radiation contam-inated the soil and the water. This created an environment where internal contaminationbecame possible for all who entered the area for years afterward. In the immediate after-math ofthe bombing, people who had either lived outside the city or who had left the citycenter prior to the detonation reentered the city looking for family and friends. These peo-ple, not exposed to the detonation, subsequently became contaminated by internal emitters.Nevertheless, they were later included in the control group ofthe Life Span Studyrepre-senting people who were not exposed to radiation.This briefportrait provides all the information the reader needs in order to under-stand the overwhelming number oferrors inherent in the atomic bomb survivor study.Never lose sight ofthe fact that, in the hands ofthe ICRP, this study provides the founda-tion for current models ofthe risks to health from radiation exposure, and via extrapola-tion, the hazards oflow-dose exposure to internally emitting radionuclides. At a meeting ofthe European Parliament in February 1998, a number ofattendees expressed criticismofthe ICRPand the Hiroshimadata on radiation effects. These were summarized in thefirst publication ofthe European Committee on Radiation Risk(ECRR).1. Professor Alice Stewartfaulted the Hiroshimaresearch on the grounds that thestudy and control groupswere not representative ofa normal population. Those includedin the study were survivors ofthe stresses ofwar who had endured an overwhelming atroc-ity. Between the end ofthe war and the establishment ofthe Life Span Study, as many as100,000 people succumbed as a result ofblast injuries, irradiation, conventional illnesses,and internal contamination from fallout and tainted food and water. As a consequence,
thestudy omits tens ofthousands ofradiation-induced deaths that took place inthe first seven years after the dropping ofthe bomb
. Thus, any results ofthe LSSwill inevitably underestimate the hazards ofradiation exposure. Due to the multiple stres-sors ofthe bombing and its aftermath, a natural selection process was set in motion where-by unfit people, the physically and psychologically weak, succumbed and were weeded outofthe study population. A “healthy survivor effect” thus biased the study. By the time theLife Span Studygot underway, those studied made up an atypical population that could notadequately represent the delayed effects ofradiation exposure for the entirety ofmankind.2. Several participants at the meeting ofthe European Parliament criticized theICRPfor failing to adequately address the subject ofinternal contamination. The surviv-ing Hiroshimapopulation was modeled on the basis ofeveryone receiving an instantaneousbarrage ofgammaand neutron irradiation at the moment ofdetonation ofthe bomb.

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
rsurya18 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->