Editor's Note: This is still a work-in-progress subject to review and correction by the various principles involved that may be reasonably but not totally accurate at this stage for research purposes.

"The Real Deal" Radio Show
(March 30, 2012)

Host: Dr. James Fetzer Ph.D.
Guests:
Dr. Majia Nadesan, Ph.D.
Leuren Moret, B.S., M.A., PhD (ABD)

Real Deal download page here, MP3 download here (43.1 MB, 2:02:07).

Part I, published at Veterans Today here, also listed at the Lone Star Iconoclast here.
Part II published at Veterans Today here

Editor’s Note: This transcription was prepared with "Editor's Notes" by William B. Fox, Publisher, America First Books, who also helped organize this interview.

Introduction

by Major William B. Fox
last revised 1:54 PM 1 Oct 2012
(Rough draft, may be edited and coauthored)

The first line of defense to handle any major crisis is accurate information. Tragically, not only has accurate information been deliberately withheld from Americans regarding the Fukushima crisis, but they have also been steadily fed disinformation.
Dr. Majia Nadesan reports in the interview below that on December 16, 2011 The Wall Street Journal wrote that the total radiation dispersed over a broad swath of northern Japan was 15% of what was released from Chernobyl. In contrast, the summary report of the RSMC [Regional Specialized Meteorological Center] Beijing on the Fukushima nuclear accident emergency stated that the total amount of radiation released from Fukushima in the first five days was equal to Chernobyl. In addition, scientists found radio-Xenon levels in the Pacific Northwest at 450,000 times average concentration levels in the weeks following Fukushima -- not to mention other dangerous concentrations of radionuclides well beyond what any Western Europe countries ever experienced following Chernobyl.
Then we learn from Dr. Nadesan that "...People in the Pacific Northwest actually inhaled between five and ten hot particles a day in the first month of the disaster -- it could take 20 years for cancer to develop or it could take ten years or thirty years. But the significance is that the Western Press in the United States and in Europe as well as in Japan has trivialized the amount of radiation released by using terms like `no acute effects', `no immediate health effect'..."
Dr. Nadesan also commented: "...If you look at the recently released NRC transcripts, they were projecting the dose to the thyroid of a one year old child, and they had different calculations. But one of their calculations was a thyroid dose of 30 millisieverts just from iodine to the thyroid of a one year old child annualized. And 30 millisieverts is a lot of radiation... clearly there was no effort to make any kind of recommendations to the public to keep their kids inside or to stop drinking milk or dairy, which was found in the wake of Chernobyl to be the primary vector by which small children were exposed to iodine is through milk. And that's disturbing."
Leuren Moret delves into the broader social and political context behind this abusive behavior by the establishment. Rather than resolve public issues through honest fact-finding and open dialog, powerful elements within the government and their corporate media allies have been ratcheting up the mechanisms of police state repression. The implication is that as ever increasing percentages of the U.S. population sicken from Fukushima radiation -- over and above existing levels suffering from accumulations of toxic vaccines, Corexit, chemtrails, aerosolized depleted uranium, GMO food, fluoridated water, and myriad other poisons in our environment -- a de facto police state intends to enslave and kill Americans as a first resort rather than help them out of their predicament.
As a further example of a malicious establishment in action, Ms. Moret points out that a day prior to when the Fukushima cloud was first expected to arrive over the San Francisco Bay area on March 17, 2011, letters went out to every medical doctor in every county in California from the Surgeon General warning doctors not to give iodine to patients who were concerned about radiation exposure from Fukushima. Ms. Moret notes: "The excuse was that it would damage their hearts or make them sick or this or that. Now I can't imagine health officials doing that. It is so absolutely irresponsible and just malicious because the health effects of even low levels of radiation are very well known."
One can find plenty of support for Ms. Moret's position among many health professionals. As one example, Fukushima Meltdown & Modern Radiation: Protecting Ourselves and Future Generations by Dr. John Apsley states that people should saturate their thyroids in any fallout environment with iodine to pre-empt build-up of the radioactive version in this critical organ. Furthermore, most Americans are very iodine deficient. It is very hard to overdose with certain types of iodine treatments such as rubbing it on the skin. In certain cases involving iodine sensitivity, Dr. Apsley writes (page 93) "When high levels of iodine are taken too abruptly, toxins may exit `en masse' so quickly that temporary skin rashes, minor hair loss, congestion, scratchy throat, or very rarely, even asthmatic reactions may arise." The implication is that saturating the body with iodine even without any fallout threat can be therapeutic to help chase out "bad halogens" like chlorine, fluoride, and bromide.
The article "Magnesium & Calcium Protect DNA From Radiation" by Dr. Mark Sircus, dated November 5, 2011, notes that "Dr. David Brownstein and I have made a similar universal call for iodine in that the nutritive type of iodine protects the thyroid from the radioactive type of iodine. One has to be a fool not to be taking iodine because 95 percent of us are deficient in iodine, thus making our thyroids sitting ducks (sponges) for the radioactive type. A thyroid deficient in iodine becomes like an intense vacuum cleaner hungry for anything even looking like a halogen (fluoride, bromide, chlorine, rocket fuel). Because so much blood goes through the thyroid it has a fantastic capacity to concentrate radioactive iodine and these halogens no matter how low the concentration is of them in the blood."
If we can go by the medical opinions expressed by Dr. Apsley and Dr Sircus, what "honest and reasonable man" in his right mind would deliberately cause Americans to remain iodine deficient as they are getting plastered with the radioactive iodine and other toxic halogens from fallout?
Once one factors in all the poisons quietly foisted on the American public, and then combines this with patterns of disinformation promulgated by major media, and then on top of all this weighs in myriad official actions that deliberately deny to the public the very civil defense-related resources that they have already paid for with their tax dollars, one can easily draw the conclusion that the American public has become the victim of a stealth war being waged against it by malevolent special interests.

Profiles in disinformation: Radiation is good for you,' says Ann Coulter as she weighs in on Japan's nuclear crisis by David Gardner, 18 March 2011, dailymail.co.uk. Some alternative media reactions to downplayers of radiation dangers: Let’s Send Ann Coulter to Fukushima by Kurt Nimmo, Infowars.com, 21 March 2011; Radionuclide Blankets United States; Authorities Insist Levels Are Harmless, by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 22 March 2011, and Government Responds to Nuclear Accident by Trying to Raise Acceptable Radiation Levels and Pretending that Radiation is Good For Us, georgewashington2.blogspot.com, 29 March 2011.

Transcript

 

“The Real Deal” Radio Show (March 29, 2012)

Host: Jim Fetzer: James Fetzer Ph.D.

Guests:
Dr. Majia Nadesan, Ph.D.
Leuren Moret: Leuren Moret, B.S., M.A., PhD (ABD)

Editor’s Note: This transcription was prepared by William B. Fox, Publisher, America First Books, who also helped organize this interview.

 

 

Hour One

 

