Medical Consequences of Nuclear War: Radiation 
by  Carolyn Coomer

      I was among the first few foreigners to reach the site of this historic bombing and  walked for nearly two hours today through streets where the stench of death still  pervades and survivors or relatives of the dead, wearing gauze patches over their  mouths, still probe among the ruins for bodies or possessions.

                                                  (Lawrence, “Visit to Hiroshima,” 1) 

      New York Times reporter, W.H. Lawrence gave several vital pieces of information in his article concerning his trip to Hiroshima.  Of course, as one of the first outsiders, this trip did not take place until September 3 when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed just shy of a month before.  Even a team from the Manhattan District, the atomic bombs’ creators, did not arrive to assess the damage until September 8 (Schull, Effects of Atomic Radiation, 10).  Americans had managed to steer clear of the indefinite aftereffects these two cities had to offer.  Hiroshima was clearly in ruins a month later, death and odor ruling the streets.  But an equally discouraging point one can see now in retrospect: the thin gauze that may have sheltered survivors from the “stench of death” was no match for the lasting implications of ionizing radiation.

      The devastation inflicted upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki taught the world a great deal about what nuclear war can bring to a population.  However, technology at the time was ill-prepared for the research and analysis required in unraveling the medical impacts nuclear war can cause.  It can be argued that the world is still learning as we assess the medical outcomes in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or more recently, those effected by the Nevada Test Site here in the US.  Radioactive fallout brought about by nuclear explosion is what is responsible for lingering effects.  Yet over the years, some have managed to overlook, or even discredit the effects fallout radiation has.  In this paper I plan to examine the consequences of radiation, specifically concentrating on the underestimated, yet lasting effects of radioactive fallout as seen in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the Nevada Test Site.

What is Radiation?

      In order to grasp the medical implications of exposure to atomic radiation, it is imperative to understand the way it works.  Ionizing radiation is the energy given off when a nuclear bomb explodes.  What made the bombs explode at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the process of fission, where radioactive atoms of unstable elements, like uranium-235 or plutonium-239, were split.  This process emitted neutrons from the atoms’ nuclei, shooting out and bumping into atoms of different elements.  These neutrons then join the exposed atoms, only to change them into a different form of itself, or isotopes.  For example, iodine-131 is a radioactive isotope of iodine, transformed when neutrons join it’s nucleus.  (Iodine-131 has also proven to linger in the thyroid gland, making one more prone to cancer.)  The process continues as neutrons shoot out from the now radioactive atom, and join the next, so on and so forth as a chain reaction.  Chain reaction eventually slows down depending on the type of atom.  This “rate of decay,” as it is called, “is measured in terms of its half-life, that is, the time it takes half of the remaining radioactive atoms to decay.” (Cheney, They Never Knew, 17).   This process seems more significant when applied to the radioactive elements used in nuclear war.  For example, “the half-life of plutonium-239 is about 24,000 years” (ibid.).   Clearly the damage done to Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the atmosphere is not over.

      Not only does the process of ionization create radioactive atoms, but it also gives off heat, known as thermal radiation.  This is what is responsible for flash burns and the shadows of bodies left behind on buildings and streets, comparative to the diagnostic X-rays taken in medical facilities.  Of course thermal radiation found in the atomic bomb proved to be much more intense than what is received by X-rays, as people were literally “vaporized” by the heat (ibid., 26).

      The amount of radiation absorbed by living tissue in proportion to body mass, or the absorbed dose, came to be measured in rads.  An absorbed dose of as little as 250, for example, would prove fatal to at least 50 per cent of those exposed within 60 days.  This has come to be a significant figure, known as the Lethal Dose for 50 per cent of the population (LD50/60).  Following the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this estimate was as high as 450 rad.  The smallest amount of radiation the human body can handle has always been a debatable amount.  People react differently.  The only sure answer is that scientists have commonly lowered what they deem the lethal dose (Solomon and Marston, The Medical Implications of Nuclear War, 224).

