The UN, Modern Civilization and Terror

Re:
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/448362/un-chief-calls-international-mobilisation.html

UN chief calls for international mobilisation against terror

The year 2015 must be a "time for global action", UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has said and asked the international community to do more to counter extremism and work on reforms of world body to adapt it to a new global landscape.

"The UN is now actively engaging with countries in danger and vulnerable to terrorism and extremism and seeking to help those member states to strengthen their national capacity,....".

Commentary on terror and extremes
R. Ashok Kumar

Modern Civilization(MC) is the very embodiment and soul of terror, even to the extent of destroying itself. The various parts of MC act on one another destructively. And as MC grows so do the terror components of the various parts of MC and of the MC as a whole.For example, UN is a champ of nukes under IAEA and WHO! Nukes terrorise the people and contaminate them into cancer and other types of fatality like infant mortality. Now the ICRP(International Commission on Radiation Protection) Safety Regulations are flawed as it was framed during pre DNA era. Even though the truth as found out by many including ECRR 2010 shows that millions of infant mortality have occurred due to exposure to radionuclides, the ICRP Regulations say none occur! This is terror! The connection is lost on nuclear wheeler dealers or they have deliberately ignored it with impunity by refusing to conduct appropriate tests on human beings contaminated, applying the precautionary principle. But nuclear programs do not yield any electricity to society outside the nuclear industry for decades and indeed for all time when nuclear waste management for millions of years is considered. So the terrorists blindly build more and more thermal, hydro and nuclear plants to fill the shortage! Thus today because of neglecting demand side management, India has 250000 MW of thermal,hydro and other types of plants and a small amount of nukes which are indistinguishable from a very small part of the electric transmission losses. Today cancer fatalities caused every year by the nukes of the world amount to more than 204000 excess deaths or 100 Bhopals of immediate deaths. Without the dams, the nukes cannot exist and the grid would be unstable. But the dams cause surge waves to hit nukes and other infrastructure of MC at impulse hits of hundreds of thousands of terawatts and this contributed in no small measure to the earthquakes which killed Fukushima and destruction and death by other nukes like Kyshtym,Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and the WIPP.
Thus to eliminate terror we must switch over to a normal mode of life seamlessly.
A normal mode of life recognizes the infinite superiority of trees compared to dams: now start a global major decentralised, people's cooperatives based millennium forest creation effort. See Reforest Mother Earth to Live!/R. Ashok Kumar

Effects of Nuclear Tests: enenews documents US experience: 18 December 2014

Re:

Stop Nuclear Energy Programmes

http://plutoniumaradiumabillionpeoplehitdna.blogspot.com/2007/12/stop-nuclear-energy-programmes.html

enenews has brought out the following information on 18 December 2014:

See

http://enenews.com/video-cemetery-blocks-filled-babies-downwind-nuclear-site-be-talked-about-children-murdered-mother-newborns-died-hours-tumors-all-brain-disintegrated-after-massive-stroke

Video: Cemetery blocks filled with babies downwind of US nuclear site — “This needs to be talked about, the children… murdered” — Mother: My newborns died within hours, tumors all over, brain disintegrated after massive stroke — “Body parts, cadavers, fetuses… the nuclear industry took in the dead of night… from all over US”

Kay Sutherland (Walla Walla, Washington) published Nov 8, 2010 (emphasis added):

• We’re in the Walla Walla Mountain View Cemetery standing where the babies’ graves are… Many children all died in the same era… (counting tombstones) 1950, 1950, 1950, 1950, 1945 — All of these babies need to have a voice in what Hanford has done. From this section… back towards my car, is all babies. Some of them do not have marked graves, my cousin was one.
• All of them here say ’48, ’49, ’48, ’48, ’48… ’55, ’55, ’56… ’48, ’48, ’48… This is what needs to be talked about — the children… our future, that Hanford murdered… ’46, ’46, ’46… this area must be the 1954 and ’55 area… It breaks your heart to know that there was so much sadness… because of a handful of men who decided to play god and took away… our life, our hope. ’62, ’62, ’62.
• My daughter [Jennifer] was born in 1963 [and is] buried here… double club feet… tumors throughout her body, an enlarged liver, and died from a massive stroke which disintegrated her brain. She lived 15 hours.
• It doesn’t even tell you about all the miscarriages… I myself had 4 miscarriages.
• My children are right over here… Todd lived 36 hours… These babies need to have a voice in what has happened… Todd weighed 3 lbs, 14 oz… the placenta didn’t develop.
• Jennifer, her birth was very traumatic… I hemorrhaged… filled my bed with blood. The doctor told me… when the water broke, it was green, foul smelling… It took her 2 hours… to die after she had her stroke. They never brought her to me so I could hold her… I wasn’t even told until the following day she was dead… It just goes on and on and on.