Dr. James Fetzer: This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Real Deal with another very special event. Two experts on radiation, contamination, Fukushima and related issues. One, Leuren Moret who has been a guest on this show numerous times, who is an independent geoscientist and who has done remarkable research around the world, articles that have been published in Veterans Today and elsewhere. The second joining us is Majia Nadesan from Arizona State University who has recently published "Lessons From Fukushima" as a participant in a workshop about what we have to learn here. I am simply so pleased to have you both. Majia, welcome to The Real Deal.
Dr. Majia Nadesan: Thank you.
Dr. Fetzer: Leuren, it is such a pleasure to have you back.
Leuren Moret: Thank you so much.
Dr. Fetzer: And Leuren, why don't we begin with you. There are some rather startling developments going on here in the United States and elsewhere that are very bothersome as a kind of prelude to turning to Fukushima and the stunning results that we are getting from that event.
L. Moret: Well, it's the militarization of the United States and just criminalization of the public in subtle and not so subtle ways. And I know that I am doing interviews in Mexico on HAARP, and the tectonic warfare application where they can trigger earthquakes with these huge HAARP antennas that are located all over the world. This is destabilizing Mexico. And there are also a lot of drug wars and mass murders that are happening too in Mexico. And this is all part of the North American unification of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, and also the NAFTA highway, which is part of that. Its actually drug routes. And what we have been seeing in California, there are a lot of videotapes, video clips that people have put on the Internet, and if you google "massive military equipment being moved" or titles like that, you'll find them. And in May and July, in November and December, in January and even February, there are clips of trains, railroad trains, Union Pacific for example, carrying huge amounts of military equipment. Primarily what I have seen are Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Strykers. Those are probably coming from Ft. Lewis in Tacoma, Washington, and they seem to be going north and south. And a lot of them are going down near Barstow to Ft. Irwin. The army has a training base there out in the desert. And then the Marine Corps also has one near by [Ed. Note: Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow]. Also 29 Palms is there. And what we are seeing is soldiers, busloads of soldiers, some are in jungle fatigues, some are in desert fatigues, and some are in sort of blue-colored camouflage, and there have also been U.N. vehicles that are painted white reported on these trains of massive military equipment, so the number of trains and the amount of equipment being moved and the amount of men being trained is much greater than has normally been happening in the past years, although it has happened before. So I think that a lot of people suspect or believe that this increase in militarization and fusion of police departments in urban areas is just more movement towards regionalization and unification of North America. And then of course adding to it or facilitating it or enabling it, promoting it maybe, is that the huge amount of radiation that is coming from Fukushima, and what we are going to talk about today is an update on the news there, because this will greatly, greatly, greatly affect America, especially if any of those reactors have any further spent fuel pool collapses or more problems with emissions from the ruined reactors.
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, and of course I was born and grew up in Southern California. I have many friends there. My son lives in Seattle with his fiance, and I have many friends there. And of course, in between, I mean this is a staggering proportion of the American population, and it is extremely disturbing. I would just add a couple of notes to what you have been observing, Leuren, which include that the Department of Homeland Security has requisitioned 450 million rounds of .40 [S & W] caliber ammunition and another 175 million rounds of .223 high velocity rifle ammunition. There are only around 380 million citizens of the United States, so this is more than a bullet for every man, woman, and child. I can't imagine what they would need that staggering quantity of ammunition (for). And of course we know repeated reports about these detention facilities where they are actually actively recruiting for personnel to man them. Obama's recent signing of executive orders that seem to place the control of the country really at his disposal are equally disturbing. I am very apprehensive that the whole idea of the North American Union of consolidated Mexico, United States, and Canada into one entity is going forward in spite of the fact that there would be overwhelming popular democratic resistance which is a further sign that we may simply no longer be a constitutional republic. It is very, very troubling. But having the opportunity to have you and Majia here, let's pursue the Fukushima aspect of this, and place the other on the burner, but to return to on another occasion. Majia, you recently participated in this work shop about what we have to derive from Fukushima, and I would be very pleased if you could give an outline, an introduction to your research and what you have discovered in terms of lessons from Fukushima.
Dr. Nadesan: OK, well, I am a communications studies scholar, so I don't know a lot about the engineering of nuclear plants, but I do know quite a bit about media strategies, tactics, ways of representing information. I teach propaganda in a class on public relations, so I know quite a bit about how that works.
Dr. Fetzer: Well Majia, I think this is fabulous, because I have not only featured Leuren before, but also Christopher Busby before, and we have gotten into some of those other questions, but what you are offering is a fresh approach that I think is going to be extraordinarily revealing because the way this whole thing is being marketed and managed, as it were, of public relations and damage control is an extremely serious aspect of this, and one on which I think illumination needs to be shed, so I am very, very glad you are doing this.
Dr. Nadesan: Well, in a democracy, of course transparency is a prerequisite for a democracy to function as such. And also in democracies the health and welfare of populations should be the preeminent goal of government. And in my analysis of the media coverage of Fukushima and the crisis communication by the Canadian government, the Japanese government, and the U.S. government, as well as European governments, I think it is clear that these two objectives of democratic governments, that is, both transparency and the prioritization of human health, have not in fact been achieved or prioritized, and I have a lot of concerns about complete lack of transparency in crisis communication both with the Japanese government and the American, and also simply outright censorship and propaganda in mainstream media. And I don't just say this glibly. I have evidence that supports these claims.
Dr. Fetzer: Yes, yes, yes, well please do proceed. I want to hear more.
Dr. Nadesan: OK, well, did you post the "Lessons of Fukushima" PowerPoint that I sent? If it is not at your site, I will provide some links where people can go in and look at the PowerPoints, and the PowerPoints contain the evidence. But in the first instance with crisis communication on the part of the Japanese and American governments, there was an initial effort to trivialize the scale of the disaster, and as a consequence of that trivialization by government, populations in Japan and also in the U.S. West Coast were not warned of the radiation releases and they were not warned of the severity of the disaster. For example, the Japanese radiation dispersion data, the SPEEDI data, was censored. Japanese officials resisted releasing important data about dispersion because they were afraid of panicking residents, and I think that there is good reason to believe that people are more likely to be panicked when they think their government is lying to them as opposed to when they have a realistic assessment of what the risks are, because then they can make educated decisions. And so what really produces panic is a lack of knowledge and a lack of trust. And unfortunately the Japanese government failed to uphold the public trust. They failed to expand the evacuation zone adequately, because they did in fact censor the SPEEDI data. They tried to shut down monitoring equipment to reduce fears about contamination. They used a variety of strategies to manipulate the data that was released, for example if the data on the fallout on the ground was too high, they would simply raise the radiation monitor higher in the air, where the concentrations of fallout would be less. They wouldn't include all radionuclides. They would only look at iodine or cesium and they wouldn't look at the presence of strontium or plutonium or other radionuclides. So across the board the crisis communication failed to lead to safe, adequate evacuations, and also there was an inability to distribute potassium iodide as a consequence of lack of knowledge about the severity of the crisis.
Dr. Fetzer: Majia, part of what you are telling me seems to be that they were filtering or selecting the evidence they were willing to present to the public and eliminating the rest, which of course violates a basic principle of scientific reasoning known as the requirement of total evidence. You are of course correctly observing in the absence of accurate information about what actually is taking place it is impossible to know what policies are the best ones to adopt in the public interest. So it appears to me we have a two-sided sham or scheme or shell game. They are not only not revealing the accurate scientific data, but they are then based upon the inaccurate reports offering solutions or recommendations for action or behavior modification that are actually inappropriate for the situation they are really in.
Dr. Nadesan: Exactly, and the same situation happened with the crisis communication by the U.S. and Canadian governments as well. There was the statement made that of course that no harmful levels of radiation would reach the United States, and in fact that is not true. We have EPA data that shows that uranium was detected, plutonium was detected, before the EPA stopped reporting. Now the EPA is no longer reporting all the RadNet data for the cities across the United States, but before they stopped reporting there were months and months of highly elevated radiation levels. A radiological expert that I have had communication with used the EPA's data and found that Phoenix, for example, just at their radiation monitoring sites had 20% higher levels of radiation in 2011 than in 2010. The same kinds of analysis have been done for Oregon have also found elevated levels. So the government's own data shows in fact that people were exposed to elevated levels of fallout. Cesium is not something that is found in nature, and it is not good for us, yet no precautions were advised. Children were not asked to stay inside during recess. There were absolutely no precautions. And again I think that is an indication of a lack of concern of the public welfare as a goal of government.
Dr. Fetzer: Wouldn't you infer also Majia that what is going on here is the government is suppressing information so as not to alarm the public, the problem being that this is an expensive public health -- I mean life and well-being are at risk here -- I mean if the government has an obligation to promote the general welfare, which I take to be one of its fundamental roles, then it is seriously abusing its responsibility here. I am reminded when Christie Whitman as head of the EPA announced on 9/11 that the air there, in New York City, was safe to breath when it was full of all kinds of heavy metals and toxic substances, arsenic, asbestos, and a host of others including from the computers that had been destroyed. It was completely and totally false that she made such a statement. It was deemed to be politically expedient, but it was at the great risk to the lives and health of the first responders where we now have an epidemic of the kinds of consequences in terms of cancer, leukemia, and multiple manifestations one would expect from exposure to highly toxic and hazardous materials in the atmosphere. This is just utterly shameful, and the government, of course, has put off and put off any acknowledgment in order apparently to forestall having to provide any benefits to those who are placed in jeopardy. I mean it is a complete disgrace as I see it and an abdication of the government's responsibility to the people.
Dr. Nadesan: And we saw the same scenario in the BP Oil Spill. There have been subsequent analyses of the tissues of fish that the EPA deemed safe to consume and shellfish in particular were very highly contaminated and those products made it to market and people consumed them, and yet subsequent analysis, because the FDA had simply relied on taste tests, have shown that those products were not safe.
Dr. Fetzer: Majia, how could they rely on taste tests, for God's sake! I mean, you know all kinds of poisons can taste good.
Dr. Nadesan: And smell --
Dr. Fetzer: You know aspartame is widely used, and aspartame is well known to cause cancer. This seems to me to be yet another scandal impugning the integrity of our own government.
Dr. Nadesan: Well certainly the regulatory structure has been captured by the revolving door and by political appointees. I know that there are many scientists who work in the EPA and FDA who are committed to public safety, but unfortunately the agencies have been politicized, and the revolving door has corrupted their ability to fulfill their mission.
Dr. Fetzer: Listening to these stories, to me it is gut-wrenching. I mean I literally become nauseated at the abdication of responsibility of the American government. I mean those who find it far-fetched to imagine that the government could have been involved, for example, in the atrocities of 9/11, I think, should really consider what we are learning about the government's cavalier attitude toward the life and welfare of the American people. I mean it appears as though we are expendable. I don't quite grasp for whose benefit, you know, the loss of a major proportion of the American population would serve. But it seems as though it has been allowed to come to pass without taking any action whatsoever. No preventative steps, not even informing the public of the risks if confronts.
L. Moret: Could I make a comment?
Dr. Fetzer: Sure.
L. Moret: There is a book you might like to read Majia, or people in the audience. It is called Fire in the Rain: The Democratic Consequences of Chernobyl by Peter Gould, and he was the Evan Pugh professor of geography at Penn State. This was published by John Hopkins Press in 1990. And it is very interesting because we can compare what is happening today surrounding Fukushima in terms of deception, and basically "deny and delay" is the main mechanism. They keep shoving the disaster off the chart. And in this book it has a figure which is called the relationship between the degree to which a country is dependant on atomic power and the degree to which information about Chernobyl's effects were manipulated or suppressed. And what is interesting is the countries who were least dependent on atomic power were the least manipulative with the information and the developments. And those countries were Denmark, Portugal, Norway, Austria, and Ireland. And contrast that to the countries or the governments that did the most manipulation and suppression of information and those were Belgium and France, which are very, very, very dependent. In fact France is 75% dependent on nuclear energy compared to the U.S. which is maybe, I think it is 20% or something like that. So that is one of the explanations. It is the profits and the finances that really have a lot to do with what they report and don't report to benefit and protect their own industry. And then also General Electric and Westinghouse own ABC and NBC so they are the biggest builders and designers of nuclear power plants in the world. So we are not going to see it on TV in the U.S.
Dr. Fetzer: Well I think those are all astute points and I would relate them to Iran as well where you know the primary concern with Iran appears to have nothing to do with nuclear weapons. It does appear to have a lot to do with nuclear energy, however. I mean the Iranian motto is "Nuclear energy for all, nuclear weapons for none" because they are developing fuel rods that they can market in competition with the American nuclear energy industry at a competitive price and take away the market, whereas American corporations and industries like to have monopolies. I mean we have this mythology of the free market, but it is virtually nonexistent in the United States today. And the combination of the Iranian threat to undermine the American nuclear fuel rod process by undercutting it for the rest of the world is I think a major factor, plus of course Iran having gone to an oil bourse where they are no longer trading oil in petrodollars but have moved to multiple currencies. This of course was a pattern we saw with Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, which of course incurred the wrath of the United States where our intervention in Afghanistan appears to have a tremendous amount to do with the world's largest deposits of lithium that are apparently located there, where lithium can be used for components in computers and in some nuclear weapons and apparently for new processes to convert water into energy in a dramatic fashion that can hugely reduce the cost of energy and could benefit the whole world. But it appears to be something that the United States is seeking to dominate, contain, and no doubt for the benefit of private corporations. I mean the situation is really outrageous. Majia, let's get back to some of your observations about the PR aspects of this which I am sure are highly complementary with the political that Leuren has been addressing just now. Would you like to add a few words before we take our first break?
Dr. Nadesan: Well I think that she is just absolutely right about General Electric and Westinghouse and the corporate control of the mass media. And so that whenever the mass media does report about Fukushima, it is always represented as posing no health risk, even in terms of framing the consequences for the people in Japan. There was a headline in Bloomberg [Ed. Note: Please see the Reuters version cited at majiasblog.blogspot.com] that said "No Big [Fukushima] Health Impact [Seen]." It was attributed to a former member of the U.N., and what in fact he had said was that there were no acute radiation illnesses among the civilians in the Fukushima prefecture. Well, acute radiation syndrome will kill you. And so essentially the article misrepresented the effects of health by equating all radiation effects with acute radiation effects. And if radiation kills you in five years, that is not an acute radiation syndrome. Acute radiation syndrome is it kills you in three months or six months or five days or whatever. And so the Bloomberg article functioned propagandistically to frame the health effects as minimal or trivial when in fact that is simply just not true.
Dr. Fetzer: Majia, that is such an important point. We are going to take our first break. This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Real Deal with my very special guests today Leuren Moret and Majia Nadesan. We are talking about Fukushima radiation politics and PR. We will be right back.