Differences in Radiation’s Effect Between Hiroshima and Nagasaki     

      The atomic bomb in Nagasaki actually emitted more energy than that of Hiroshima.  However, Hiroshima had 100,000 to180,000 fatalities (depending on what was attributed to radiation exposure in the long-term), where Nagasaki had about 70,000. (Cheney, 25).  This discrepancy is attributed to many outlying factors: differences in geography, wind patterns, population density, whether victims were inside or outside, behind buildings, the angle at which a victim stood, availability of hospitalization, and so on.  Also, the Hiroshima bomb was made with uranium-235 while Nagasaki’s was made with plutonium-239 (Solomon and Marston, 114).  These elements, while they are both radioactive, interact differently with other elements.  However for the purposes of this paper, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are approached collectively in order to demonstrate radiation’s medical consequences.

Initial Consequences of Radiation

      The point at which the atomic bombs exploded has been termed the “hypocenter” or “ground zero” (Schull, 108).  Likelihood of survival at this point was hopeless, considering the actual blast, firestorms that followed, and flash burns.  The thermal radiation that was emitted from the blast, termed “prompt radiation,” was very intense but died off quickly.  It is this initial release of radiation that caused the firestorms and flash burns.  Author, Richard Mould retells a survivor’s account from Hiroshima, standing 1.6 km from the hypocenter at the time of the explosion: “whole face burned…no eyebrows…mother had to pull my eyes open…my skin came off when they tried to remove my burnt clothes” (Mould, A Century of X-rays and Radioactivity in Medicine).  Thermal radiation is what burned this victims so badly.  The New Yorker photographer, John Hersey, left a lasting image for the world with his shot of the woman in a blue kimono.  The print of her kimono was actually imprinted onto her skin because of thermal radiation (see Fig.1).  Going back to the X-ray comparison, the radiation released acted as a magnified X-ray. 

      It is important to note, however, that the majority of burn victims were actually from the fires that the bombs had ignited and not flash burns.  In Hiroshima, a mass fire ensued that engulfed a 2 km radius, exploding every combustible in its path (Solomon and Marston, 212).  Third-degree burns accounted for over 50 per cent of fatalities in Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Schull, 12).  Recovering from burns like these was difficult, especially considering the likelihood of infection and the considerable amount of ensuing effects radiation had.  Those burn victims who did manage to recover developed keloids, elevated scars that limited joint mobility and full recovery (Schull, 14), (see Fig.2).

Radioactive Fallout

      Radioactive particles swept up in the mushroom clouds by the blasts, began to settle back into the atmosphere within 24 hours (Rosenfeld, “The Effects of Nuclear Weapons,” 17).  However research has indicated that “fallout is generally thought to have contributed little to the exposure of most survivors” (Schull, 119).  Radiation absorption was inevitable for those near the blast, so the radiation that was given off in fallout was considered inconsequential.  Though this may be true, it seems fallout is underestimated.  Clearly high-dose radiation was present in the immediate fallout that ensued.  Following the blast, victims inhaled, digested, or absorbed (through the skin) radiation from the dust and particles that fell, increasing the absorption dose.  For those who were already at critical condition, maybe this added radiation dose did not really matter.  But for those who were far enough away, especially foreigners who came in, fallout could have had major medical implication.  As previously indicated, everyone reacts to radiation differently.  A small dose from fallout could do a lot of damage.

      Outsiders were indeed effected by radiation.  Those who immediately came in to help clean up the cities were completely unaware of what exactly happened or what they were exposed to.  Most developed symptoms of radiation poisoning.  American prisoners of war were sent to Hiroshima and Nagasaki a few days after the explosions.  They quickly developed “terrible sunburns” and rashes after resting “in the powdery gray dust that blanketed the city” (Cheney, 26).  The sunburns and rashes were a result of the high levels of radioactive waves that still surrounded the blast points. One prisoner, Al Maxwell, had the rash until he died forty years later (ibid.).

Radiation’s Effects Within the First Nine Weeks

      While the initial flash, explosion, and fires at the epicenter caused over half of the fatalities in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it has been deduced that radiation, whether from initial exposure or fallout, was responsible for about 30 per cent following the explosion (Schull, 12).  In the next nine weeks or so, survivors experienced “fever, nausea, vomiting, lack of appetite, bloody diarrhea, loss of hair…, bleeding under the skin…, sores in their throat and mouth…, and decay and ulceration of the gums about the teeth” (ibid., 12-13).  These symptoms were the result of acute radiation sickness.  Radioactive atoms were attacking the cells of each of these survivors, not only leaving them with these external symptoms, but internal ones as well.  Pancytopenia, a reduction in platelets, red, and white blood cells, inflicted victims of acute radiation sickness.  This alteration of the blood left them hopeless to fight off infection.  Even at an absorbed dose of 100 rad, a survivor would lose 50 per cent of his ability to produce cells and platelets (ibid., 14).  Comparing this figure to the LD 50/60 at the time, a dosage as high as 450 rad, almost seems unimaginable.  An absorbed dose this high would have disastrous effects on the blood.  Needless to say, in this time period following the blast, death was widely related to pancytopenia as the immune system deteriorated.

