The radiation safety issue has long been extremely contentious. Radiation
safety levels established by the government as shown historically, have
left the public undefended. The intentional contamination of the public
with dangerous levels of radiation represents outright criminal behavior.
Investigations like former senator John Glenn's that exposed how the
U.S. government killed people, as well as damaging their genes, is rapidly
disappearing from public awareness.
Rosalie Bertel has documented how the very agencies that have been
set up to establish safety levels are biased, and have never ever allowed
representatives to be part of the bodies that set radiation standards.
In what has to be one of the most dramatic examples of wholesale manipulation,
several international bodies have set up a global campaign to hide the
true impacts of the Chernobyl disaster from the world at a time when
the industry is driving to push for new reactors around the world.
How the radiation safety issue is being presented to the public is
highly biased. One of the best examples of this extreme bias can be
see with the President's recent blue ribbon commission that has been
set up to deal with radioactive wastes. Not a single environmental organization
or scientist that might represent a counter to the nuclear industry
was selected.
The behavior of the government on the radiation safety issue has two
faces. Their demeanor towards general public which is unfamilar with
the historic nature of this issue and then towards those who have been
caught in the government's system. Whistleblowers, workers, environmentalists,
stakeholders or anyone who has been effected by radiation find themselves
in a David & Goliath situation, where few resources exist to help
them obtain help or present their case to the public or government.
The desperate conditions of these people has long been ignored by the
national media. The government and the media have been using the national
security claim to hide the radiation impacts to locally effected communities.
Very few people outside of these affected communities are aware of
the scope of the problem. For example how many people are aware of the
$400 million legal settlement that homeowners near the Rocky Flats community
received in 2006 over contamination of their properties from radiation!
In community after community there are stories about the hundred's of
thousands of radiation workers having lost their health, but only a
fraction of those applying for benefits have been granted due to the
structure of how the program pits them against the government. Most
people involved believed that the ultimate agenda of the government
on this issue is to wait until all of the workers who have been affected
are dead. Then in conjunction with this stonewalling tactic, we have
watched as most of the national media has refused to even discuss the
immense tragegy going on. There have been several attempts by a handful
of local media outlets to cover this tragedgy like the now defunct Rocky
Mountain News.
But let's go even farther. Most older people in this country watched
the dramatic shift in how cigarettes used to be openly tolerated. The
terrible tragedy of hundred's of thousands of people dying yearly due
to their cigarette addictions has cost this country dearly in terms
of the medical costs of taking care of those afflicted. However, as
early as the late 1970's, there was documented evidence that much of
the impacts of cigarettes is directly related to radiation, especially
when it comes to second hand smoke. Long ago, the New England Journal
of Medicine reported that one of the most dangersous aspects of cigarette
smoking comes from the natural radiation that is drawn into tobacco
from the Polonium 210 that comes from the use of commercial fertilizers.
Thanks to worker safety campaigns there is now a stronger awareness
that the overuse of x-rays and other radioisotopes involved in medical
treatment have health impacts. From radon gasses to the burning of carbon
based fuels, we are forever increasing the natural background level
of radiation. The entire country has been told that increase in cancers
to the general public has nothing to do with the increased exposure
levels. Yet, as anyone who watches this issue closely knows, that if
there is no safe level of radiation, whether it be from naturally occuring
or man-made releases, somebody isn't quite wanting to acknowledge or
address this with the larger public.
If you've read this far, here's the first step in how you might want
to relate to this highly charged issued. Average people have an intuitive
ability to see when people are lying to them. We have documented that
our government has historically been caught lying to the public about
radiation and its impacts. Even to the point of purposefully destroying
people's lives. The documented proof of these acts are available for
anyone to see with the federal government's own official website documenting
many of the most agregious events. In our society, once a person commits
a crime, it is very hard for that individual to ever be openly trusted
again. Most of us have a natural suspicion of claims made. Yet, its
not easy to looke an agency with thousands of workers in the eye and
ever get a direct answer.
At present activists who have been involved in this issue over the
last 25 years have shown over and over why it is all but impossible
to trust the U.S. government on this issue right up through the present.