Spring 2012

Spring 2011
(Please see Dr. Majia Nadesan's commentary below)

Conflicting news reports: Are we faced with a horrifying catastrophe at Spent Fuel Pool 4 which might happen if TEPCO cannot remove all its spent fuel rods in time prior to another major earthquake -- or has the worst case scenario already happened, and we were never told?

STORY LINE ONE: Throughout winter 2011-2012 up until the late summer 2012, a steady stream of news reports gave the impression that Spent Fuel Pool 4 was mostly intact and under control. It remained steadily supplied with water, although it may have experienced some burn offs and leakage in the past that presumably were quickly brought under control. The focus of news stories involved how quickly TEPCO might be able to extract all the fuel rods before an earthquake might cause a building collapse. This in turn would likely empty the fuel pool and expose the fuel rods to air, causing them to ignite. If this nuclear fuel got released into the atmosphere, there was serious talk by experts about the need for Japanese to immediately evacuate the greater Tokyo area, and even for Americans to move to the Southern Hemisphere. The following are some sample stories along these lines:

2012-09-07 Japan Times: Unit 4 fuel pool continues to alarm scientists and gov’t officials around the world — ‘Intense criticism’ from some senior US officials, by ENENews.com
2012-05-27 Video of SFP4, posted by Mochizuki, fukushima-diary.com, on April 27th, 2012 [Editor's Note: This shows Spent Fuel Pool 4 filled with water, giving the impression that things are under control].
2012-05-20/26 Miscellaneous articles. Editor's. Note: This includes the photo captioned Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station 26 May 2012, cryptome.org, "Goshi Hosono, Japan's environment and nuclear minister, third from left, wearing a red helmet, along with members of the media, walks on the No. 4 reactor building at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s (TEPCO) Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Okuma, Fukushima prefecture, Japan, Saturday, May 26, 2012." The photos create the impression that things are under control.
2012-05-13 Nuclear Expert: I believe entire No. 4 fuel pool had drained to point where boiling occurred — Footage shows top of fuel racks were exposed to air (VIDEO), by ENENews.com
2012-05-11 Chief Engineer: I’m telling my friends on West Coast of US to watch Unit No. 4 like a hawk — Wake up everyday and make sure it’s standing… have a plan to move somewhere (VIDEO), by ENENews
2012-05-09 U.S. Senator sounds alarm about 'precarious' Fukushima situation, warns of imminent release of radiation by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, Editor of NaturalNews.com
2012-04-17 Wyden: WSJ: Very dangerous situation at Fukushima Daiichi says Senator -- Taking years to remove fuel "carries extraordinary and continuing risk" -- No comment from Tepco, Japan gov't -- Quake could send buildings tumbling down, resulting in "an even greater release of radiation, by ENENews.com
2012-04-06 Murata: Former Japan Ambassador Warns Gov't Committee: "A global catastrophe like we have never before experienced" if No. 4 collapses -- Common Spent Fuel Pool with 6,375 fuel rods in jeopardy -- "Would affect us all for centuries", by ENENews.com
2012-04-04 Gundersen: Move south of equator if Unit 4 fuel pool goes dry, that's probably the lesson there -- Like cesium from all 800 nuclear bombs ever dropped on Earth, except all at once (VIDEO), by ENENews.com
2012-03-15 Kyodo: Spent Fuel Pool No. 4 visibility deteriorating — Major drop over past month — No where near what’s needed “to work at removing nuclear fuel”, by ENENews.com

STORY LINE TWO: The worst has already happened. The bulk of the nuclear fuel in Spent Fuel Pool Four has already been released into the atmosphere. For those Japanese who have not already evacuated Tokyo, or those Americans who have not yet moved to the Southern Hemisphere, do the "powers that be" now expect us to simply shrug our shoulders and get used to the idea of having significantly shortened lifespans, vastly more heart attacks, and significantly more mutant progeny?