Long-Term Effects in Blast Survivors

      Scientists continued to study the long-term effects of radiation on blast survivors and their children.  Radiobiology, a science that was virtually unheard of before the bombs, had greatly evolved.  By the early 1950s, scientists began to really understand what they were dealing with.  Thus medical research became much more coherent in comparison to the initial studies done after the bombings.  For example, in 1950, about 120,000 survivors from both Hiroshima and Nagasaki underwent years of tests.  This joint American-Japanese study lasted until the year 2000, where cases of leukemia, mental retardation, and possibly cancers were linked to radiation exposure (“Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” 1). 

      As mentioned earlier, strontium-90 is a radioactive isotope with a half-life of 28 years.  It acts as calcium and attacks the bone marrow. This can cause leukemia, tumors, and blood defects (Rosenfeld, 18).  Leukemia flared up in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki 3 years after the blasts, hitting a peak around 1951.  By 1978, the rate of death from leukemia proved to be about twice as high had the atomic bomb not been dropped.  Research has also shown that “the younger the age at the time of the bomb, the greater the risk of leukemia…” (Solomon and Marstom, 330).  This has proven to be a common trend in radiation-induced cancers, as children’s bodies are still growing and producing cells more rapidly than adults.  If these cells are mutated, then more mutated cells grow and potentially cause leukemia among many other complications.  The increase in leukemia cases could easily be linked to strontium-90.

      As with most radioactive isotopes, cancerous tumors are another possible medical consequence of strontium-90.  However, no more than 8 per cent of blast survivors are said to have contracted cancers directly attributed to radiation exposure.  In 1978, the estimated percentage was 3.4 (Solomon and Marstom, 331).  Scientists seem to agree that those who will die of cancer “will do so as a result of other factors” (Schull 160).  Exposure may be considered one more contributing factor, but not the only one.  Though this percentage may seem small, it is difficult to relate something as common as cancer to radiation exposure.  For leukemia, deaths were more easily linked to radiation, assumedly strontium-90, as the leukemia death rate significantly increased after the atomic bombs.  Most cancer rates simply did not significantly increase. 

      One specific type of cancer that seemed to be effected the most by radiation exposure was breast cancer among women.  Women exposed before the age of 20 were most likely to be the ones to contract radiation-induced breast cancer.  The statistics decreased as age at the time of the blast increased.  It often took between 5 and 10 years for breast cancer to show up (Solomon and Marstom, 331).  As tumors, cancerous or benign, are attributed to strontium-90 exposure, breast cancer could be linked to this type of radiation.

      Cesium-137 has a half-life of 30 years.  It does not pose as much of a medical threat as strontium-90, but it can cause “gonadal irradiation and genetic damage” (Rosenfeld, 18).  Radiation exposure seemed to be more dangerous for the male reproductive system than the female.  As the female reproductive system is completely internal, women had that much more tissue blocking radioactive particles.  Since testes are external and not as protected, exposure was more likely (Schull, 105).  Tests concluded that while fertility may have been affected in the short term for both males and, to a lesser degree, females, “none of these… studies found evidence of permanent impairment” (ibid., 171).  As in the case of cancer, there is was not enough evidence nor statistical increase in fertility complications to attribute them to radiation exposure.   

      However, genetic damage passed on to future generations remained a concern.  Genetic damage begins in the chromosomes.  Half of the chromosomes come from the male and half from the female, giving offspring genetic characteristics like gender, inherited physical and character traits (Schull, 172).  If these chromosomes are damaged or mutated, this can cause medical implications for future children.  However, recent studies have shown that “opposed to common views- an increased frequency of genetic defects as a result of radiation has not been established despite extensive studies of children and grandchildren of the survivors” (“Atomic Bombs…”, 2).  This is not to say that an increase in genetic damage does not exist, but there are just too many outlying factors that could be attributed to complications (ibid.).  A lack of defined, attributable causes of medical complications seems to be a common theme when it comes to researching the long-term effects of radiation.

