The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: High Radiation Levels In America! Oklahoma City

The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: High Radiation Levels In America! Oklahoma City Hit By High Radiation Levels From Rainfall On August 6th, 2011.

 August 7 2011

For a while now, I have been trying to keep up on any reports of high radiation being experience here in Canada as a result of the fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster that is still ongoing, despite all of the news reports that are now downplaying that disaster.  More reports about the levels here in Canada will be coming up soon in this blog….

In the meantime, I just came across a very startling and disturbing video, that comes from Youtube user “FireByNIght”.  In this video, that I have embedded here in this report, “FireByNight” has taken readings in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on the night of August 6th, 2011, of radiation from rainfall that had occurred that night after a very long period of drought.   Please watch this video to see the results for yourselves:

NTS Notes:  Again, I want to thank Youtube user, “FireByNight” for taking these readings and exposing the fact that America, as well as Canada, is experiencing deadly radioactive fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster.   It does seem that the citizens in BOTH the US and Canada are being lied to when our governments claim: “There is no cause for alarm” when it comes to this ongoing nuclear disaster.

And where is the US as well as the Canadian government in all of this?  Our media is continuing to downplay the fallout danger from Fukushima, and trying to keep the public unaware of the dangers that we truly face.    Again as I have stated before this is not negligence on the part of our media, or our governments, but outright criminality!

Please spread this information around for others to see…. We must all demand that our governments come clean about the danger that we face from the ongoing disaster at Fukushima.

Compliments of Northern Truth Seeker.

Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Fallout Maps

Where the wind blows it goes.

The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster in Perspective

Dr. Helen Caldicott’s March 18th press conference in Montreal, sponsored by the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

Our thanks to Felton Davis for the transcription from the GRTV Video recording and for the annotations.


This press conference organized by Globla Research was held in the context of Helen Caldicott’s public lecture to Montreal on March 18, 2011.

First I want to present this report, produced by the New York Academy of Sciences, a report on Chernobyl.  It can be downloaded.(2)  They translated 5,000 articles from Russian for the first time into English.  It seems that nearly a million people have already died as a result of Chernobyl, despite what the WH0(3) says and the IAEA.(4)  This is one of the most monstrous cover-ups in the history of medicine.  Because everybody should know about this.

Then we extrapolate through to Japan.  Japan is by orders of magnitude many times worse than Chernobyl.  Never in my life did I think that six nuclear reactors would be at risk.(5)  I knew that three GE engineers who helped design these Mark I GE reactors, resigned because they knew they were dangerous.(6)

So Japan built them on an earthquake fault.  The reactors partially withstood the earthquake, but the external electricity supply was cut off, and the electricity supplies the cooling water, a million gallons a minute, to each of those six reactors.  Without the cooling water, the water [level] falls, and the rods are so hot they melt, like at Three Mile Island, and at Chernobyl.

So the emergency diesel generators, which are as large as a house, got destroyed by the tsunami, so there is no way to keep the water circulating in the reactors.(7)  Also, on the roofs of the reactors, not within the containment vessel, are cooling pools.  Every year they remove about thirty tons of the most radioactive rods that you can possibly imagine.(8)  Each one is twelve feet long and half an inch thick.  It gives out so much radiation, that if you stand next to it for a couple of minutes, you’ll die.  Not drop dead.  Remember Litvinenko, the Russian, who got poisoned by polonium?(9)  You’ll die like that, with your hair falling out, and bleeding with massive infection, like AIDS patients die.

And [the spent fuel rods] are thermally hot, so they have to be put in a big pool, and continually cooled.  The pool has really no roof.

There have been three hydrogen explosions, blowing off the roof of the building, not the containment vessel of the core, but the roof.  And exposing the cooling pool.(10)  Two of the cooling pools are dry.  They have no water in them.  Meaning that the nuclear fuel rods are covered with a material called zirconium.  When zirconium is exposed to air, it burns, it ignites.  Two of the cooling pools at this moment are burning.  In the cooling pools are many times, like 10 to 20 times more radiation than in each reactor core.  In each reactor core is as much long-lived radiation as would be produced by a thousand Hiroshima-sized bombs.  We are dealing with diabolical energy.

E=MC2 is the energy that blows up nuclear bombs.  Einstein said nuclear power is a hell of a way to boil water.(11)  Because that is all nuclear power is used for, to boil water through the massive heat, turn it into steam, and turn a turbine which generates electricity.