2012-09-28 Unit 4: Is There Intact Fuel Left Unburned? by Dr. Majia Nadesan, September 28, 2012
Majia here: When I listened to Arnie Gundersen's recent interview and heard him make the following remark I wondered whether there was any truth in Tepco's assertion that there is nothing left to burn in fuel pool #4. Here is the Enenews headline:
Enenews 9/27/2012: Gundersen v. Tepco: Watch audience uproar after official says “there’s nothing in the fuel pool to burn” (VIDEO) http://enenews.com/gundersen-tepco-watch-audience-uproar-after-official-fuel-pool-burn-video/comment-page-1#comment-291470
I had suspected that this might be the case because we saw so much smoke coming from the general area of units 3 and 4 in the winter of 2011-2012. We saw few recent images of unit 4 until the late spring of 2012.
The images of unit 4 in the late spring of 2012 looked considerably different than earlier images of this building.
[Above] see an image of unit 4 from the spring of 2012. Below that find an image of unit 4 approximately 1 year earlier. [Editor's Note: Please note the charred building structure in 2012 not present a year earlier].
2012-04-06 STATUS FOR SPENT FUEL POOL #4: IMMINENT DANGER?, majiasblog.blogspot.com

Part II

Introduction
by Major William B. Fox
last revised 1:54 PM 1 Oct 2012
(Rough draft, may be edited and coauthored)

The stealth dirty nuclear war currently being visited upon America goes far beyond government and major media disinformation, although there is certainly plenty of the latter as well as the former.
Dr. Majia Nadesan stated in this interview, "In June it was reported in the Japanese press that there was actually melt-through. A melt-through is when the melted corium melts through all levels of containment. And not a single U.S. media -- I did a search using EBSCO and using LexisNexis to see if any U.S. media picked up in June the Japanese report about the melt-through, and not one single U.S. media picked up that story. A melt-through means that the situation is out of control. Corium is sinking deeper into the ground while sporadically undergoing `limited criticalities' and releasing ever more extremely dangerous volumes of contamination into the atmosphere, ground water, and ocean. The entire public in Japan, North America, and elsewhere needs to understand how this situation remains out of control."
The failure to report these melt-throughs was followed by the Japanese government's big lie perpetrated in December 2011 that all the reactors were in "cold shut down," implying that all the melted nuclear fuel remained safely within their containment chambers and were subject to stable cooling systems which guaranteed against any further criticalities or radiation releases. Nothing could have been further from the truth. .
In the first part of this series, Dr. Nadesan described how Japanese media even went so far as to censor the Emperor of Japan's speech in January 2012. She noted: "This censorship was -- the only American media that picked it up was The Atlantic where there was an article discussing this. But the Emperor of Japan stated that the Fukushima disaster was not over -- one [his first point]. And there has been a concerted propaganda effort to make people in Japan and elsewhere believe that the reactors are in cold shut down, and that is a myth. And so the Emperor destroyed that myth by saying that the disaster was not over. The second thing that the Emperor said was that it wasn't safe for people to return to their homes in the exclusion zone or even further out. That was censored in Japan, and there was no coverage of it in the United States. And, sort of the predominate message of cold shut down continues to prevail in the U.S. media."
During the first hour of this interview, Leuren Moret explained how blame for the cover-up went much higher than just the Japanese government alone: "But the U.S. had to hide the effects of the nuclear weapons testing program, and they have hidden the effects of nuclear power in the United States, and actually it is Secretary of Energy Steven Chu and former British Petroleum scientist Steven Koonin from Cal Tech who have been directing TEPCO and the Japanese government on their emergency response."
People around the globe are now under assault right down to the DNA level. Fertility rates are plummeting and birth defects are rising everywhere. Leuren Moret noted during the second hour: "And then it [radiation] gets lofted into the air, and the worst thing is pregnant women getting exposed, especially in the first about six weeks. 80% of the embryos die in organisms that are exposed in the first six weeks of pregnancy."
Bomb test radiation, nuclear power plant emissions, aerosolized depleted uranium, and myriad other forms of nuclear toxicity have already raised background radiation levels to the point that fertility rates have dramatically declined in major areas around the globe. Leuren Moret's Geiger counter in the San Francisco Bay area shows that Fukushima radiation has now doubled background levels compared to the pre-Fukushima melt-down era. She has also observed that we are getting hit with more than just a few isotopes such as radioactive iodine and cesium. In fact, according to a TVA study, nuclear power plants can emit the entire witches' brew of radionuclides found in an atomic bomb blast, something like 1,300 fission products in all.
Cesium-137 alone has a half life of 30 years. As a rough rule of thumb, many experts estimate that it takes about ten half lives for radioactive isotopes to decay down to below dangerous levels. This means that it could take over 300 years for the massive amounts of cesium that have already blanketed North America to no longer pose a significant hazard.
As global background radiation levels rise, the rates of sterility and birth defects rise in direct proportion. If this trend persists, we will eventually reach a tipping point where background radiation rates will not only prevent human populations from adequately reproducing themselves, but also where radiation will create such a burden of mutated, dysfunctional people that many currently productive societies will not longer have the critical mass of intelligent, fit people required to advance civilization.
At a minimum, high level malefactors are clearly playing an extremely dangerous game of nuclear chicken with the future of mankind. At a maximum, they have a mentality approximated by the phrase "criminal insanity" and are succeeding all too well in fulfilling some of the darkest global depopulation schemes one can imagine.

“The Real Deal” Radio Show (March 29, 2012)

Host: Jim Fetzer: James Fetzer Ph.D.

Guests:

Dr. Majia Nadesan, Ph.D.
Leuren Moret: Leuren Moret, B.S., M.A., PhD (ABD)

Editor’s Note: This transcription was prepared by William B. Fox, Publisher, America First Books, who also helped organize this interview.

