----- Original Message -----

From: savorsuccesslady3

To: AmericanDUST@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 8:14 AM

Subject: [AmericanDUST] Re: The latest news on how radiation affects us

First, to Bugs. You are so very welcome. But I am so terribly sorry
that you had to become ill...There is so much environmental toxic,
radiological pollution in TN that I would not be surprised if far
over 40 percent of the people do not come down with some form of
cancer in their lifetime.

This is absolutely insane. Even if we're getting on in our years, I
believe we have to do this for our kids and their kids, and so on. We
have a responsibility to them to stop the messes made by those in
power when they were young, or when they were not yet even born!

This radiation is not their fault. It is, in large part, the fault of
our grand parents and our parents and our own selves. So many of us
were "asleep at the wheel" when the mushroom clouds and smaller - but
still deadly - radioactive explosions have been exploded in the US
for into now the [GASP!] sixty-third (63) year!

So many people think that the nuclear tests ended. They did not. They
are still performed in CA, NV, and NM, and the military is still
firing its Uranium, too, in many places both inside the US and
throughout the globe.

So what you did - educating just one man - is what needs to be done.
We can and must each be doing this, as wide as our sphere of
influence will go. Who knows, Bugs? Maybe when you are fully
recovered, you will want to speak about this to groups of people? You
may want to join some of us in rallies or maybe even start a rally of
your own?

So much has been accomplished through grassroots activism by ordinary
people just like us. Who am I? I was a retired business manager and
environmentalist, just any person who learned about this on my own,
and said, ENOUGH'S ENGOUGH! They are contaminating us ON PURPOSE and
I can no longer just sit here and ALLOW THEM to do so!

TN must fight the nuclear power plant and STOP the radiological
madness there! But it is going to take more education. A whole LOT
more education. People do not realize that this invisible poison gas
is making them sick!

Keep up the GREAT work, Bugs! Your kids, grand kids, and great-
grandchildren will be AWFULLY glad you did!