Now when you fission uranium, 200 new elements are formed, all of which are much more poisonous to the body than the original uranium.(12)  Although uranium is pretty poisonous.  America used it in Fallujah, and in Baghdad.  And in Fallujah, 80 per cent of the babies being born are grossly deformed.(13)  They’re being born without brains, single eyes, no arms…  The doctors have told the women to stop having babies.  The incidence of childhood cancer has gone up about twelve times.  This is genocide — it’s a nuclear war being conducted in Iraq.  The uranium that they’re using lasts more than 4.5 billion years.  So we’re contaminating the cradle of civilization.  “The coalition of the willing!”

In the nuclear power plants, however, there is a huge amount of radiation: two hundred elements.  Some last seconds, some last millions of years.  Radioactive iodine lasts six weeks, causes thyroid cancer.  That’s why people are saying, “Better take potassium iodide,” because that blocks the thyroid uptake of radioactive iodine, which later can cause thyroid cancer.

In Chernobyl, over 20,000 people have developed thyroid cancer.(14)  They have their thyroids out, and they will die unless they take thyroid replacement every day, like a diabetic has to take insulin.
Strontium-90 will get out, it lasts for 600 years.  It goes to the bone, where it causes bone cancer or leukemia.  Cesium lasts for 600 years — it’s all over Europe.  40 per cent of Europe is still radioactive.  Turkish food is extremely radioactive.  Do not buy Turkish dried apricots, or Turkish hazelnuts.  The Turks were so cross with the Russians, they sent all their radioactive tea over to Russia after Chernobyl.(15)

Forty per cent of Europe is still radioactive.  Farms in Britain, their lambs are so full of cesium they can’t sell them.  Don’t eat European food.

But that’s nothing compared to what’s happening now.  One of the most deadly [nuclear byproducts] is plutonium, named after Pluto, god of the underworld.  One millionth of a gram, if you inhale it, would give you cancer.  Hypothetically, one pound of plutonium if evenly distributed could give everyone on earth cancer.  Each reactor has 250 kilograms of plutonium in it.  You only need 2.5 kilograms to make an atomic bomb, because plutonium is what they make bombs with.

So any country that has a reactor, works with your uranium.  You [Canada] are the biggest exporter of uranium in the world.(16)  Canada sells two things: it sells wheat for life, and uranium for death.  Plutonium is going to get out and spread all over the northern hemisphere.  It’s already heading towards North America now.

Radioactive iodine, plus strontium, plus cesium, plus tritium, and I could go on and* on and on.  When it rains, downs come fallout, and it concentrates in food.  If it gets into the sea, the algae concentrate it, hundreds of times.  And the crustaceans concentrate it, hundreds of times.  And then the little fish, then the big fish, then us.(17)

Because we stand on the apex of the food chain.  You can’t taste these radioactive food elements, you can’t see them, you can’t smell them.  They’re silent.  When you get them inside your body, you don’t suddenly drop dead of cancer, it takes five to sixty years to get your cancer, and when you feel a lump in your breast, it doesn’t say, “I was made by some strontium-90 in a piece of fish you ate twenty years ago.”

All radiation is damaging.  It’s cumulative — each dose you get adds to your risk of getting cancer.  The americium is more dangerous than plutonium — I could go on and on.  Depends if it rains if you’re going to get it or not.  If it rains and the radiation comes down, don’t grow food, and don’t eat the food, and I mean don’t eat it for 600 years.

Radioactive waste from nuclear power is going to be buried, I hear, next to Lake Ontario.  It’s going to leak, last for millions of years, it’s going to get into the water, and into the food chains.  Radioactive waste will induce epidemics of cancer, leukemia, and genetic disease for the rest of time.  This is the greatest public health hazard the world has ever witnessed, apart from the threat every day of nuclear war.

Einstein said “the splitting of the atom changed everything, save man’s mode of thinking” — very profound — “and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.”  We are arrogant, we have a lot of hubris, and I think the reptilian mid-brain of some men’s brains is pathological.(18)

We are in a situation where we have harnessed the energy of the sun.  It is totally out of control.  And there’s simply nothing we can do about it.

Source

Older report with radiation fallout maps included. The radiation fallout is massive at this point in time.