Hour Two

Dr. Fetzer: This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Real Deal continuing my conversation with Majia Nadesan and with Leuren Moret. I think these PR aspects are utterly fascinating, Majia. Do you have more graphs and documents you would like to introduce in our discussion?
Dr. Nadesan: Well, just as an example to demonstrate this, the situation at Fukushima, the exact situation, seems to be unclear. But one thing is clear is that there is no containment of the nuclear cores in at least three of the units at Fukushima. Units 1, 2, and 3. In June it was reported in the Japanese press that there was actually melt-through. A melt-through is when the melted corium melts through all levels of containment. And not a single U.S. media -- I did a search using EBSCO and using LexisNexis to see if any U.S. media picked up in June the Japanese report about the melt-through, and not one single U.S. media picked up that story. The only outlet that came close was The Washington Post [which] did include a story that included a quote by a scientist about the hypothetical possibility for a melt-through, and this occurred [but was not reported]. [T]this Washington Post story was reported a day or two after the Japanese press reported the melt-throughs. But the Washington Post story did not acknowledge that the Japanese press had said in fact there was a melt-through. So there is no other explanation other than censorship for the fact that that was not reported in the U.S. press.
Dr. Fetzer: Leuren?
L. Moret: Yes, it is really interesting, something was going around blogs, and people were passing it around for a while. TEPCO came out with a press conference and a PowerPoint presentation and it might have been around the same time. It was! It was TEPCO who had actually admitted it had melted through. But that PowerPoint didn't get circulated very widely. But then another report showed up. It was a simulated melt-down and melt-through just like Fukushima that was simulated at Browns Ferry, a nuclear power plant in the eastern U.S. I forgot which state it is in, maybe Tennessee, I am not sure. But the Browns Ferry simulations of how long it took to melt through the raise in temperature once the electricity, the power source was shut down. It actually completely coincided with, and was verified by the Fukushima TEPCO PowerPoint presentation. I will have to send those to you both. So they knew from the very beginning.
Dr. Nadesan: Yes, yes, I concur, that they did know from the very beginning. But they don't want to acknowledge it because it essentially means that any nuclear plant anywhere could in fact have a melt-down, especially the Mark I's, within 24 hours of a station blackout.
L. Moret: That is right. Yes, that is right. That's right.
Dr. Fetzer: I would like to report some of the information that is coming over the Internet, and to get your comments on it. Some reports about how there is a lot of fallout that has come into this country, meaning the United States. A lot of radiation coming down in rain. British Columbia, Seattle, the whole of Washington, Oregon, part of California being powerfully affected. They know of an organic farm in Portland that is not selling or producing anything more because he tested it and found a lot of radiation on his farm. Hawaii had tainted fruit and milk, and there is a lot of radiation there too. Generally very frightening what happened on the West Coast. There are more here, but let's begin with those.
L. Moret: Go ahead Majia.
Dr. Nadesan: Well I think that one of the most concerning things is that if you look at the recently released NRC transcripts, they were projecting the dose to the thyroid of a one year old child, and they had different calculations. But one of their calculations was a thyroid dose of 30 millisieverts just from iodine to the thyroid of a one year old child annualized. And 30 millisieverts is a lot of radiation. And there is research that finds that every [10] millisieverts over 10 milliseiverts causes a 3% increase in cancer over a five year period in adults. So now we are talking about kids getting three times that from one radionuclide or various forms of the iodine, because it is not just Iodine-131. This projection doesn't include cesium, it doesn't include strontium or plutonium or uranium. In the transcripts somebody actually asked "Should we alert the public?" and the response was "No." So we don't really know what the real thyroid impact was because nobody is publishing that data. We don't even know if the data is being collected. But clearly there was no effort to make any kind of recommendations to the public to keep their kids inside or to stop drinking milk or dairy, which was found in the wake of Chernobyl to be the primary vector by which small children were exposed to iodine is through milk. And that's disturbing.
Dr. Fetzer: That is very disturbing. And who was it Majia who was saying "No" when the question arose, "Shall we alert the public"?
Dr. Nadesan: It was a conversation among a variety of NRC [Nuclear Regulatory Commission] people, and the transcript can be found online. I don't know the specific individual's name off the top of my head. I would have to pull it up.
Dr. Fetzer: So the members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission are themselves suppressing the information about the contamination in order to protect the nuclear industry?
L. Moret: But so did the U.S. Surgeon General. And if you recall, all those reactors exploded one after another. On March 17th we started seeing chemtrails all over the Bay area. And the Fukushima cloud was supposed to arrive on the 18th or 19th. It was supposed to arrive on Friday. On the 17th letters went out to every medical doctor in every county in California. I suspect it was nationwide and came from the Surgeon General. And the message --I had copies of two sent out to doctors -- one in Sonoma County, north of the San Francisco Bay area, and the Stanford area, whatever county that is, San Mateo I think -- anyway the state and county health officials warned doctors not to give iodine to patients who were concerned about radiation exposure from Fukushima. The excuse was that it would damage their hearts or make them sick or this or that. Now I can't imagine health officials doing that. It is so absolutely irresponsible and just malicious because the health effects of even low levels of radiation are very well known. And they have been known for a long time. Even before 1920. Dr. [Joseph] Mueller's work was the micro-biological foundation for understanding the health effects of radiation. And he did studies on fruit flies, Drosophila melanogaster, and he won the Nobel Prize in 1946 for his work before 1920. But telling people not to take iodine is completely crazy, and when you tell a whole nation after you have put them through 1,300 bomb tests, and fried their children's brains, which is what has happened in the U.S., it is beyond irresponsible. And the iodine levels were monitored and reported and were very high for Japan, Hawaii, and the U.S., also Canada, by the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty facilities that are all over the world. They are nongovernmental-funded so they were much more revealing. And they have excellent facilities with excellent equipment and very good scientists trained to do very careful measurements. So all indications, all governments knew this because then they immediately stopped allowing any reporting at all by the end of July and that is when the melted fuel started hitting the ground water. It had melted down into the ground and was subsurface, and big cracks started opening up between the reactor buildings at Fukushima, and radioactive steam was coming out of the ground into the air. And if you look at the EPA levels reported for different cities of radiation in the rain, that is when the levels started increasing.
Dr. Nadesan: Actually it is interesting because I have been monitoring the EPA data and either they were really censoring EPA data for RadNet early on in March and April, either they were censoring that or the levels got even worse in December, because, for example in Phoenix, and in California, the radiation levels in December 2011 were extremely high, and this is after the cracks at the plants that were reported, they subsequently led to concerns because of measurements that there was fission occurring at the plants in November. And by December, we were having literally radiation levels, beta levels, that are electron counts, off the charts in places like Bakersfield and Yuma.
L. Moret: That's right.
Dr. Nadesan: They were very high. And I noticed that there was a pattern. West Coast cities that had mountains to the east of them were really hit hard. So Fresno, Bakersfield, Sacramento, Yuma Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, these places have mountains immediately to the east of them where the air got trapped, had these extremely high levels. And you could see the radiation moving across the country if you were to look at the jet stream and then map the jet stream on to the EPA RadNet levels. Unfortunately most of those beta levels have been taken down now and a lot of cities are not even reporting gamma levels any more. So we don't even have access to that information any more.
L. Moret: Yes, Dr. Busby told me, because he and I were talking daily for months, and he had a lot of insider information as a government radiation expert. And he said the EPA was lying from the beginning. The Japanese and American governments and Canadian governments were completely lying, and he said the only sources that he trusted and other radiation experts that we worked with in Germany and Russia, and other countries, the only data they trusted was the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty monitoring station at Cologne University in Germany and NILU in Norway, and they were both shut down [by] July 31st, and there is no reporting at all now. [Ed. Note: NILU was shut down on May 11, 2011, a suspiciously "occult date" divisible by "11" like "9/11]"].
Dr. Nadesan: Yes, and even the NILU, is that the Norwegian Institute?
L. Moret: Yes, yes.
Dr. Fetzer: The fact that there is no reporting now means that the numbers must be off the charts.
L. Moret: That's right.
Dr. Nadesan: The cesium levels are growing in Japan.
L. Moret: That's right.
Dr. Nadesan: And there was just an article that was published in one of the Japanese press, it was only a brief excerpt in English, but what the excerpt said was that they are finding that cesium levels in the area around Chernobyl continue to increase in the animals there. And so it is not clear whether it is increasing because the plant is spewing even more radiation, or it is increasing because of the bioaccumulation that occurs, and that is why the effects of this are going to be across time. Because it is really not so much the radiation we are exposed to in the air that is the biggest issue. It is as it ends up in our carrots, as it is absorbed. Any plant that absorbs potassium is going to be absorbing cesium from the soil, and so it is going to end up in the plants, and then it is going to end up in the animals, and at the top of the food chain these concentrations are going to get higher and higher and higher in us. And our body's ability to do the DNA repair will be weakened as it is simply overwhelmed by all this genetic damage that occurs.
L. Moret: That's right, and the bioaccumulation in the environment and in living systems is very complex because it is very different for each species or for each geographic location or weather or whatever. But I will give a couple of examples. In shellfish, these are filter feeders that take in water like clams, abalones, muscles, sea urchins, and they take minute particles out of the seawater and then release the seawater, the waste, and continue filter feeding. And the bioaccumulation can be 150,000 to 300 [thousand] times higher in, for instance, an oyster than the radiation levels in the sea water around it that it is living in. And this was discovered off of Seattle. A man suddenly died, a middle-aged man. And he loved to eat oysters. So they did an autopsy on him and did bioassays and everything, and he was just full of radioactive zinc. Well radioactive zinc, where does that come from? That is a fission product. So they went out and discovered where these oysters -- he knew where he was buying them, and they traced them to the producer, and discovered that the oyster bed was 150 miles off the coast of Seattle, and yet the levels were so high that they caused his death.
Dr. Fetzer: Don't you imagine this is from dumping polluted water into the ocean? It is inevitable it would happen from the beginning, so don't you suppose --
L. Moret: Oh, its Hanford and the Trojan Reactor on the Columbia River. They completely poisoned the Columbia River, and then currents take it all over.
Dr. Fetzer: You are telling me this is contamination coming from North America.
L. Moret: Yes, this is before Fukushima.
Dr. Fetzer: Ah!
L. Moret: And so this very same phenomenon is going to happen because of Fukushima over here. Now with fish living in fresh water and salt water, the carnivorous fish that eat smaller fish have lower levels of radiation concentration in them than fish that eat off of the bottom, and you know they pick up mud and filth and that is full of radiation. And so the bottom feeders have higher levels of radiation that the carnivorous fish. So there are all kinds of subtle differences and mechanisms in the environment for bio-concentrating in certain foods and animals. And what they are doing basically is poisoning the whole Pacific because these releases continue every day, twenty four hours a day, and they are dumping this into the ocean, or it is leaking into the ocean, carried by the great conveyor belt of circulation that goes around the North Pacific, and then goes through Southeast Asia, and then around Africa, and up around the Atlantic, so it circulates the entire world oceans, carrying all this Fukushima radiation. And who knows where it will go. But it is going to wash up on shorelines all over the world. And then it gets lofted into the air, and the worst thing is pregnant women getting exposed, especially in the first about six weeks. 80% of the embryos die in organisms that are exposed in the first six weeks of pregnancy.
Dr. Nadesan: There was a wonderful study that was done on the bird population in California after Chernobyl, and they found extremely high bird mortality for birds that ate new growth. What they found was that essentially no offspring were born, and it was because they were killed by the buildup of the iodine in the vegetation, which the birds ate and fed to their young. It led to this really high infant mortality. It was on the west side of the coastal mountain range. They didn't find it on the east side. So it was specific to how the fallout was dispersed and the role of mountains in shaping that. But yes, the contamination that is going into the ocean as well as the contamination in the air is going to end up in people, and this is an unprecedented level of radiation that has been released at one time. There is nothing like it. I don't know whether it exceeds the level released over atmospheric testing, but that occurred over a decade. It occurred in the 50's and did not stop until the 60's, it was started in the 40's. But we're talking about incredible volumes of radiation which is being released in a year period that essentially has been unmitigated. You know it is being released into the air, it is being released into the soil, it is being released into the ocean. It is unprecedented. It is called the worst release of radiation into the sea ever, and it is going to end up in us.
L. Moret: That's right.
Dr. Nadesan: That has implications.
L. Moret: Well, the difference between the radiation released from atmospheric testing and the Fukushima disaster as well as the whole nuclear power program and these uranium weapons they have been using on the battlefield since 1990 is that with atmospheric testing, those nuclear bombs were injected high into the atmosphere because they were actually using the radiation released from nuclear bombs to study the behavior of the earth's magnetic field in the ionosphere. And so that was really key to developing HAARP, actually. The difference now, and then the jet stream would primarily transport that radiation from west to east at the same latitude. But, 85% of that radiation from bomb testing is still up in the ionosphere. So we only got 15% protracted over the whole period up to now since 1952 when they did the first nuclear bomb test in the U.S. Now the weapons that are being used on the battlefields and the nuclear power plants and the Fukushima disaster are releasing large volumes of radiation, particulates, and it is even solids, liquids, and gas which are being picked up at ground level and then they are drifting up into the troposphere which is where all the storms and hurricanes and tornadoes -- it is the most turbulent part of the entire atmosphere-- so there is a 95% rainout of the radiation released on the ground within the first two and a half months. So Majia, we are getting a very, very, very acute exposure compared to the nuclear bomb test period.
Dr. Fetzer: Let's take our final break here. This is Jim Fetzer, your host with Leuren Moret and Majia Nadesan talking about Fukushima and its consequences. You don't want to miss everything left to say. We'll be right back.