The Department of Energy has one of the largest libraries of secret
documents of any agency. The public has had to go to extreme lengths
to obtain the details of what happened in the past.
National Security has been used to hide the wrongdoings of this goverment
from the public. There has long been a cold war environment of extremist
politics that have played out from all of those who have ever taken
the reigns of this agency. It represents an immense budget that is in
turn given to giant private companies in the form of massive contracts
to operate huge facilities like the massive Hanford nuclear resevation
in Washington state, or any of the dozen plus facilities located across
the country. Today, the DOE pays the salaries of over 200,000 private
contract workers, while only 15,000 others actually work at government
level salaries. There has long been a massive concern that the agency,
under conservative strategists have dramatically shifted almost all
work to private contractors over the last decade. Few citizens are aware
of this massive agency's role in promoting the nuclear agenda which
is where most of its billions of dollars are spent. It is these gigantic
companies who take in huge contracts that then hire lobbyists to push
their quasi-private agenda.
As a result of high profile contamination stories a generation ago,
the entire DOE infrastructure after the collapse of the Soviet Union
was believed to be ready to be shut down. After years of work during
the mid 1990's the process of evaluating the scope of the environmental
and human toll of the nuclear weapons disaster slowly came out. Today,
the DOE's own cleanup division has reported that it will take $270-330
billion to clean up the radioactive contamination across the country.
This problem is immense and inbedded. The systematic attempt to bury
safety issues and attack the messengers of the problem have led to nearly
a nationwide institutional problem. The scientific community is mostly
ensnared in this problem in terms of how professionals obtain funding
and develop status. At the hard physics institutional level, dare tell
your professor that you are in school to train to be an anti-nuclear
health expert, or take on regulatory oversight of nuclear contractors
with the goal of carrying out a precautionary principle!
Dear reader, the two sides on this issue have become so ideologically
opposite that the people in charge see opponents and stakeholders with
complete disdain. For decades opponents have relied almost exclusively
on volunteer or extremely small budgets to impact government policies.
During the Bush administration, opponents watched as a whole new push
was set in motion to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to redevelop
a whole new generation of nuclear weapons and commerical reactors.
There has been no serious attempt by the media to educate the public
about the dangers of radiation issues. Most people in this country are
oblivious to this issue simply because the media refuses to alarm or
educate the large populace about the issue. Nuclear opposition relies
almost exclusively upon public sentiment. If the public is kept in the
dark, then it is much easier to keep a status quo going.
Has anti-nuclear opponents overstated the dangers of radiation today?
No!
Has the pro-nuclear side understated the dangers of radiation?
Yes!
Are nuclear reactors relatively more safe today than they were 30 years
ago?
Yes!
Can the pro-nuclear side guarantee the public that there will be no
further disasters that could displace all of its benefits?
No!
Why is it that every generation the public is forced to accept claims
that a generation later are exposed as being wrong?
Have you ever asked a grassroots pro-nuclear activist if they have
ever donated money to an environmental group prior to bringing up their
views on nuclear safety?
.
The
Energy Net
Most
of us aren't experts on this kind of thing, but there was a rather
big controversy about this stuff in the past. Doesn't take long
for people to forget and move onto other things. This isn't an issue
that plays well these days. Lots of other things on people's minds.
But just in case you know somebody that has had a bout with cancer
or heard Radon might be seeping into their basement, there might
be a few resources here that will help you sort things out, or even
spook you into making a few changes. 
Radiation
has been around since the beginning of time. Awareness of it by
humans however, is rather new in terms of understanding it. At this
point in time you should know that this site is not happy about
how radiation issues has been presented as something the authorities
have a handle on. There has never been a real precautionary principle
by those who are in charge of protecting the public. From the death
of some of its earliest scientists, like Madam Curie to formation
of "safe standards" the history of our use of radiation
has been full of scandals. Over time, it has become clear that there
is a major tension between economic interests that are driving its
expansion vs. real public safety. The details of how and why we
have become a world flooded with growing health problems can be
found here by looking at the real struggles over the exploitation
of radiation.