      However radiation-induced malformation, can concretely  be ascribed to one demographic: those who were “prenatally” exposed at the time of the bombs (Schull, 189).  Malformation should not be confused with genetic damage as it only applies to those who were in the womb. Genetic damage refers to the damage done before conception.  As a result of radiation exposure while pregnant, 33 women from Nagasaki miscarried and 12 went into premature labor.  The study only included 182 women and all of this happened within 3 months of the bomb (ibid., 184).  In a study involving both cities, 21 babies out of 500 who did survive birth, were born severely mentally retarded.  Only 4 or 5 were expected to have retardation (ibid., 189).  In 1985, 30 cases of severe mental retardation were found from both Hiroshima and Nagasaki (“Atomic Bombs…,” 2).  Mental retardation and a “disproportionately small head” were common among the infants born after the bombings (Schull, 189).  These two conditions seem to be the only concrete medical effects associated with radiation exposure in the prenatally exposed. 

      Iodine-131 has the shortest half-life of about 8.1 days.  It collects in the thyroid gland and can potentially destroy it or cause thyroid cancer.  However since it’s half-life is only 8.1 days, it would require continuous exposure to cause long-term effects.  Otherwise, the radiation in the body would die off relatively quickly, leaving little time to cause damage: “Iodine-131 dissipates most of its radioactive energy within a fortnight.  Therefore it would take sustained testing and considerably more fallout to produce a clear danger” (“Fallout,” 1).  Of course there are reports of thyroid cancer, but the outlying factors again make cause of cancer indefinable. 

      Plutonium-[239] is the last major radioactive isotope, with a half-life of 24,000 years.  Research shows that “ingestion of as little as 1 microgram of plutonium, a barely visible speck, is a serious health hazard causing the formation of bone and lung tumors” (Rosenfeld, 18).  This implication on health is huge considering the fact that it stays in the atmosphere for so long.  There were indeed increased levels of cancerous tumors, yet again indefinitely linked to radiation.  It is worth mentioning that bone cancer was often linked to Strontium-90 and Plutonium-23[9].  

  

Long-Term Results Outside the Hypocenters as a Result of Fallout

      As discussed earlier, the mushroom cloud that emitted radiation within the following 24 hours of the blast did indeed carry short-term medical implications.  Whether the added radiation dose at the time effected blast survivors in the long run is debatable.  However fallout radiation continued to linger in the atmosphere for much longer than those first few days after the blasts.  Many would agree that considering radioactive particles’ rate of decay, fallout could be an issue for generations- not just for survivors. Previously mentioned, Strontium-90, for example, has a half life of 28 years.  That means that in 1969, only half of this radioactive isotope was gone, leaving the rest to continue deteriorating the population’s health.  Radioactive fallout can have massive medical consequences, leaving certain areas completely uninhabitable for up to five years (Rosenfeld, 17). 

      The areas most effected by fallout were Koi-Takasu and the Nishiyama Reservoir, an area only populated by 600 people at the time of the blast.  Koi-Takasu is located 3 km west of Hiroshima’s hypocenter, and the reservoir is 3 km east of Nagasaki.  Both of these locations are downwind of each city, showing that radioactive particles were displaced by wind patterns (Schull, 118).  Many believe that fallout radiation has little effect on survivors, especially considering the fact that Hiroshima has negligible amounts of radiation left in the atmosphere.  Tests show that fallout radiation in Hiroshima “can no longer be readily identified through physical measurements- all parts of the city have a more or less uniform level of background radiation” (ibid., 119).  This background radiation is the naturally occurring radiation found in the atmosphere.  

      However as of 1995, “long-term residents” who live around the Nishiyama Reservoir, the place where “black rain” reportedly fell from the skies after the atomic bomb, still showed unusually high levels of cesium-137 (Saito-Kokubu, “Plutonium Isotopes Derived…”, 465).  This is the same radioactive isotope that can cause genetic defects.  The reservoir apparently acted as a sump, collecting radiation from nuclear tests of up to thousands of miles away.  While the theory may seem a bit far fetched, global fallout has always been an issue.  Scientists have deduced that “the consumption of food raised in contaminated soil, often in household gardens” is the culprit for such high levels of cesium-137 (Schull, 119).  Fallout radiation, whether from 1945 or later nuclear tests, had contaminated the soil and thus a lot of the food people consumed.  Yet those from Nagasaki who used the reservoir for drinking water did not show these same high levels.  This would not have been true following the blast, but much of the radiation in Nagasaki died off or decayed. 