Dr. Fetzer: This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Real Deal concluding my conversation with Leuren Moret and Majia Nadesan. I would just like to mention that the idea of this particular interview involving Majia, Leuren and me came from Bill Fox of America First Books who has had a number of astute ideas that we have liked and implemented that have made a big difference, I think, where this will be the third in a series of studies based upon these interviews that will be published in Veterans Today, and the previous two which wound up generating four different articles about all of this have been making their way around the world. They seem to be very well received. Leuren, you could comment about that.
L. Moret: Yes, they have been really well received, not so much by the people who do not like what we are doing, but I think they have had an astounding impact. And you know information is not just frightening. That is not why we are doing this. It is empowering. You really can't effectively act in your own best interest and take care of your family and friends and protect them unless you know what the truth is. So we are not doing this to frighten people or sensationalize this issue. It is the most serious issue in the world today, and it will continue to be for many centuries. So it is really a pubic service, and we are all very interested in hearing people's comments as well. But I think that what Majia is presenting today is a perspective and a way for people to understand what is really happening and how to look at the information being presented in the media and to understand that it is not the truth. To understand it has happened before, and to understand that economic factors are one of the main things behind it. But we also have to discuss before we end this interview some ways that are part of the solution. I don't like to leave people just knowing about the problem and not offering some solutions to them.
Dr. Fetzer: Let me just add a comment here about a technical, philosophical distinction, but it is obvious in this instance between what is known as "rationality of belief," which involves forming your beliefs based upon the available relevant evidence, where you need to make sure your belief is formed on the basis of all the relevant evidence to have it best founded in relation to what evidence is available, versus "rationality of action" which has to do with adopting measures or techniques or actions that are going to advance your goals. Ordinarily, to achieve effective action in the world you need a high degree of "rationality of belief" so you know the situation you are in and can take those actions that are best founded in terms of what you know. But, there can be those who have goals that entail deceiving a certain target population about the actual situation. So even though they may have rational beliefs, they may take actions that entail curtailing or suppressing or distorting the information that is available for their own specific goals. So this is very well illustrated here, I think, if you assume for example that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the nuclear energy industries want to protect their viability politically, and believe that can be done most effectively by suppressing or distorting the information about the catastrophes that have ensued from reliance on nuclear energy, then you can see where they can benefit in terms of "rationality of action" from deliberately disseminating information that is false or misleading, or simply manufactured in order to obtain that goal. So for the sake of "rationality of action," you can actually, based upon beliefs that are rational, nevertheless you can distort what you believe to be true for the sake of the objective that is your goal.
Dr. Nadesan: I think that is very important, and if you look at the history of public relations in the United States, Edward Bernays wrote a book called Propaganda, and he was actually an advisor to presidents, and encouraged fear of communism as a way of making the population malleable. And that kind of mentality, that really the role of leadership in democracies is to mobilize consent rather than to actually create a democratic society, I think perpetuates today. We see that the media, although the media is not always a tool being used for the purposes of propaganda, it often is. What people need to realize is to look for the inconsistencies and contradictions both within stories and also across stories and to realize that in many ways we are kind of in a crisis situation, because our food, our air, our water is all becoming increasingly contaminated, and we are starting to see the proliferation of diseases that simply cannot be explained by any kind of genetic or even lifestyle explanations like Parkinsons, growing cancer, growing thyroid cancer, growing autism, growing ADHD -- and these things are not simply all a function of just measuring them differently. Our bodies are essentially under assault from all of the chemical and radiological contaminants. And if we don't pay attention to what is happening and demand reform, really, if we don't demand reform, then we are compromising our genetic heritage and our survivability as a species. Fukushima to me is sort of like the last straw. If people don't wake up and see what is happening and demand transparency, and demand preventative action, demand collaborative governments' response across the world to deal with Fukushima, I really don't see how we can recover from this because it really just shows that no matter how large the crisis, the public is just going to sort of sleep through it until it is too late to recover.
Dr. Fetzer: Majia, I think what you are saying is exactly right, and we have been confronted with a series of environmental catastrophes, including the use of what now turn out to be advanced nuclear weapons in Iraq where we have all of the genetic defects that are taking place here, where a quarter of births are stillborn, and three quarters of those born live are suffering from serious genetic abnormalities. The BP disaster in the Gulf Coast which has contaminated so much of the shell food, shell fish, the lessor forms of life on which all the higher forms of life is dependant, you are going to have unbelievable effects on the coastal population, which of course as we know world-wide is where most of the world's population is located along the coasts of the different continents. And then of course now in Fukushima, I believe you are exactly right, that we are confronted with disasters of unparalleled proportions and that if the governments and the news media and so forth are so under the control of corporations they are placing profits ahead of people, that they are placing their own personal corporate interests ahead of the welfare of the people, that it may in fact make it impossible as a practical matter for effective steps to be taken, and thereby bring about the more rapid extinction of the human species. And I say this as a student of evolution, we are talking about events here of a magnitude that they have the capacity to bring about the extinction of the human species sooner rather than later by virtue of failing to take appropriate actions that might have been taken other than for the suppression of information or its deliberate distortion for the sake of private interests and maximizing profits.
L. Moret: Well on March 25th there was an article, AP article in the news, titled "Another Japan Reactor Shuts Down, Only One Left Operating," and this is really interesting, because what's happened is the Japanese people have been beaten into submission for a thousand years. They are very, very, very controlled socially. But, since this has happened, all the frustration and the anger and the outrageous extermination of the Japanese people in this instance has really mobilized them, and they are doing a lot of demonstrations in Japan. They are doing a lot of things despite the censorship there. The people are really mobilized, and suddenly the Japanese government and TEPCO are not willing to really turn all their reactors back on. In fact this last one which is up on Hokkaido, the northern island, they are going to turn that off. It is for refueling and inspection, but it is not expected to be turned back on again because of overwhelming opposition by the public at the local level. The local leaders are afraid to support nuclear power now because they won't get reelected, and then that proliferates up into the higher levels of the government. So we could see the end of nuclear power in Japan. I can see that now. But it is only because of the opposition of the people. And I went on 20 speaking tours to Japan between 2000 and 2010 and the people all over Japan at all levels were very interested in the information that I presented, and actually I took Dr. Busby's ECRR report which was the first risk model that challenged the U.S. Government basis for the world radiation exposure standards. [Ed. Note: A good example of Dr. Busby's work in this area prior to 2003 is "From Sellafield to Chernobyl and Beyond: Exposure to Man-Made Ionizing Radiation As the Primary Environmental Cause of Recent Cancer Issues, " Contribution to the ASPIS seminar, Kos Island, September 6, 2000. Please also see a Dr. Chris Busby archive here]. I stayed in Japan in 2003 all summer, and educated the lawyers who were representing the Japanese survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They had never won a law suit against the government just for health benefits. And after I educated them and they translated that new risk model, they went into the Japanese courts, conservative ones, like in Nagoya and Hiroshima, and they have been winning all their cases since then. So it is really up to the scientists to produce the good science, up to some people in academia like Majia Nadesan educating the public about how the media affects the information they are getting, and how that protects or doesn't protect the citizens. I just think a lot of really good things are going to come out of this terrible tragedy.
Dr. Fetzer: But the fact of the matter is even if there was a cessation of the nuclear power industry in Japan, we may nevertheless be anticipating the extinction of the Japanese population and culture. I mean that would take the nuclear energy industry with it, but it would have been a cause and effect relationship that is simply catastrophic.