According to the Walla Walla coroner’s website, they have ‘unclaimed’ remains of nearly 100 cremated babies. 95% of the babies died between 1946 and the 1970s (56 of 57 boys; 33 of 36 girls). “Hanford produced its first plutonium on Nov 6, 1944 [until] the reactor shutdown in the 1970s.” -Source

Sutherland also noted this about Jennifer: “Her body had been removed and I wasn’t even told that she was cremated. I thought that she had been buried here… she sat on the shelf of the mortuary for 4 years… It was big secret that was kept from me, from my whole family… Everything that I thought was true wasn’t. What was true I didn’t know… Jennifer was delivered by one of the old doctors of Walla Walla… the old doctors were in-on-the-know with Hanford… His very church-going friend… did the experiments on the prisoners… She was autopsied by the very same pathology lab that autopsied Hanford people. They would… steal them away from the mortuaries over there, bring them to Walla Walla, have the pathology lab do their tests or take their body samples or parts, and take them back to Hanford… without their families ever knowing… The nuclear mausoleum [is] under the direction of… Washington St. University… They have body parts, cadavers, fetuses — any kind of sample that you can imagine… that the nuclear industry took in the dead of night, under cloak-and-dagger terms, from all over the US [and] nuclear facilities.”

The comments:

Go to the link given above in enenews. There are more than 300 comments so far.

Nuclear Power's Infinite Liability for All Time

© 2015 Ramaswami Ashok Kumar
That nuclear power is desperately required
for meeting energy needs is not scientifically
supportable. That leaves out only one dangerous
posture-deterrence or attack ignoring consequences.
My arguments on nuclear liability in this regard
bring out these dangers:In a programme of building
nuclear power plants the energy input to construction per
year is 0.67 times the energy output of the plant per year.
After the commissioning of the plant after 8 years,
if we want to construct 2 nuclear plants, the energy output
to construction is 1.33 times the nuclear electricity
output from the commissioned plant per year!
From such reasoning it has been found that there
is never any net energy available to society in any year
during the construction phase of a nuclear power programme.
Thus, if nuclear is to supply any electricity net to society
it is just impossible in this power hungry proud
world. Thus nukes are duds-do not have any utilitarian value.
And the risks mount because of the insatiable need for energy
by the nuke industry and the society. Please avoid this suicidal
path because it leads to other energy supply systems to be
constructed on a large scale to meet the demands of the nuke
industry with catastrophic consequences for mother earth,
like earthquakes,tsunamis and nuke meltdowns.
Right now even during normal operations, the 350
nuclear reactors around the world are causing the premature
deaths equivalent to twenty Bhopals or more every year
(following JW Gofman).
The health risks because of biospheric contamination
due to the plants are totally unacceptable. Just in
2009 because of the ENCODE and other programmes
like the GRID the central dogmaof molecular biology has been
radically revised with the so-called junk dna
parts having been found to be part of the process
of biological expression at the molecular level. With this the
risks of nuclear are many orders of magnitude
more than ICRP's: ICRP risk levels are witchcraft-
totally unsound for internal radioactive contamination
based as it is not even on the dated central dogma of molecular
biology,its pre DNA!.
No nukes,never.Nuclear liability is infinite and includes
compensation for those who are not yet here to vote no-
trillions and trillionsof euros/dollars/rupees. So Obama is right.
Dont have nukes! But the next part
of his reasoning: Non nuclear states will never have nukes
used against them is pure witchcraft.
Nuclear contamination does not respect such boundaries.
So the principle of perfect design for a safe future is
let no one have nukes. Make it happen!
To make it happen man has to design around his fallibility
so the system is infallible in forbidding the propagation of error.
With nukes this safety problem is just too difficult to solve
save by divinely perfect automata. Life with nuclear is
unbearable because they cannot be safely disposed off
in sarcophages unlike humans and other forms of life
who can be safely, usefully recycled! Enjoyment of
human and animal muscle power in India alone
is to the extent of more than 100000 megawatts!
This discussion then leads us all to a normal way of life,
far far away from the modern. If only all people
who matter accept true knowledge for survival:
Everything is interconnected with
everything else. So the principle of perfect design
for living is: Transcending all is the Unknowaball(Unknowable).
Design around your ignorance to live or
simply perish.Will people force leaders to go normal?