      Thus one must remember that it was the “long-term inhabitants” of the Nishiyama Reservoir who continued to receive low-dose radiation from the Nagasaki bomb, as well as the possible fallout of distant nuclear tests.  Assuming every inhabitant of Nagasaki used the reservoir, it is only the water they were ingesting.  Wind patterns had taken most radioactive fallout to the Nishiyama Reservoir, where long-term inhabitants were contaminated by the food, water, and air.  Interestingly enough, no comparable research has been conducted in Hiroshima’s fallout area, Koi-Takasu (Schull, 120).

      Today, according to a recent science journal, there is still evidence of plutonium-239, potentially causing bone and lung tumors, and cesium-137 in the sediment of Nishiyama.  How could there not be considering how long it takes for these radioactive isotopes to decay?  In the late 1980s, scientists Sakanoue and Mahara discovered high levels of plutonium-239 in the reservoir.  They believed the radioactive material was caused by the 1945 atomic bomb.  Confirming Schull’s research, they recognized global fallout as a potential contributor to the levels of radiation.  However author Saito-Kokubu recently conducted an experiment, and as of April 2007,  results “indicate that the main source of plutonium isotopes was not the nuclear tests’ fallout but the atomic bomb dropped at Nagasaki” (Saito-Kokubu, 465).  Soils flow into the reservoir and continue to contaminate the water with plutonium.  However, cesium levels have decreased (ibid.)  This variation in cesium can be expected since its half-life is only 30 years.  Plutonium levels will not decrease for many years to come. 

      The point is, except for one scientist here and there, most people seem to have completely forgot about these two fallout zones.  The radiation levels at the reservoir are out there, yet do not seem to be of particular interest to anyone.  And of course, still nothing has been said of Hiroshima’s fallout area.  When it comes to nuclear war, those who discount fallout as a major source of radiation exposure seem to have narrowed their vision to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  If Hiroshima does indeed have normal levels of radiation now, and this is the only site people are looking to for the medical implications of radiation, then fallout would clearly not be an issue to most.  Wind patterns have taken much of the radiation away from the hypocenters, leaving blast survivors and their children as the only example of the medical consequences of radiation.  Blast survivors were hit with short-term, high-doses of radiation.  Of course their DNA and cells were mutated, along with the children they came to have.  Another interesting point worth mentioning is that global fallout was said to be the reason behind high levels of radioactivity in the Nishiyama Reservoir.  Regardless of wind pattern, if Nagasaki is only 3 km away from its fallout area, then normal levels of background radiation seem impossible following the same logic.  Something just does not add up. 

      The question should now be, how has fallout radiation medically effected the areas downwind of the blast zones? As far as the 1945 atomic bombs are concerned, these areas are severely overlooked and under-researched.  Radioactive material may have been found in Nishiyama, but neither Schull nor Saito-Kokubu mentioned anything about the population.  Maybe it does have genetic defects or unusual amounts of bone and lung cancer.  Medical effects are unknown at this point.  Major newspapers have no archives about either fallout zone, the web is nearly barren with related information, and only a few author have addressed the issue.  These fallout zones should definitely be higher on the priority lists of those who dedicate so much time and research to the study of the atomic bombs’ consequences.  

Nevada Test Site Shows Medical Implications of Long-Term Low-Dose Radiation

      Thus fallout  is so dangerous because it not only exposes new populations to radiation, but also exerts long-term, low-dose radiation.  While the medical implications of this type of exposure have not been tested in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki fallout zones, they still exist.  In the 1950s, even as the US was coming to know the effects nuclear war had on Japan, it continued to detonate nuclear bombs in its own territory, specifically in the state of Nevada.  The government seemed willing enough to risk its own population in order to win the Cold War.  Considering the lack of information on long-term radiation that the US inadvertently imposed on Japan, Nevada’s fallout zones serve as an example of the lasting implications radioactive fallout can have on a population. 