Dr. Nadesan: And we have the same problems here in the United States. The San Onofre Nuclear Power plant I believe is shut down at the moment because they discovered that there had been deterioration of vital pipes. And there was no explanation how this deterioration could have occurred because the pipes were very new, and it is just that the entire plant was unsafe. Where I live there is the Palo Verde nuclear plant, and there is a gentleman who I have had correspondence with who has for his entire career, he is 89 now, but for his entire career he studied radiation, essentially. He has looked at the tritium emissions from the Palo Verde nuclear plant. He has a new book out --his name is Clyde Stanger -- that shows his analyses of the tritium releases and how they threaten human health in the Phoenix area, because tritium is continuously released from nuclear plants. It is essentially a radioactive isotope of hydrogen, and so there is no way you can filter it out, so it gets in your drinking water. It is in precipitation. It is in our lakes, it's in our swimming pools. As a beta particle if it is ingested and if it is somehow breathed in, it can do damage inside our body as an internal emitter. And Chris Busby's model that Leuren was discussing is significant because it looks at the effective internal emitters on the body and the models that had been used prior to that simply emphasized external exposure. When they did use models for calculating internal exposure it was based on an extrapolation that was developed before DNA was fully understood. So it doesn't look at things like the bystander effect, which shows the way in which radiation can damage cells that aren't even directly hit by the gamma radiation, or the beta radiation, just because of the synergy of the cells in their environment. So new understandings of the effects of radiation show conclusively how dangerous they are, and not just from plants that go awry like Fukushima, but by fully operating plants like Palo Verde, and yet nothing is being done. And in fact, instead, what is being done is proposals to build more nuclear plants and proposals to update the U.S. nuclear arsenal. I mean it is truly madness and can only be explained by greed and profit.
L. Moret: That's right, and another thing that is happening, this is very, very serious, the Fukushima [radiation] coming over to North America is being rained out and is contaminating all the surface water and irrigation supplies and then everything living on the plants or in the water or living on the land or in the water is going to bio-concentrate the radiation. It is going to increase every month, every week, every day for decades ahead. And what is being reported all over the world, and people are irate about it, is now Halliburton has special exemptions in the United States by the EPA and in other countries and those governments to conduct frackings, subsurface fracking. They are allowed to use extremely poisonous chemicals in the United States because the EPA gave them an exemption and a pass to use these horrible chemicals that were used also in the BP disaster in the Gulf, and nobody else is licensed to use those because they are so toxic. So they are pumping these horrible biological poisons as chemicals to do fracking, which is subsurface exploration for gas, and the chemicals are poisoning ground water. These are ancient aquifers where the water is a million years old or even more under ground. They are permanently poisoning them, and water districts very frequently take well water from aquifers or deep drilling, because that is like champagne, and they mix it with surface water which is the runoff from the mountains, which is loaded with the radiation. When you combine chemicals and radiation you get synergistic effects which are multiplications by many times of what one or the other, the chemicals or the radiation would cause. So you are subtly multiplying the effects of low levels of radiation and chemicals and coming out with a really, really killer result.
Dr. Fetzer: Let me add from a moral point of view that this is all very understandable from the point of view of the corrupt moral theory known as "limited utilitarianism," according to which an action is right when it maximizes benefits for the members of your group, regardless of the consequences for others. So it could be exemplified by the Third Reich. It could be exemplified by the mafia. It could be exemplified by General Motors. An illustration of General Motors was when the corporation made the decision to put the fuel tank on the outside of the frame of certain pickup trucks they knew in anticipation there would be more deaths and maiming from fires that would result from accidents that otherwise would not have brought about those effects, but they had lot's of lawyers they were paying retainers anyway. So they went ahead to do it because it would have cost a $1.05 or so more to put them on the inside of the frame than the out[side], and they realized that by making calculations even if they had to handle law suits they would come out ahead profit-wise, and clearly that is going on here with the nuclear power industry. I published an article about it titled "Are Corporations Inherently Corrupt" which you can find online. Marjorie Kelly has a brilliant book entitled "The Divine Right of Capital" in which she proposes that corporations have to be re-conceptualized, reconstituted so that they are performing some public good, which used to be the case in the past. But perhaps most simply put, that they should be serving not merely the interests of the stockholders by maximizing their profits, but they have to maximize the benefits to stakeholders, namely everyone whose interests are affected by the actions taken by the corporation. So you now have to take into account consumers, the environment, the general situation from the point of view of ecology and evolution, which would transform our understanding of the functioning of corporations, so these kinds of catastrophes would not occur. All of this must be contrasted with a deontological viewpoint according to which every human being, every person must be treated as an end, and not merely as a means. I mean the classic kinds of abuse that humans exercise on other humans, murder, robbery, kidnapping, rape, are all very easily understood as using other people merely as means. When you cannot use other people merely as means, you restore mutual respect between parties where one another are respecting each other with regard to their interests, which of course can be then generalized even in a democracy often identified with classic utilitarianism where the greatest good for the greatest number does not satisfy the deontological conception because you could have a society,for example, that was a slave-based society that produces more happiness for the majority, if say 85% were the majority and 15% the slaves, even though the slaves were very, very, unhappy by being used by the majority. It could be the case that this arrangement for society would produce the greatest good for the greatest number, but if you work it the other way around, and recognize that a democracy and majority rule only functions properly when you have minority rights combined with majority rule so that even the minorities have to be respected. Then you get the proper balance between morality and politics, which is a subject that I discuss in "Render Unto Darwin," one of my most recent books about all these issues, including a critique of creation science and intelligent design and creationism in relation to evolution which has to be understood as having multiple variations because there are eight different causal mechanisms that affect the evolution of species and where most of the criticisms of evolution have been based upon caricatures that only cite for example genetic mutation and natural selection when they are discounting or ignoring genetic drift, sexual reproduction, sexual selection, group selection, genetic engineering, and so forth. So I just say there is a very broad intellectual canvass here that we are addressing that has many elements, but where the domination of corporations in pursuit of profits is really at the heart of the matter, I am sorry to say, and is corrupting life on this planet and may even lead to its ultimate extinction sooner rather than later.
Dr. Nadesan: And in a democratic society government has the responsibility to arbitrate neutrally competing interests, and unfortunately we see so many ways with the financial crisis, the BP oil spill, the Fukushima disaster, genetically modified food -- and not so much the genetic modification but what they are being genetically modified for, to be doused in Roundup, we are seeing over and over again that governments' willingness, ability, capabilities, to protect the public interests have been fundamentally eroded. And they have been eroded because of the revolving door and conflicts of interests and greed. This is incredibly important now because we are reaching such a critical point. As Leuren says, our fresh water supplies are being compromised by both chemicals and radionuclides. Our food supply is being compromised by the lack of fresh water, by erratic climate change and this year it may even have been impacted by all the radiation that Fukushima has spewed. So we have all these pressing problems that are threatening our continued survival, and yet our governing apparatuses are self-serving and self-interested and as a result are simply unwilling to address these issues. And the public is complacent. So if we don't all wake up and act collaboratively to fix them, we are not going to have a very happy future.
Dr. Fetzer: Majia, I can't thank you enough for coming on this show today. You are making excellent contributions. I greatly value your perspective. You have greatly enriched our understanding of these issues. Leuren, I can't thank you enough for being here again. And I want to conclude by thanking Bill Fox once more for having a brilliant idea in recommending that we have this particular interview. This is Jim Fetzer, your host, thanking my guests, Majia Nadesan and Leuren Moret for being here, and all of you for listening.

