Hi Sachiko >at the time of the chernobly accident, i was >living in sweden. when the news broke (which >was not as immediate as the fukushima) we were >warned not to ingest certain things:
Not in France !!!!! There has been NO official warnings. All contaminated vegetables and goods were in the market and have been eaten. ( chronology following) >if the french government knows so much about >nuclear reactors and have strict rules, why >didn't france take the same precautions? because they didnot admit that the situation was bad. French ministers of health and agriculture in 1986 "there is no danger, there is no dangerous radioactive cloud". So why changing normal habits ? ----------------------------- Docs: a google translation of the chronology of the governemental lying in 1986: http://translate.google.fr/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sortirdunucleaire.org%2Findex.php%3Fmenu%3Dsinformer%26sousmenu%3Dthemas%26soussousmenu%3Dtchernobyl%26page%3Dindex&sl=fr&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8 if you don't have time to read all this chronology, just go to the May 2 1986, then May 16, 1986, then february 26, 2002.... it's incredible. [ an good video documentary about the french lying ( in french, sorry ) http://ma-tvideo.france2.fr/video/iLyROoaft6yg.html ] ------------------------------- > or did they change their regulations after the >chernobyl accident? can you clarify? yes, they partialy did, in the nineties, and few years ago ! Thanks to the constant actions of the French NGO CRIIRAD, an independant observation laboratory/network on radioactivity who was created the may 16, 1986 (few days after explosion) !!!!! this NGO was founded by researchers disgusted by the authorities lies. http://www.criirad.org/ >for the record, i'd like to mention that i have >always been against nuclear power and after this >i will remain against nuclear energy. but i >would like the climate of major news network to >change, from emotionally based reporting which >leads to fear mongering and panic. sweden seems >to have the same regulation as japan, i.e. >international standard, though i will have to >check into this to be 100% sure. in any case >they have not made any claim that is not the >case. the swedish public channel recently showed >a documentary which was in line with the >so-called "scientific community's consensus." >that is there is no or little evidence to >suggest there is abnormal increase in cancer >rate except for those unfortunate who were >exposed to immediate high radiation and outside >the exclusion zone except for those who >continuously ingested highly contaminated >radioactive food and water (the worst long term >effect). (here again, let me also state i am >personally for making a larger exclusion zone to >be on the safe side, especially for the infants >and those under 40 years old). so far i have >not heard a case in sweden that resembles those >claims in france. During the last decades, epidemiologic studies about thyroid problems in France, or studies about nuclear measures from tchernobyl in france, have been masked by a lot of medical and statistical manipulations, and are still modified and masked by the governement because they are afraid of lawsuits that could affect the actual politicians and health Institute directors (still in power...). Sarkozy himself was in 1987 " Chargé de mission pour la lutte contre les risques chimiques et radiologiques" and has some responsabilities in the lies. France wants also to deal its nuclear plants to the world. ( and french uranium rods are in most of the japanese plants) Like in Japan, the french nuclear industry is deeply included into the medical and political decidors network. Until now, it's very difficult to have good epidemiologic studies, it's very difficult to have good statistics and precise maps on Tchernobyl effects in France. About the world-wide strengh of the nuclear lobbies, it very important to understand that the military use of nuclear could NOT exist without the education programms, the money and the infrastructures for "civil" uses of nuclear. The nuclear lobby is very very strongly implanted in every sector of the society, because nuclear technologies are one of the best opaque juicy-business and because nuclear is deeply strategic, especially for certain countries. JN # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