The blessed Lord said:
Being good in thought, word and deed
Is the divine state.

Relevant knowledge
The modern and the normal
In  thought, word and deed:

Purity of heart
Fearlessness,austerity,
Yagna, uprightness.

Reading the Shastras
Gift giving, senses controllled,
Steadfastness in Yog.

Non-injury, truth,
Tranquility, gentleness,
Uncovetousness,

Renunciation,
Complete absence of anger,
Compassion to beings.

Non-fickle, modest,
Yes,absence of calumny,
Boldness, forgiveness.

Absence of hatred,
Fortitude, absence of pride,
Transparently pure.

These are the attributes
Of being in the divine state
Good thoughts, words and deeds.

------- Adapted from the Gita
10 June 2015
Ramaswami Ashok Kumar

India Infant Mortality and Nuclear Tests

The health effects of worldwide nuclear activities on India: Infant mortality and Under 5 Mortality
By R. Ashok Kumar, B.E., M.E., Negentropist, Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal,299, Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007. Tel No. 022- 23872061
e-mail: ashokuku@rediffmail.com
Copyright ©2015-2019 Ramaswami Ashok Kumar
Note: Please Right click on the tables and figures to view them each in a separate tab

Abstract
1. Infant Mortality Rate and Under 5 Mortality Rate
The paper shows that the Indian infant mortality rate in the nuclear age (1945 onwards) has more than doubled compared to the pre-nuclear age and is statistically significant (95% confidence limits for a mean Relative Risk of 2.34 being 1.33 to 4.67 : Table 1). Nuclear activity worldwide during 1945 to 1999 has probably mainly contributed to an excess infant mortality in India of 22,676600(about 23 million infant deaths in the age group 0-1) compared to the period 1911-1945. See Figure 1. Further a study of the under 5 mortality rate shows that there is a similar doubling of the risk of under 5 mortality and with a similar holocaust(Table U5MRPRENN). The recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR 2003) appear to support this assertion. The nuclear activities till 1993 have resulted in a total collective ionizing radiation dose commitment of 123 mSv per person based on World population of 5 billion assumed by UNSCEAR ( page 133, ECRR 2003).










When we consider the period 1946 to 1989, the yearly excess infant mortality over the annual mean during the period 1911-45(The control group of the prenuclear age), the following figures result(Table IMNA):





1a. Ten Year totals of Infant Mortality correlate extremely significantly with the Northern Hemisphere Adult Ingest and Inhale Radiation Dose due to Atmospheric Tests of Nuclear Weapons: 1945 to 1989: Linear regression: r= 0.72, degrees of freedom 43, p= 1.94E-8(Figure WIMP6070):






1b: Figure TYIMP63 identifies the culprit with a logarithmic fit of the ten year totals of infant mortality with the weapons dose: When the dose peaks at 1963, the ten year Infant Mortality Total also peaks.




1c. The percent annual population growth rate(compound) correlates with 10 year totals of Infant mortality extremely significantly(Figure AGRP).




1d. The annual growth rate of the India population resonates with the Northern Hemisphere ingest and inhale annual dose due to atmospheric test of nuclear weapons, 1945 to 1989(Figure PED):




To indicate a sense of the reality on the ground, Table 2 shows the calculation on the percent infant mortality excess relative risk per unit ECRR dose commitment. Compare this with the risk factor which ECRR cites for this birth effect: Percent increase in baseline rate per mSv (ECRR) parental exposure in year of conception: 0.05%. This 0.05% is got according to ECRR recommendations by computing dose according to ECRR model and including new weighting factors Wj and Wk .



Table 2: The excess relative risk in percent of infant mortality in India on account of global nuclear activity from 1945 till 1993 based on ECRR collective total effective dose commitment (123 mSv per person, see text).

The India U5MR
The figures of infant mortality and relative risks are also robust over the 0-4 infant mortality rates and mortality figures as shown in the Table U5MRPRENN below:



When man-made poisons are introduced into the biosphere infinitely more than the natural, nature reacts by doubling the risk prevalent prior to the introduction. Thus as seen in column 12h in the above table, the relative risk of 0-4 infant mortality in the nuclear age doubles compared to that in the prenuclear era( See Figure U5MRPRENN below). Compared to the data for infant mortality, the data readily available for 0-4 mortality was less. Still the robustness of the results is preserved. What a holocaust. Andrei Sakharov should have been immediately followed and implemented(1955). Rather than the two heads of state enjoying tea at a Texas ranch after all the damage has been initiated, never to be controlled.