Jim Fetzer, PhD. is the McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, is a former Marine Corps officer and the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

Leuren Moret is an independent geoscientist who has done expert studies on the Fukushima disaster, radiation problems around the world including depleted uranium.

Majia Nadesan, PhD., is a professor of communication in the Division of Social and Behavioral Sciences in the New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences at Arizona State University.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Resources supplied by Dr. Majia Nadesan:

The link to the Willamette College conference proceedings:
http://www.willamette.edu/events/fukushima/stream/index.html
I was the second speaker on the 2nd day.
My extended powerpoint presentations can be found on these two websites:
http://www.powershow.com/view/3813de-MmI2M/Lessons_of_Fukushima_Powerpoint_Majia_Nadesan_flash_ppt_presentation
http://asu.academia.edu/majianadesan/Papers/1506315/Lessons_From_Fukushima

Relevant Studies

For every 10 mSv of low-dose ionizing radiation, there was a 3% increase in the risk of age- and sex-adjusted cancer over a mean follow-up period of five years (hazard ratio 1.003 per milliSievert, 95% confidence interval 1.002–1.004). Cancer risk related to low-dose ionizing radiation from cardiac imaging in patients after acute myocardial infarction. By M J. Eisenberg, Jonathan A., P. R. Lawler, M. Abrahamowicz , Hugues R., L. Pilote http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3050947/?tool=pubmed

New Research on childhood leukemia and nuclear plants suggests significant health effects from low levels of ionizing radiation International Journal of Cancer study by C. Sermage-Faure, D. Laurier, S. Goujon-Bellec, M. Chartier, A. Guyot-Goubin, J. Rudant, D. Hemon and J. Clavel, “Childhood leukemia around French nuclear power plants – the Geocap study, 2002 – 2007,” http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.27425/pdf.

Prof. Yuri Bandazhevsky found that children contaminated with cesium-137 producing 50 disintegrations per second (becquerels) per kilogram of body weight suffered irreversible heart damage . (Starrr, S. 2012 Health Threat From Cesium 1-137. Japan Times Feb 16. Available: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/rc20120216a1.html

Genomic Damage in Children Accidently Exposed to Ionizing Radiation: A Review of the Literature. Fucic, A. et al. (2008). Mutation Research, 658, 111-123. “Overall, the evidence from the studies…reveals consistently increased chromosome aberration and micronuclei frequency in exposed than in referent children”

New Understandings of radiation: Bystander effect and DNA Instability

New model emphasizes how low-dose radiation can cause indirect damage to cells through the bystander effect and through genomic instability. The effects of low-dose ionizing radiation are variable and can reduce DNA repair mechanisms, operate lethally on cells or some instances activate them depending upon type of radiation, chemical environment, etc.
Dietrich Averbeck, a, Towards a New Paradigm for Evaluating the Effects of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis Volume 687, Issues 1-2, 1 May 2010 pages 7-12

Detection is biased toward small particles and large particles are often not measured
Risk is formulated in relation to external exposure patterns rather than internal emitters.
“Health effects depend on the number of released particles and their properties. Particle size and activity are the dominant quantities affecting radiological hazards. Risk estimates are usually performed for inhalable beta-emitting particles smaller than a few micrometres in size [such as Cesium and Iodine] (Burkart, 1988; Hofmann et al., 1988; Kritidis et al., 1988; Lange et al; 1988; Likhtariov et al., 1995; Lindner et al., 1992; Vapirev and Grozev, 1993), whereas the effects of large particles are neglected”

Cesium Radiation contamination persists in Russia today:

“The long-lived radionuclide, 137Cs, has still a significant influence upon the current radiological situation in the western part of the Bryansk Region contaminated due to the Chernobyl accident. The median value of 137Cs inventories in the areas of 30 settlements studied was 350 times higher than the current ground deposit of the radionuclide resulting from nuclear weapon fallout” Gamma-dose rates from terrestrial and Chernobyl radionuclides inside and outside settlements in the Bryansk Region, Russia in 1996–2003 Original
Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, Volume 85, Issues 2-3, 2006, Pages 205-227

Regarding Xenon Gas and the the 400 million lethal dose quote:

November 14, 2011 Xenon Gas and Lethal Doses by Inhalation http://www.aipri.blogspot.com/ (this site is in French so I used Google translate): The AIPR or International Association for the Protection Against Ionizing Radiation posted this on Nov 4 (please note it is translated from the French) "The program "semi formalized" in Fukushima of 1.67 E19 Bq 133 Xe gas have meant the spread of 2.411 kg. This emission is equivalent in terms of internal radiation lung 400.8 million in potentially lethal doses by inhalation. As shown, 2.4 kg of material having the power to kill only transient 400 million people, the Xenon 133 is classified as very low radiotoxic. It's not beautiful science! "The Xe 133 has a half-life of 5.244 days. It decreases in beta mode with a decay constant of 1.52985 s-1 E-6. (Ln (2) / T1 / 2 ie 0.693147 / 5.244 * 24 * 60 * 60 = 1.52985 E-6. ) The specific activity of E15 6.9271 Bq / g E05 Ci/gr.- -1.872 (6.0221415 E 23 / ??133 * 1.5299 = 6.9271 E-06 E15 Bq / gr.) The inhalation dose factor is of 1.20 E-10 Sv / Bq.