Dr. Sherman and Joseph Mangano interviewed by Harvey Wasserman January 17, 2012.
Archive | Radiation RSS feed for this section
Link to Green Power and Wellness Show
by admin on 20. Jan, 2012 in Cancer, Chernobyl, Environmental Health, Fukushima, Nuclear Power, Radiation
Listen to “Nuclear Hotseat” podcasts hosted by Libbe HaLevy
by admin on 19. Jan, 2012 in Environmental Health, Nuclear Power, Radiation
Nuclear news from an anti-nuclear activist perspective, including holistic healing tips and protection from radiation, interviews w/leading activists, and how you can help stop the nuclear madness. Nuclear Hotseat is produced and hosted by 3 Mile Island survivor Libbe HaLevy.
Tuesday Jan 17—Dr Sherman talks with Harvey Wasserman on web radio show
by admin on 16. Jan, 2012 in Chernobyl, Environmental Health, Fukushima, Nuclear Power, Radiation
On Tuesday January 17th from 2–3 pm EST, Dr. Janette Sherman and Joseph Mangano will discuss their new report questioning increased mortality rates as a result of Fukushima fallout, the Chernobyl report, and the history of the debate about radiation and health with Harvey Wasserman, host of the Green Power & Wellness Show on www.progressiveradionetwork.com.
Harvey Wasserman brings to the air his half-century of joyous activism on issues ranging from peace, civil rights and human liberties to No Nukes, election protection, people’s history, ending the drug war and much more. Harvey has served as senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and he helped organize the 1979 No Nukes concerts in Madison Square Garden, and spoke at the MUSE2 concert in Silicon Valley in 2011. He edits the www.nukefree.org website.
Learn more about Mr. Wasserman at www.progressiveradionetwork.com/harvey-wasserman/
Dr. Sherman to Speak at Educational Forum on Uranium Mining in Virginia
by admin on 07. Nov, 2011 in Environmental Health, Nuclear Power, Radiation
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
On Friday, November 11th 2011, Sustainable Loudoun and Piedmont Environmental Council are hosting a free educational forum: Uranium Mining in Virginia: Should We End the Moratorium? at the George Washington University Ashburn Campus, Ashburn VA. Doors will open at 6 pm and the speaker program begins at 7 pm. Light refreshments will be provided. Speakers will provide information on a number of aspects regarding uranium mining and nuclear power. The featured speakers are:
Tony Noerpel, Sustainable Loudoun: Long-term viability of nuclear energy—supply, safety, complexity, waste and cost
Rob Marmet, Piedmont Environmental Council: Legal aspects of Virginia’s moratorium and impact of surface mining
Linda Pentz Gunter, Beyond Nuclear: Uranium mining—health and environmental impacts
Janette Sherman, M.D.: Health effects of nuclear power and Uranium mining
Will Stewart, Sustainable Loudoun: Alternatives to nuclear power, and cost comparisons
The event will be held at George Washington University – Virginia Campus:
20101 Academic Way, Ashburn, Virginia on Friday November 11th, 2011 at 6 pm.
Question marks, the elephant in the room…
by admin on 25. Jun, 2011 in Chernobyl, Fukushima, Radiation
…and the refusal of nuclear power defenders to consider what has happened to people and the environment since Fukushima and Chernobyl
San Francisco BayView, June 25, 2011 — By Janette Sherman and Joseph Mangano
By concentrating only on the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) data – incomplete at best – and ignoring the on-going radioactive releases from Fukushima, it is apparent that the pro-nuclear forces are alive and active.
In the recent article published on June 9, 2011, in the San Francisco Bay View, there were two question marks in the title: “Is the Dramatic Increase in Baby Deaths in the U. S. a Result of the Fukushima Fallout? How Can we Find Out?” In the Counter Punch article published in the weekend edition on June 10-12, 2011, again there was a question mark at the end of the title, “Is the Dramatic Increase in Baby Deaths in the US a Result of the Fukushima Fallout?” The question marks were intended to stimulate interest and prompt demand for governments – Japan and the U. S. at least – to provide definitive and timely data about the levels of radioactivity in food, air and water.
We received many responses, some in support of our concerns and some critical about how we used CDC data, including outright ad hominid attacks accusing us of scaremongering and deliberate fraud.
Fukushima and the Nuclear Establishment: The Big Lies Fly High
by admin on 16. Jun, 2011 in Chernobyl, Environmental Health, Fukushima, Radiation
Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, has focused on investigative reporting on energy and environmental issues for more than 40 years. He is the host of the nationally-aired TV program Enviro Close-Up (www.envirovideo.com) and the author of numerous books.
He writes for CounterPunch.org:
The global nuclear industry and its allies in government are making a desperate effort to cover up the consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. “The big lie flies high,” comments Kevin Kamps of the organization Beyond Nuclear.
Not only is this nuclear establishment seeking to make it look like the Fukushima catastrophe has not happened—going so far as to claim that there will be “no health effects” as a result of it—but it is moving forward on a “nuclear renaissance,” its scheme to build more nuclear plants.
Indeed, next week in Washington, a two-day “Special Summit on New Nuclear Energy” will be held involving major manufacturers of nuclear power plants—including General Electric, the manufacturer of the Fukushima plants—and U.S. government officials.
Although since Fukushima, Germany, Switzerland and Italy and other nations have turned away from nuclear power for a commitment instead to safe, clean, renewable energy such as solar and wind, the Obama administration is continuing its insistence on nuclear power.
Will the nuclear establishment be able to get away with telling what, indeed, would be one of the most outrageous Big Lies of all time—that no one will die as a result of Fukushima?