This foresight is what is required rather than hindsight. Why then all the damages of the cold war? To what end? They are making the same mistake through new nuke deals. For example with India. What say have the citizens on this irreversible trend?


3.Correlation between ionizing radiation dose and infant mortality rate.
Let us now consider the radiation dose to the bone marrow of an “average child” born in 1950 in millirems. A study of the correlation between the Indian Infant Mortality Rate and this radiation dose shows that while the linear regression is statistically extremely significant during 1951 to 1999(r = 0.47,p=0.0006,degrees of freedom 47), there is no statistically significant correlation between the Indian Infant Mortality Rate during the pre-nuclear period 1911-1945 with this dose assumed to start from 1911 instead of 1951 and end by 1945(r = 0.32, p= 0.056, degrees of freedom 33)(Reference 2).

4.The correlation between radiation and All-India annual rainfall is shown below(Figure2) (Reference 4 and 5):





5.The correlation between ionizing radiation dose and excess infant mortality rate is brought out in Figure 3(Reference 4):






6.The dose to the parent has a pronounced and significant effect on Infant Mortality(Figure 4):





7. References and Notes

1. Reference for dose commitment for nuclear activities 1945 to 1993:Chris Busby,Rosalie Bertell, IS Feuerhake,Molly Scott Cato and Alexei Yablokov. 2003. 2003 Recommendations of the ECRR: The Health Effects of Ionising Radiation Exposure at Low Doses for Radiation Protection Purposes. Regulators’ Edition. Published on behalf of the European Committee on Radiation Risk. Green Audit. U.K.
2. For Section 1 and Figure 4, the radiation dose for the period 1951-80 has been taken from Figure 3: “Annual Radiation doses to the red bone marrow of the average child born in 1950 from diagnostic medical practices, nuclear weapons fallout and natural radiation: Risk of leukaemia calculated to the age 20 years,” in “Assessing Risks of Childhood leukaemia in Seascale” in the book Jones, Robin Russel and Richard Southwood (editors), 1987. Radiation and Health: The Biological Effects of Low-level Exposure to Ionising Radiation. Edited proceedings of a symposium, “The Biological Effects of Radiation,” sponsored by Friends of the Earth U.K. and Greenpeace International, and held between 24-25 November 1986 at the Hammersmith Hospital, London; Sir Richard Southwood, Chair. (London: John Wiley & Sons.). For the period beyond 1980 the doses are derived from these values. I have made no reconciliation between these dose values and the corresponding ECRR doses.
3. The sources for the infant mortality data for India are 1) Office of the Registrar General, Sample Registration Bulletin, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi(Various issues); 2) Office of the Registrar General, Registrar General’s Newsletter, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi( Various issues);3) Tata Services Ltd., Department of Economics and Statistics.1998. Statistical Outline of India 1998-99. Table 36, p46 and 4) Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat, World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision and World Urbanization Prospects: The 2003 Revision, http://esa.un.org/unpp, 22 December 2005; 8:34:55 AM.
4. The source for growth of population, birth rate and population is Tata Services Ltd., Department of Economics and Statistics.1998. Statistical Outline of India 1998-99. Tables 34,35, pp45-46.
5. The source for the radiation doses for the studies reported above(Figures 2 , 3 and WIMP6070) is UNSCEAR 2000: Annex C: Exposures to the public from man-made sources of radiation: Table 16: Annual effective dose from radionuclides produced in atmospheric nuclear testing: Average annual effective dose(microsieverts): Northern Hemisphere. For Figure 4 the data for the dose is from that given in 2.
6. The rainfall data is from the website: Columbia University Website: http://ingrid.Ldgo.columbia.edu/Sources/Indices/.india/.rainfall/

Stop Nuclear Energy Programmes

http://plutoniumaradiumabillionpeoplehitdna.blogspot.com/2007/12/stop-nuclear-energy-programmes.html