Add to that the radiation poisoning from wars

What a hell of a mess they are creating.

Fox News tell you all is well. LOL Rightttt.

Obama in a Radiation protection suit, says all is well. Right Sure it is.

I feel so safe after that one. Don’t you?

Obama says “Don’t worry folks, I am not paranoid that is why I am wearing the pretty yellow suit”.

Hello any intelligent life out there. And one has to wonder where Obama and friends are getting their drinking water and food..

Monitoring stations catch a fraction of Fukushima fallout

By Alex Roslin, August 4, 2011

Confused by all the nuke lingo about becquerels and sieverts and what it means for your health? So were most of the nuclear experts we talked to for this story.

It also doesn’t help that Health Canada’s data on the radioactive fallout from Fukushima is so sparse and confusingly reported that it’s hard to figure out whether or not it exceeds government limits.

Health Canada reports on monitoring data for only three or four of the hundreds of radioactive substances spewing out of the crippled Japanese nuclear plant.

Canada also has only five monitoring stations that contain equipment sensitive enough to notice levels of specific radioactive substances from Fukushima in the air.

“They’re measuring only a fraction of the radioactive fallout from Fukushima,” said Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, speaking from Montreal.

In contrast, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has 200 monitoring stations checking for up to 11 radioactive substances in everything from air and milk to drinking water and rainwater.

Health Canada’s radiation-monitoring webpage downplays any fallout concerns, saying radiation reaching Canada has been “within normal background levels”. That’s based largely on data from a second network of 35 other monitoring stations that have less sensitive equipment (including 12 in B.C.).

But an analysis of the data from these stations shows radiation levels did hit sustained above-normal levels for an average of 36 days in March and April after Fukushima. The radiation level rose to 0.48 microsieverts per day, on average, during this time, up from 0.43 seen in the rest of the monitoring data between March 10 and July 27—or an increase of 11 percent.

Of all the B.C. sites, the biggest spike was in Victoria, where the level rose from 0.23 to 0.25 microsieverts per day between March 19 and 25—an increase of 9.9 percent. Vancouver saw a four-percent increase, from 0.43 to 0.45 microsieverts.

The worst-hit city in Canada was Regina. It saw a 90-percent spike in its radiation level, from 0.36 to 0.69 microsieverts per day. Yellowknife was second-highest with a 31-percent jump, followed by Toronto with a 26-percent rise.

But this data downplays the radiation from Fukushima, Edwards said. The less sensitive equipment also picks up large amounts of background radiation from natural sources like the sun and soil.

It also doesn’t spot jumps in the type of radioactive substances released in a nuclear accident, like iodine-131. Another problem: sieverts are a questionable way to measure radiation because they include a subjective calculation of the radiation’s impact on a person, and so the results can be manipulated to play down impacts, Edwards said.

“It’s a shell game. Microsieverts are quite a distance removed from the raw data. They’re blending in stuff from nature to make the data look innocuous,” he says.

You have to scroll down to the bottom of Health Canada’s radiation webpage to find the more striking data from the five stations monitoring specific radioactive substances.

This data shows the air at the five stations contained an average of 33.3 millibecquerels of radioactive iodine per cubic metre during 30.4 days of elevated radiation.

That works out to double the 16.7 millibecquerels per cubic metre of iodine-131 that would be permitted over those 30.4 days, according to the maximum limit set by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. (The commission’s ceiling is 200 millibecquerels per cubic metre of exposure in the air on a daily basis for an entire year. That equates to 16.7 millibecquerels per cubic metre over 30.4 days.)

The station in Sidney, B.C., detected 19.4 millibecquerels per cubic metre of iodine-131 in the air during a 22-day-long spike in radiation. That was 61 percent higher than the maximum dose of 12.1 millibecquerels per cubic metre permitted for 22 days.

Source

Kelowna BC receives High Fukushima Fallout Radioactive Rain

July 2011

Dangerous Radioactive rain in Lake Louise, AB

The radiation levels here are dangerously high.

July 2011

Fukushima, Japan China Syndrome or Chernobyl

Maps of Nuclear Sites in US, Europe and Japan

On June 26, 1954, at Obninsk, Russia, the nuclear power plant APS-1 with a net electrical output of 5 MW was connected to the power grid, the world’s first nuclear power plant that generated electricity for commercial use. On August 27, 1956 the first commercial nuclear power plant, Calder Hall 1, Eng-land, with a net electrical output of 50 MW was connected to the national grid.

