Wednesday, 11 January 2012

Fukushima Fallout - Lessons from Chernobyl

Dr. Dave DeSante is the founder of the Institute for Bird Population in Point Reyes, California.

After the radioactive cloud from Chernobyl passed over the U.S. West Coast in the spring of 1986 his research uncovered a severe die-off of young birds.

Later, researchers Gould and Goldman duplicated his results with human mortality data from both the U..S. and Germany.

The young, the old, and those with weak immune systems were the main casualties - an estimated over forty thousand in all.

In mid-March of 2011, as the nuclear disaster in Japan deepens by the day, scientific predictions of fallout again crossing the Pacific are being made.
In this in depth interview EON producers Mary Beth Brangan and Jim Heddle ask Dr. DeSante to explain his findings and their implications for today.

The video points out that low level radiation is a serious problem when ingested. Please watch !

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, January 11th, 2012.]


steven andresen said...


I wrote in a comment section just a bit ago that ...just as there is a "plunge protection team" operated by the government, presumably, that manipulates the stock market board, and its numbers that suggest upturns or downturns in the economy, there might be protection teams in other areas, also run by the government, that prevent there being data that would suggest any dangers for the population.

This speaker said there were manipulations in population death statistics during the time of the Chernobyl radiation leaks. What he's suggesting is that he saw evidence in these manipulations which showed I was correct. There seems to be efforts to hide dangers to the population caused by radiation from nuclear catastrophes.

In the same way, one might say the climate data that was used to support one interpretation of the global warming or cooling debate was manipulated, showing, at least, that statistics are being manipulated in one or many ways.

At a time when people rely on scientific evidence to make decisions about policy, it would seem the manipulation of that evidence, for a political purpose, say, should be a major criminal activity, not just an unfortunate accident...

The study of epidemiology will always have to take into consideration the possibility that their original data has been corrupted at its source by actors interested in some politically sensitive cause.


Spookypunkos said...

Great comment and analogy.

I could not agree more - that there are various efforts to keep scientific information from the public.

The idea that some data is being manipulated or hidden, to serve a (corrupt) political agenda, is well backed up in the recent record.

Cheers !