      Research has shown that long-term, low-dose exposure can actually be more dangerous than short-term high-dose radiation.  In the case of the latter, “the cells killed by the sudden burst are ejected from the body by the immune system, and healthy cells replace them” (Cheney, 19).  Of course the success of the immune system is contingent on how much radiation is absorbed.  As discussed earlier, victims of pancytopenia often did not have the capability to fight off infection and produce new cells.  However with long-term exposure to low-dose radiation, radioactive particles “will modify the genetic structure of cells without killing them…the cells are then able to reproduce genetic flaws that can go on to cause cancer and other diseases” (ibid., 19).  Not only this, but certain radioactive elements can cause reproductive problems, potentially mutating future generations.  As discussed earlier, it is difficult to say what is caused by nuclear radiation and what is caused by numerous outlying factors like background radiation, smoking, or pesticides.  As was found with the blast survivors, there are so many possible causes of disease and cancer, it is difficult to pinpoint radiation as the source.   However when cases of disease are abnormally high in a nuclear test zone, one can’t help but blame consistent radiation exposure.

        Utah’s small town of St. George with a population of 5,000 was positioned downwind of the Nevada Test Site.  However, it was 70 miles away; much further than the 3 km spread between the 1945 hypocenters and their fallout zones.  A total of about 100,000 people were said to be in areas of high fallout radiation, that is southern Utah and bordering rural Nevada.  Most people lived on ranches and were very spread out (Cheney, 58). 

      The fallout zones of the Nevada Test Site logically received long-term, low-dose radiation in two ways.  The first, nuclear tests lasted for a span of about seven years.  This time frame could arguably be considered long-term in comparison to the single blasts experienced in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  At a considerable distance away from the test site, radiation would be more likely to dissipate and hit people at lower doses.  Second, the fallout radiation that lingered in the atmosphere of these zones would account for even lower dosages of radiation.  

      Radiation became a voiced issue in 1953: “after two years of testing, down winders were starting to show concern” (Cheney, 62).  Apparently after a series of tests, ranchers were perplexed at the ensuing results of their sheep.  Kern Bullock, a rancher who actually saw a bomb drop, was approached by army personnel who told him he was “really in a hot spot” (ibid., 65).  Some sheep died after being herded to the next presumably safest place.  Those who went on to “lamb” either died or had lambs “born with little legs, kind of potbellied…some of them didn’t have any wool, kind of a skin instead of wool” (ibid.).  However the stories presented to the government were ignored.  The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), simply stated that the given radiation levels could not have caused the phenomenon.  These long-term, low-dose levels of radiation caused health to go from bad to worse.  In the same year as the sheep incident, people complained of nausea and diarrhea “during times of passing fallout” (ibid., 66).

      Nuclear testing was banned by 1958, but by then damage had been done.  Fallout radiation would remain in the atmosphere of fallout zones for years to come.  There were significant increases in all types of cancer: leukemia, lymphoma, melanoma, thyroid cancer, breast cancer, colon cancer, stomach cancer, brain cancer, and bone cancer.   All had increased by 1.9 to 12.5 times above the average rate by 1980 (ibid., 82).  In the cancer cases of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it was much easier to dismiss radiation exposure as the definite source, especially when statistics did not greatly increase.  Survivors were assumed to have one time of exposure: the blast.  Fallout radiation was said to be carried far enough away that the cities were back at normal, background levels.  However, for those who lived downwind of the Nevada Test Site, long-term, low-dose radiation seems the most likely cause.  Considering the theory that this type of exposure can be more damaging than short-term, high-dose radiation, increased cancer rates in southern Utah seem logical.  Cells could slowly mutate, as explained before, and reproduce, instead of die and flush out.

      One should not forget that those who lived 50 miles or so from the test site were not the only ones impacted.  In 1952, The New York Times reported radioactive rainfall in the city as a result of nuclear testing- a series of nuclear tests started in Nevada, across the United States, three days before.  This across the United States.  Radiation levels were reportedly 7 times higher than normal in New York City (Laurence, “Vast Atoms Strides Expected in Tests,” 83).  However scientist, Dr. John Harley, assured the newspaper that levels would drop by the next day: “The radiation could have increased a hundred times over the highest point it reached during the rainfall…before it would have been unsafe” (“Radioactive Rain Falls,” 25).  Whether it was a legitimate lack of knowledge or an effort to avoid public opposition to the Cold War, nothing was going to impede fallout radiation’s medical effects- not even thousands of miles of land. 