As of August 7, 2011 in 30 countries 432 nuclear power plant units with an installed electric net capacity of about 366 GW are in operation and 65 plants with an installed capacity of 65 GW are in 16 countries under construction.

As of end 2009 the total electricity production since 1951 amounts to 64,600 billion kWh. The cumulative operating experience amounted to 14,570 years by August 2011.

Country

In operation

Under construction

Number

Electr. net output
MW

Number

Electr. net output
MW
Argentina

2

935

1

692

Armenia

1

375

Belgium

7

5,927

Brazil

2

1,884

1

1,245

Bulgaria

2

1,906

2

1,906

Canada

18

12,569

China

  • Mainland
  • Taiwan

14

6

11,058

4,982

27

2

27,230

2,600

Czech Republic

6

3,678

Finland

4

2,716

1

1,600

France

58

63,130

1

1,600

Germany

9

12,068

Hungary

4

1,889

India

20

4,391

5

3,564

Iran

1

915

Japan

50

44,215

2

2,650

Korea, Republic

21

18,698

5

5,560

Mexico

2

1,300

Netherlands

1

482

Pakistan

3

725

1

315

Romania

2

1,300

Russian Federation

32

22,693

11

9,153

Slovakian Republic

4

1,816

2

782

Slovenia

1

688

South Africa

2

1,800

Spain

8

7,567

Sweden

10

9,298

Switzerland

5

3,263

Ukraine

15

13,107

2

1,900

United Kingdom

19

10,137

USA

104

101,240

1

1,165

Total

432

365,837

65

62,862

Source

This is not a complete list as Israel has Nuclear plants as well.

Inspectors are never allowed in there however.

Israel’s Dirty Nuclear Secrets, Human experiments and WMD

There is more information at the site on new ones being build as well.

Uranium Mining, Grand Canyon now at Risk, Dangers, Pollution, History

Grand Canyon protection from mining about to end

By Ginger D. Richardson

December.5 2008
The Arizona Republic

The Bureau of Land Management today is expected to eliminate a regulation that gave two congressional committees the ability to block future uranium mining and exploration on public lands near the Grand Canyon.

The little-used provision, which is buried in Section 204 of the 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act, has for decades provided the House and Senate natural-resources committees with the authority to take emergency action to protect threatened federal land.

It was last invoked in June by Tucson Democrat Raul Grijalva, in a failed attempt to order Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to ban immediately new mining claims on more than 1 million acres of property near the Canyon for a period up to three years.

The department ignored the order, questioning its constitutionality, and started in late October the public process to abolish the rule.

Thursday, Grijalva, who is rumored to be a leading candidate to head the Interior Department in President-elect Barack Obama’s Cabinet, blasted the Bush administration’s decision to abolish the regulation.

“This last-minute change puts at risk the health of millions of citizens of the West,” Grijalva said in a statement, adding that “in my view, the Grand Canyon is one of those places that deserves extra protection from the impact of industrial activities.”

Roger Clark, air and energy director for the Grand Canyon Trust, expressed similar sentiments.

“We are deeply disappointed that the Bush administration places a higher priority on helping the mining industry than it does on protecting the Grand Canyon,” he said.

Environmentalists fear that uranium mining could adversely harm the national park and have a negative impact on the Colorado River, which provides drinking water to residents in Arizona, Nevada and California.

But the BLM, one of several agencies under the umbrella of the Interior Department, has argued that ample protections are in place to protect the Grand Canyon and to ensure the sanctity of federal lands.

This week’s action likely will not end the fight; environmental groups have sued over the mining issue, and that case is pending in U.S. District Court.

Source

The Effects of Uranium Mining are Disastrous.
Extracting a disaster

By David Thorp

December 5 2008

The increased sourcing of raw uranium that will arise from nuclear new build is an ethical and environmental nightmare currently being ignored by the government.

The World Nuclear Association (WNA), the trade body for companies that make up 90% of the industry, admits that in “emerging uranium producing countries” there is frequently no adequate environmental health and safety legislation, let alone monitoring. It is considerately proposing a Charter of Ethics containing principles of uranium stewardship for its members to follow. But this is a self-policing voluntary arrangement. Similarly, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s safety guide to the Management of Radioactive Waste from the Mining and Milling of Ores (pdf) are not legally binding on operators.