Will it be able to continue its new nuclear push despite the catastrophe?
Chernobyl: Consequences of the catastrophe 25 years later
by admin on 27. Apr, 2011 in Cancer, Chernobyl, Environmental Health, Fukushima, Japan, Nuclear Power, Radiation
San Francisco BayView, April 27, 2011
by Janette D. Sherman, M.D., and Alexey V. Yablokov, Ph.D.
Editor’s note: The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists asked Dr. Sherman, recognized worldwide for her expertise on Chernobyl, to write this article last year, then rejected it just before deadline, probably considering it too alarming. In it, she reports the widespread expectation of another nuclear power plant failure and the catastrophic consequences. Now, a few months later, the world commemorates the 25th anniversary of Chernobyl while watching the Fukushima meltdown.
For more than 50 years, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have abided by an agreement that in essence allows them to cover each other’s back – sometimes at the expense of public health. It’s a delicate balance between cooperation and collusion.
Signed on May 28, 1959, at the 12th World Health Assembly, the agreement states:
“Whenever either organization proposes to initiate a programme or activity on a subject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult the other with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual agreement,” and continues: The IAEA and the WHO “recognize that they may find it necessary to apply certain limitations for the safeguarding of confidential information furnished to them. They therefore agree that nothing in this agreement shall be construed as requiring either of them to furnish such information as would, in the judgment of the other party possessing the information, interfere with the orderly conduct of its operation.”
The WHO mandate is to look after the health on our planet, while the IAEA is to promote nuclear energy. In light of recent industrial failures involving nuclear power plants, many prominent scientists and public health officials have criticized WHO’s non-competing relationship with IEAE that has stymied efforts to address effects and disseminate information about the 1986 Chernobyl accident, so that current harm may be documented and future harm prevented.
Dr Sherman Interviewed on Democracy Now!
by admin on 26. Apr, 2011 in Cancer, Chernobyl, Environmental Health, Fukushima, Japan, Radiation
Dr. Sherman is interviewed by Amy Goodman on Democracy Now!
Chernobyl Catastrophe: 25th Anniversary of World’s Worst Nuclear Accident
Considerations on the 25th Anniversary of the Chernobyl Disaster in the context of current events [Fukushima Disaster]
Each is a major public health and environmental disaster, and while Chernobyl occurred 25 yeas ago, it is not over, nor will Fukushima be over any time soon. Unless the laws of biology, chemistry and geography change, what we have learned from Chernobyl will apply to people exposed to the radioactive emissions from Fukushima.
1. Radiation was distributed around the entire northern hemisphere, with “hot spots” in some areas.
2. There will be a marked increase in thyroid diseases in general and thyroid cancer specifically.
3. There will be an increase in birth defects in humans and in animals.
4. There will be an increase in heart disease, brain damage, and other illnesses, especially among the clean-up workers (called “liquidators” at Chernobyl.)
5. The onerous agreement between the WHO and IAEA, signed into effect in 1959, remains a barrier to information and to protection of public health.
6. There was a delay in declaring an evacuation zone.
7. There has been an attempt to minimize the effects of the radiation, emphasizing whole-body external doses, while ignoring the more important exposure to radioactive isotopes that are absorbed by inhalation and ingestion. These include I-131, I-129, Cs-137, Sr-90, various isotopes of plutonium and uranium as well as other radioactive emissions.
8. The governmental and industry spokespersons have ignored the BIER report that there is no safe level of exposure to radioactivity. Every exposure is cumulative and can result in genetic damage, cancer, and other damage to health.
Nuclear Tragedy: Is it too late?
by admin on 19. Apr, 2011 in Environmental Health, Fukushima, Japan, Radiation
A WVVH-TV News Special. Karl Grossman is interviewed following the earthquake and meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
Is the Fukushima nuclear plant breakdown worse than Chernobyl?
by admin on 15. Apr, 2011 in Cancer, Chernobyl, Environmental Health, Fukushima, Japan, Radiation
Is the Fukushima nuclear plant breakdown worse than Chernobyl?
Dr. Sherman writes for the San Francisco BayView Newspaper
A little over six months ago I wrote: “Given profound weather effects (earthquakes, floods, tsunamis etc.), human fallibility and military conflicts, many believe that it is only a matter of time before there is another nuclear catastrophe. Nuclear fallout knows no state or national boundaries and will contribute to an increase in illnesses, decrease in intelligence and instability throughout the world. The economic costs of radioactive pollution and care of contaminated citizens are staggering. No country can maintain itself if its citizens are economically, intellectually, politically and socially impoverished.”
(My submission, which had been requested by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, was ultimately rejected … too alarmist?)
While thousands of miles and 25 years separate the sites and the events that led to the catastrophes at Fukushima and Chernobyl, the effects will be very similar – and will remain so for years to decades to centuries.
I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.
—Hippocratic Oath, Modern Version
Recent Posts
Archives
- October 2015 (1)
- February 2015 (1)
- January 2015 (2)
- October 2014 (1)
- August 2014 (2)
- May 2014 (3)
- March 2014 (1)
- January 2014 (2)
- November 2013 (2)
- September 2013 (2)
- August 2013 (5)
- May 2013 (2)
- April 2013 (3)
- March 2013 (4)
- November 2012 (1)
- October 2012 (2)
- September 2012 (2)
- August 2012 (2)
- July 2012 (1)
- May 2012 (1)
- March 2012 (1)
- February 2012 (1)
- January 2012 (5)
- December 2011 (4)
- November 2011 (1)
- July 2011 (1)
- June 2011 (3)
- April 2011 (10)
- March 2011 (6)
- December 2010 (1)