© 2013-2019 Ramaswami Ashok Kumar

Re: "PM to visit ‘cradle of nuclear energy’",(Deccan Herald, 28 August 2007), citing a picturesque fishing hamlet, little does the report inform readers about the ban on fishing on a 100 km radius around the Tarapur conglomerate. Little does the report also inform about the nuclear equipment only conforming to unsound Risk recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection(ICRP), based as they are on acute external irradiation. The alternate Risk Recommendations of the European Committee on
Radiation Risk(ECRR 2003)(Ref 1) based on internal radiation contamination have unequivocal evidence of the ICRP Risk Recommendations being 100 to 2000 fold lower than the real risks of ionising radiation. Thus the ECRR recommends that the maximum permissible radiation dose to members of the public arising from all human practices(including coal fired power plants)should not be more than 0.1 millisieverts (mSv) per year.
According to ICRP however, doses below 5 mSv per year, as defined by their system(modeling risk on the basis of acute external irradiation which is unscientific pre-DNA era stuff) can have no measurable consequences. The ECRR Recommendation of 0.1 mSv per year would severely curtail the application of nuclear fission to produce electricity. Hence Nuclear power stations are the costliest way of producing energy when health effects are also taken into account. By applying the precautionary principle which suggests that when we are unsure about the risks of a certain industrial process or its pollutants, we should not allow it to proceed until we can be sure that it is safe, all radioactive emissions must be stopped forthwith till they are proved safe by the latest science and technology research which can be independently verified. In this connection readers may note that a Sievert is a subjective measure of radiation dose based on the Gray, a Joule of energy delivered to a kilogramme of tissue. Note that a radioactive element (the radionuclide being Plutonium 239 or Radium 226 (mining uranium or in a coal fired plant, the flyash)) lodged in a living cell may deliver (5000000 to 6000000)x10^-19 Wattseconds(Joules) in 10^-17 seconds(Ref 2) to a DNA molecule in a cell weighing 512x10^-15 kg. The dose to the cell then is about 1000 mSv. The dose to the DNA weighing much less is much much more (a million times or so)! The dose to the cell is delivered at the rate of 50-60 KW or at a power surge of average muscle power of more than a thousand people! What the ECRR is recommending is that nukes should not deliver a dose of more than that corresponding to a 5 W-6W hit to a single cell. Since there are hundreds of thousands of DNAs in a single cell, the hit should not be more than say 5-6 megawatts(MW) or equivalent to those delivered by a hundred thousand musclemen to a single DNA! And the ICRP says 5 mSv or 50 times the ECRR’s dose or 250-360 Megawatts( equivalent to the power of 5 million muscle men to a single DNA or 25% of the 1200 MW at Tarapur ) causes an unmeasurable effect! Surely stop this madness!
But this madness has been Hyden by the IAEA by ’ institutionalizing Cold War secrecy and control in 1959 in an agreement between the World Health Organisation(WHO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) which had the effect of giving the IAEA a power of veto over WHO research into radiation effects.’ The ECRR Committee noted that ’ this agreement[Res WHA 12-40,28.5.59] is still in force….and believe that accurate reports of the health consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe may have been suppressed as a result of it.’(Ref 1).
See the effects of the agreement mentioned above: Millions of Indian infants killed and millions still born on account of nuclear activities since 1945:

http://deathdealersnukes.blogspot.com/

Andrei Sakharov and others fought bitterly against this violation of human rights enshrined in the UN Charter. Vareva! Now we have the Nuke Deal to be perhaps making the way clear for another bout of irreversible crimes against life by initiating a programme of nuclear energy in India and elsewhere.

ECRR: So how might we apply rights-based ethical theories to the activities of the nuclear industry? While the debate continues about the level of harmfulness of emissions, it is accepted by all sides that the production of energy from nuclear sources will create a fixed amount of radioactive pollutants which will be released to the environment and will inevitably contaminate the bodies of those who live in that environment. Such activity carried out without the full knowledge of the citizenry, and certainly without their informed consent, represents an infringement of the most fundamental natural right: the right to inviolability of the body…’ According to the UN Declaration of Human Rights “Everyone has the right to life,liberty and security of the person” and hence contamination of citizens’ bodies with nuclear waste represents an unacceptable threat to the security of the person, and is therefore illegal under international law, interprets the ECRR.
Moreover, nuclear energy system is not even utilitarian: On the same land used by the nuke cycle, forests use all the inputs nature gives and produce multiple goods and services infinitely more than nukes, when the principle of return is practiced.
'There is no pure reason for the non-harmonised
Nor for the non-harmonised is there concentration,
For one without concentration,
There is no peace,
And for the unpeaceful how can there be happiness?'
-The Bhagavad-Gita
Citizens! Arise to secure Freedom from the nuke menace which would extend into the far future: at least five hundred generations. Arise now!
Peace! Peace! Peace!

References.
1. Busby,C et al.Eds.2003. Recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk: Health
Effects of Ionising Radiation Exposure at Low Doses for Radiation Protection Purposes. Regulators’
Edition: Brussels. p 183.
2.Gofman,J.W.1990.Radiation Induced Cancer from Low Dose Exposure: An Independent Analysis.
Chapter 19-3.

R. Ashok Kumar,B.E.,M.E(Power),Negentropist, Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal, 299, Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007.