The problem is that transparency is not a value enshrined in the extractive or the nuclear industries. Journalists find themselves blocked. Recently, to tackle this issue, Panos Institute West Africa (IPAO) held a training seminar for journalists in Senegal which highlighted that only persistent investigation – or, in the case of the Niger’s Tuareg, violent rebellion – has a chance of uncovering the truth.

The co-editor of the Republican in Niger, Ousseini Issa, said that only due to local media campaigns was there a revision of the contract linking Niger to the French company Areva. “As a result of our efforts, the price of a kilogram of uranium increased from 25,000 to 40,000 CFA francs,” he said. The local community hopes now to see more of the income from the extraction of its resources.

IPAO has much evidence that in Africa the legacy of mining is often terrible health, water contamination and other pollution problems. IPAO would laugh at the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative – an Orwellian creation launched by Tony Blair in 2001.

What is the effect of uranium mining? Nuclear fuel from fresh uranium is cheaper than from recycled uranium or recycled plutonium (MOX), which is why there is a worldwide uranium rush.

To produce the 25 tonnes or so of uranium fuel needed to keep your average reactor going for a year entails the extraction of half a million tonnes of waste rock and over 100,000 tonnes of mill tailings. These are toxic for hundreds of thousands of years. The conversion plant will generate another 144 tonnes of solid waste and 1343 cubic metres of liquid waste.

Contamination of local water supplies around uranium mines and processing plants has been documented in Brazil, Colorado, Texas, Australia, Namibia and many other sites. To supply even a fraction of the power stations the industry expects to be online worldwide in 2020 would mean generating 50 million tonnes of toxic radioactive residues every single year.

These tailings contain uranium, thorium, radium, polonium, and emit radon-222. In the US, the Environmental Protection Agency sets limits of emissions from the dumps and monitors them. This does not happen in many less developed areas.

The long-term management cost of these dumps is left out of the current market prices for nuclear fuel and may be as high as the uranium cost itself. The situation for the depleted uranium waste arising during enrichment even may be worse, says the World Information Service on Energy.

No one can convince me that the above process is carbon-free, as politicians claim. It takes a lot of – almost certainly fossil-fuelled – energy to move that amount of rock and process the ore. But the carbon cost is often not in the country where the fuel is consumed.

And what of the other costs? Over half of the world’s uranium is in Australia and Canada. In Australia the government is planning to make money from the nuclear renaissance being predicted; uranium mining is expanding everywhere. Australian Greens are fast losing the optimism they felt when the Labor party won the last election.

In the Northern Territory plans to expand a nuclear dump at Muckaty station are being pushed forward with no regard for the land’s Aboriginal owners. The supposedly greener new Australian government Minister Martin Ferguson has failed to deliver an election promise to overturn the Howard government’s Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Act, which earmarks a series of sites for nuclear waste dumps.

In South Australia, in August the Australian government approved the expansion of a controversial uranium mine, Beverley ISL. This was dubbed a “blank cheque licence for pollution”. Groundwater specialist Dr Gavin Mudd has examined the data from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and called for it to be “independently verified by people not subservient to the mining industry” (The Epoch Times September 2 2008).

Elsewhere in the Northern Territory, BHP Billiton plans to have the first of five planned stages of expansion at its Olympic Dam mine in production by 2013. This will increase production capacity to 200,000 tonnes of copper, 4500 tonnes of uranium and 120,000 ounces of gold. This is a vast open cast mine, from which the wind can carry away radioactive dust.

Not far away locals are fighting a new uranium mine 25 kilometres south of Alice Springs. At the Ranger mines, Energy Resources of Australia – 68.4% owned by Rio Tinto – expects to find 30,000 to 40,000 tonnes of ore in the Ranger 3 Deeps area. In October it agreed to supply uranium oxide to a Chinese utility, signing a safety accord. This is how safe the mine in fact is – and you won’t find such records at African mines: almost 15,000 litres of acid uranium solution leaked in a 2002 incident, and since then further leaks ranging from 50 to over 23,000 litres have been reported.

The list goes on.

The bottom line is this: UK ministers are blind to the consequences of their pro-nuclear evangelism. Carbon credits under the Kyoto mechanism have to be independently audited by a global body to ensure that new renewable energy is unique, additional and lives up to its claims. At the very least there should be an independent, global body verifying the ethics, health and long-term safety of the nuclear supply chain.