      New York’s radioactive rain not only suggests what fallout can do across the country, but across the globe.  Fallout is a major byproduct of nuclear war and testing, and should not be disregarded as it has been in Koi-Takasu and the Nashiyama Reservoir.  Even southern Utah was ignored for a time until people spoke up too loudly, eventually suing the AEC (Cheney, 90).  Maybe these sites are forgotten because the population is so scarce.  Statistics were unknown is Koi-Takasu, but the reservoir only had 600,000 (Schull, 119)..  The fallout zone to the test site, as vast as it was, only encompassed 100,000 (Cheney, 58).  If there is not a voice, then maybe there is not an outside concern. 

      In this paper, I have outlined the short-term and long-term effects of nuclear war as seen in Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors.  Stopping there would not have given an accurate impression of all that radiation can do.  Fallout radiation, whether in the Nishiyama Reservoir or St. George, Utah, remains in the atmosphere for years.  Long-term exposure to low levels of radiation has proven to greatly impact the health of those inhabitants of fallout zones.  These zones deserve much more attention than the world gives.

Works Cited

“Atomic Bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki- Health Effects of Radiation.” 2005.  National Research Center for Environment and Health. Oct. 2007.    <www.gsf.de/neu/Aktuelles/Presse/2005/pdfs/Hiroshima-Nagasaki-2005>. 

Cheney, Glenn. They Never Knew; The Victims of Nuclear Testing. New York: Grolier,  1996. 

“Fallout.” New York Times. 29 Oct. 1961. E1. Oct. 2007 Proquest.  <http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu>. 

Hersey, John. Hiroshima. 1945. New York, Hiroshima. AtomicArchive.com. Oct. 2007.  <http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects12.shtml>. 

Lawrence, W.H. “Visit to Hiroshima Proves It World’s Most Damaged City.” New York  Times. 5 Sept. 1945. 4. Oct. 2007. Proquest.    <http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu>. 

Lawrence, William. “Vast Atom Strides Excpected in Tests.” New York Times. 15 Mar.  1953. 84. Oct. 2007. Proquest. <http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu>. 

Mould, Richard. A Century of X-rays and Radioactivity in Medicine: With Emphasis on  Photographic Records of the Early Years. CRC Press: 1993.  <http://books.google.com/books>.  

“Radioactive Rain Falls; City is Sopping But Safe.” New York Times. 20 Mar. 1953. 25.  Proquest. <http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu>. 

Rosenfeld, Carrie. “The Effects of Nuclear Weapons.” AtomicArchive.com. 2006. Oct.  2007. <http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/index.shtml>. 

Saito-Kokubu, “Plutonium Isotopes Derived From Nagasaki Atomic Bomb in the  Sediment of Nishiyama Reservoir at Nagasaki, Japan.” Applied Radiation and  Isotopes. 65 (2007). ScienceDirect. Oct. 2007.<http://www.sciencedirect.com/>.  

Schull, William. Effects of Atomic Radiation; A Half Century of Studies from Hiroshima  and Nagasaki. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1995. 

Solomon, Frederic, and Robert Marstom. The Medical Implications of Nuclear War.  Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1986.

 

This paper appeared at this url: http://www.psci.vt.edu/internationalstudies/priv_IS4004/Fall%202007/CoomerMedical%20Implications.docx in 2007.  

---

Idealist's public document archives: 1. 2.

U.S. NUCLEAR tests: 128 A + 899 U in NV,
1 A in NM, 10 U (in NM, CO, AK, MS, central NV),
100+ A, U in Pacific, 3 A in S. Atlantic
(A=aboveground; U=Underground)

'The greatest irony of our atmospheric nuclear testing program is that 
the only victims of U.S. nuclear arms since World War II have been our own people.' 
- Forgotten Guinea Pigs Report, 1980

In 1986, the U.S. Dept. of Energy used the cover of the Chernobyl fallout cloud over the United States to release huge amounts of radiation into the air from a failed underground Nevada nuclear test. It was called Mighty Oak.

learn more on our global fallout page

 

This site best viewed in Firefox