• Scientist: Cancer Fears From Hiroshima Nuke Were Exaggerated | The Daily Caller
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/12/cancer-fears-from-hiroshima-nuke-were-exaggerated-says-scientists

    Survivors of the two atomic bombings that ended World War II didn’t suffer from as many negative health effects as commonly believed, according to a new study.

    A study funded by the Japanese and U.S. governments examined data from more than 100 studies and found the long-term effects of radiation weren’t nearly as bad as originally believed. Individuals most exposed to the bomb’s radiation were more likely to develop cancer, but had an average life expectancy only 1.3 years shorter than the national average.

    There’s an enormous gap between that belief and what has actually been found by researchers,” Bertrand Jordan, a molecular biologist and lead author of the analysis, said in a Friday press statement.

    Of the 44,635 exposed to the Hiroshima bomb, Jordan only found 848 additional cases of cancer. The cancer risk of Hiroshima survivors only increased by 42 percent, meaning the cancer risk of surviving a nuclear bombing are comparable to that of smoking. Overestimation of radiation risk could have huge implications for nuclear power.

    • Résumé de l’article

      The Hiroshima/Nagasaki Survivor Studies: Discrepancies Between Results and General Perception | Genetics
      http://www.genetics.org/content/203/4/1505

      The explosion of atom bombs over the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 resulted in very high casualties, both immediate and delayed but also left a large number of survivors who had been exposed to radiation, at levels that could be fairly precisely ascertained. Extensive follow-up of a large cohort of survivors (120,000) and of their offspring (77,000) was initiated in 1947 and continues to this day. In essence, survivors having received 1 Gy irradiation (∼1000 mSV) have a significantly elevated rate of cancer (42% increase) but a limited decrease of longevity (∼1 year), while their offspring show no increased frequency of abnormalities and, so far, no detectable elevation of the mutation rate. Current acceptable exposure levels for the general population and for workers in the nuclear industry have largely been derived from these studies, which have been reported in more than 100 publications. Yet the general public, and indeed most scientists, are unaware of these data: it is widely believed that irradiated survivors suffered a very high cancer burden and dramatically shortened life span, and that their progeny were affected by elevated mutation rates and frequent abnormalities. In this article, I summarize the results and discuss possible reasons for this very striking discrepancy between the facts and general beliefs about this situation.

      THE first (and only) two A-bombs used in war were detonated over Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945. Casualties were horrendous, approximately 100,000 in each city including deaths in the following days from severe burns and radiation. Although massive bombing of cities had already taken place with similar death tolls (e.g., Dresden, Hamburg, and Tokyo, the latter with 100,000 casualties on March 9, 1945), the devastation caused by a single bomb was unheard of and remains one of the most horrifying events in the past century. The people who had survived the explosions were soon designated as Hibakusha and were severely discriminated against in Japanese society, as (supposedly) carriers of (contagious?) radiation diseases and potential begetters of malformed offspring. While not reaching such extremes, the dominant present-day image of the aftermath of the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings, in line with the general perception of radiation risk (Ropeik 2013; Perko 2014), is that it left the sites heavily contaminated, that the survivors suffered very serious health consequences, notably a very high rate of cancer and other debilitating diseases, and that offspring from these survivors had a highly increased rate of genetic defects. In fact, the survivors have been the object of massive and careful long-term studies whose results to date do not support these conceptions and indicate, instead, measurable but limited detrimental health effects in survivors, and no detectable genetic effects in their offspring. This Perspectives article does not provide any new data; rather, its aim is to summarize the results of the studies undertaken to date, which have been published in more than 100 papers (most of them in international journals), and to discuss why they seem to have had so little impact beyond specialized circles.

  • White House Censors French President For Using The Words ’Islamist Terrorism’ [VIDEO] | The Daily Caller

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/01/white-house-censors-french-president-for-using-the-words-islamist-terro

    The White House censored the video of French President Francois Hollande daring to argue that “Islamist terrorism” is at the “roots of terrorism.”

    According to MRCTV, the White House pulled the original, unedited version from WhiteHouse.gov and YouTube and then reuploaded the video with the words “Islamist terrorism” silenced.

    Moreover, the official transcript on WhiteHouse.gov at one point did not include Hollande’s claim that “Islamist terrorism, is in Syria and in Iraq. We therefore have to act both in Syria and in Iraq, and this is what we’re doing within the framework of the coalition.”

  • Google Maps May Be Helping Illegals Skirt Border Controls | The Daily Caller
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/17/how-google-maps-may-be-helping-illegal-immigrants-skirt-border-controls

    A series of user-published Google maps point out known border patrol checkpoints and stations along the U.S. border with Mexico in an apparent effort to help illegal aliens avoid border controls.

    #cartographie #migrations #frontières #répression #militer