Better, just leave it in the ground.

Source

A little history on the Risks:

Uranium mining dangers being hidden, expert warns

Geopolitical, environmental concerns not worth short-term economic gain, author argues

Katie Daubs

January 23 2008

An expert on uranium mining is coming to the Ottawa region with a warning: Don’t let it happen to you.

Jim Harding, the former director of research in the School of Human Justice at the University of Regina, will be in Ottawa and Wakefield this week to discuss his book, Canada’s Deadly Secret: Saskatchewan Uranium and the Global Nuclear System.

From Saskatchewan himself, Mr. Harding takes issue with the uranium mining that occurs in the north of the province, “out of sight and out of mind” of most citizens.

He argues that the geopolitical uses and long-term environmental effects are being hidden, and outweigh the short-term economic gain by which communities and governments are sometimes wooed.

He cites the Harper government’s eager acceptance of nuclear energy as evidence that Canada is going down a path of misplaced intentions.

“We like to think we’re a peace broker, but behind the scenes, we’ve been supplying fuel for the weapons system since the ’50s,” he said.

Murray Elston, the president and CEO of the Canadian Nuclear Association, dismisses Mr. Harding’s allegations as an exaggeration of the facts.

“Other people do have weapons and that’s true, but the folks at Foreign Affairs are very strong about the use of the materials,” he said.

Mr. Elston is citing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that Canada has signed as a non-nuclear nation. Through the agreement, all trade is prefaced with the understanding that nuclear products will only be used for energy purposes.

For his part, Mr. Elston also cites a few of nuclear energy’s positive impacts on society: medical isotopes and clean energy.

But Mr. Harding isn’t convinced about that last part. He cites the Ham Commission of 1976 that studied the health effects of radon gas on uranium miners in Elliot Lake. The study found a high incidence of lung cancer in the miners and made several recommendations that created new safety standards.

Mr. Elston was not able to comment on the Ham Commission specifically, but said other studies have shown that exposure does not cause health problems.

The only active uranium mines in Canada are located in Saskatchewan. Mr. Harding said companies are now looking elsewhere as demand is high and supply is dwindling.

The prospect of uranium mining has been widely debated in Eastern Ontario and western Quebec, as claims dot a large swath of land in the two regions, including unceded Algonquin land in the Sharbot Lake area.

George White, the CEO of Frontenac Ventures, the company in the midst of the turmoil, dismissed Mr. Harding as “just another alarmist.”

He said the only thing he could agree with Mr. Harding about is the fact that the long- term effects of the spent uranium, or “tailings,” are unknown.

“That’s why they’re storing it until they can figure out how to handle it,” he said.

Much of the uproar regarding uranium mining results from the fact that the Ontario and Quebec mining acts do not require public consultation before mining can occur. Companies can legally stake a claim on private property if the owner does not possess the mineral rights.

The province of Ontario received notice of intent for a class action lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of the act in December. Nothing similar has been filed in Quebec, although public consultations with the Quebec ministry of natural resources were held in October and a report is set to come out soon, said Michael Patenaude of the West Quebec Coalition Against Mining.

“Stay tuned,” he said.

Source

Whether it by Mining,  Reactors or War, Uranium is dangerous.

Cancer Statistics of Children Living near Nuclear Reactors 2003 report.

Major Nuclear Power Plant Accidents 1952-1999

Elliot Lake Uranium Mines The majority of uranium tailings in Canada — about 200 million tonnes are located in Elliot Lake.

Health Dangers of Uranium Mining BC Medical Association. August l980

Occupational Health effects of Uranium Mining Australia-Radiation and Health

Health Impacts for Uranium Mine and Mill Residents- 2008

Human Health Impacts on the Navajo Nation from Uranium Mining

Navajo Uranium Radiation Victims

Depleted Uranium Weapons Lessons from the 1991 Gulf War

Depleted Uranium weapons in 2001-2002 Occupational, public and environmental health issues Mystery Metal Nightmare in Afghanistan?

Letter to the Prime Minister regarding UK support for US war plans for Iraq, 13 October 2002

Depleted Uranium Watch

141 states support Depleted Uranium Ban

War “Pollution” Equals Millions of Deaths