Cathy Garger

--- In AmericanDUST@yahoogroups.com, Kevin OBrien
<desdinovatheluckyone@...> wrote:
>
> This is definetly something to pay CLOSE attention to.There is now
a demand for Depleted Uranium.What used to be a liability,is now an
assett.
>
> --- On Mon, 9/15/08, bugs <brawny@...> wrote:
>
> From: bugs <brawny@...>
> Subject: Re: [AmericanDUST] Re: The latest news on how radiation
affects us
> To: AmericanDUST@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, September 15, 2008, 7:35 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Cathy thanks, A friend of mine is serving on the Upper Cumberland
Electric Co-Op. that we get our electricity from,
> He said they the UCEMC had a meeting last Friday ,and they was
talking about trying to get the Hartsville,Tn nuclean plant back on
the drawing board.
> I told James,I hope not and he then ask why not, I then told him
about the 5 dumps Tn.has now. and that nuclean was cheap energy,but
what do you do with the waste? He ask again, I told him about you and
the chart that you had of the hottest counties in Tn for radition..
> He wanted to see for himself..
> So thanks again..
> UCEMC serves Overton,Putnam, Jackson,Smith, part Of
Macon,Clay,Pickett, Fentress, ,and Cumberland  Counties..
> I'm in Overton County, Livingston,Tn.
> Thanks Cathy.
> Bugs
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: savorsuccesslady3
> To: AmericanDUST@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 5:48 AM
> Subject: [AmericanDUST] Re: The latest news on how radiation
affects us
>
>
>
> Dear Bugs,
>
> I am terribly sorry to hear about your cancer! Wow! That was one
> amazingly large "baseball"! I am so happy to hear that they were
able
> to remove it! Hoping your recovery is swift.
>
> Yes, I have located the cancer statistics for TN. The various
reports
> are located here:
>
> http://health. state.tn. us/TCR/Reports/ reports.htm
>
> Please tell us your thoughts - and how we can help you, okay?
>
> Best wishes to you during your recovery process,
>
> Cathy
>
> --- In AmericanDUST@ yahoogroups. com, "bugs" <brawny@> wrote:
> >
> > Cathy,do you still have the chart showing the radition levels in
> Tn,for each county? I lost mine when my computer crashed.
> > I had a cancer tumor taken out of my colon 2 weeks ago that was
the
> size of a baseball and 7 inches long.. they removed 12 inches of my
> colon..
> > Thanks
> > bugs
> > Radiation Science That Will Never Make TIME or Newsweek
> >
> >
> > The following is a September 9 newsletter from the Low
> Level Radiation Campaign www.llrc.org .
> >
> > What is unique (and righteous) about this small group of
> non-compromised scientists is that they study and discuss in depth
> *all* radioactive pollution, regardless of the source... be it
> nuclear power plants, Uranium weapons production and manufacturing
> plants, military or national weapons laboratory operations,
> outdoor "testing" and firing.
> >
> > In other words, the Low Level Radiation Campaign
> www.llrc.org goes the full distance. These scientists go
courageously
> where others do not (dare not?) go. So let's all do whatever we can
> to help support this organization' s efforts. The Low Level
Radiation
> Campaign depends on donations in order to keep operating. And even
if
> we don't have a few bucks to throw their way, we can certainly
> forward this newsletter along!
> >
> > Why is the research of the Low Level Radiation Campaign so
> important? The deliberate radioactive contamination of the US - and
> the rest of the world - is only growing over time. Radiological
> effects on the human body are cumulative and will be passed along
to
> future generations, both in our genes and in our environment. Thus,
> continued studies are necessary in order to know the long-term
> implications of these damages to our health.
> >
> > Granted, on a personal level, for those of us in middle age
> and later years, this might not seem that important. But to our
kids
> and grand kids, nieces and nephews, and all of their kids on down
the
> line? This rampant, continued onslaught of radioactive pollution
now
> on the up-swing with the "Nukuler Resurgence" being pushed upon us,
> along with the manufacture of more Uranium Wars in a growing number
> of countries... is most certain to impact our descendants in a
huge -
> and most tragically unfortunate - way.
> >
> > The invisible radioactive contamination of the US is
> certainly Uncle Sam's (and our allies') "best kept dirty secret."
Our
> federal government has had a more-than-curious, pathological Love
> Affair with the widespread, liberal use of radionuclides as an
> environmental contaminant.
> >
> > How long are we going to maintain the role of helpless
> victim, begging our own government to "Please stop radioactively
> poisoning us and deliberately contaminating our kids' air, water,
and
> soil, Uncle Sam?" Certainly, if a greater number of people find out
> what's going on... those in power will be unable to
> > ignore us all!
> >
> > Beyond the immorality of bombarding our environment (and
> lungs) with radioactive gasses, nor is this pollution justified on
a
> legal basis. Actions such as toxic, radioactive outdoor "testing"
are
> a violation of basic human rights of US citizens under
international
> law. http://axisoflogic. com/artman/ publish/article_ 26286.shtml
> >
> > As I see it? The least we can do is spread the word - and
> let everyone else know that the continuous bombardment of
chemically
> toxic and radioactive emissions into our air, water, and soil is
> simply NOT Okay!
> >
> > With gratitude for all you do - and best wishes to all,
> >
> > Cathy Garger
> > www.mytown.ca/ garger
> >
> > New Scientist report on Uranium risks compromises ICRP
> > ICRP model in trouble
> >
> > A New Scientist report on Uranium toxicity reveals a
> massive gap in the scientific modelling of the International
> Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). There are massive
> implications for all aspects of nuclear policy and Uranium
weaponry.
> >
> >
> >
> > "Secondary Photoelectron effect"
> >
> >
> >
> > The dangers of Uranium may have little to do with its
> inherent radioactivity. The Low Level Radiation Campaign's Dr.
Chris
> Busby has proposed that genetic damage is caused by the interaction
> of natural gamma and other radiation fields with Uranium or any
> element of high atomic number. The impact of the gamma causes
> localised showers of ionisations close to particles and even single
> atoms of elements of high atomic number. Research by Busby in
> conjunction with Pr. Ewald Schnug, a colleague at Germany's Federal
> Agricultural Research Centre, is about to be published [see
> footnote].
> >
> >
> >
> > All elements absorb gamma radiation and re-emit its energy
> in the form of secondary photo-electrons. Their ability to do this
> varies with the fourth power of the atomic number of the element;
> Uranium absorbs gamma rays 585365 times more effectively than water
> does. The shower of localised ionisations caused by the secondary
> photo-electrons creates a mechanism for genetic damage which is
> ignored by the conventional model of radiation risk. (The
arithmetic
> is in LLRC's journal Radioactive Times April 2008 page 8.
> www.llrc.org/ rat/subrat/ rat72.pdf)
> >
> >
> >
> > In 2003 Busby reported this "Secondary Photoelectron
> effect" to the British Government's Committee Examining Radiation
> Risk of Internal Emitters (CERRIE). It was one of the many
important
> topics omitted by the CERRIE Majority Report. Subsequently Busby
> published two papers [see footnote] and described the effect to the
> UK Ministry of Defence Depleted Uranium Oversight Board and CoRWM
> (Committee on Radioactive Waste Management).
> >
> >
> >
> > Heavy metal poisoning
> >
> >
> >
> > The New Scientist has discussed the Secondary Photoelectron
> effect only in relation to Depleted Uranium, although it has far
> wider relevance. It has potential to explain why heavy metals are
> toxic. Heavy metal toxicity exists despite wide differences in
> chemistry; until now no-one has understood the reason.
> >
> >
> >
> > Uranium DNA affinity
> >
> >
> >
> > Uranium itself has a high affinity for the phosphates in
> the DNA molecule and it is known that, at small total body burdens
of
> Uranium, a very high proportion of it will be on the DNA. Meditated
> by the Secondary Photoelectron effect, Uranium focuses the energy
of
> natural gamma radiation onto DNA. This has the potential to explain
> observed high risks of genetic diseases associated with nuclear
> facilities and events like Chernobyl which are ignored by the ICRP
> and sneered at by the pro-nuclear International Atomic Energy
Agency
> and the World Health Organisation (which has to defer to IAEA in
> matters of radiation and health).
> >
> >
> >
> > Policy implications
> >
> >
> >
> > The mining, processing, use and disposal of Uranium must
> now be seen as creating health hazards far greater than predicted
by
> the ICRP's out of date modelling. There are extremely important
> policy implications for nuclear power, disposal of radioactive
waste,
> and nuclear weapons (including depleted Uranium and new generations
> of weapons containing other types of Uranium).
> >
> >
> >
> > As LLRC has said since 1992, the effects of other types of
> radioactive pollution have probably been underestimated too, but it
> now seems that Uranium is the dominant problem.
> >
> >
> >
> > New light on Busby's "Second Event theory"
> >
> >
> >
> > In the last 20 years Chris Busby has proposed his "Second
> Event theory" as a possible explanation of how radioactive elements
> that decay more than once (Strontium 90 is an example) may have a
> greater effect on genetic mutation. A first radioactive
> disintegration that hits a cell without killing it forces the cell
to
> repair itself. If a second disintegration hits the same cell during
> the repair process, which takes a few hours, it may cause a
mutation
> that the cell cannot repair. This is all in Wings of Death
> >
> > (http://www.llrc. org/wings/ wingspage. htm)
> >
> >
> >
> > Supporters of nuclear power have attacked the theory, not
> least because they said radiation could not initiate the repair
> process in cells, but in the New Scientist article the ICRP's Hans-
> Georg Menzel accepts that "double hits of energy are known to be
the
> most damaging to cells." The Majority Report of CERRIE denied this
in
> 2004 after long arguments. See the Minority Report
> (http://www.llrc. org/wobblyscienc e/subtopic/ cerrie.htm) for the
true
> state of the debate on the Second Event theory.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Secondary Photoelectron effect is now seen to be
> another case of the general Second Event theory, describing how
> sequences of radiation events can be concentrated into very
localised
> cellular targets. These considerations make nonsense of the
> conventional model of radiation biology, which views radiation in
> terms of average energy transfer across large volumes of tissue.
The
> old concept of "dose" is now useful only for those exposure regimes
> where the radiation truly is well-averaged. The regulation of
> radioactivity in the environment is about to enter a new phase in
> which "ionisation density" will be the vital parameter.
> >
> >
> >
> > Compton scattering
> >
> >
> >
> > In the New Scientist article Mark Hill of Oxford University
> is reported as saying that Compton scattering would reduce the
> importance of the secondary photo-electron effect. However, Hill
only
> discusses high energy gamma; the low energy part of the natural
gamma
> spectrum will create relatively high ionisation densities with a
> correspondingly enhanced probability of causing double hits to DNA.
> >
> > The New Scientist article in full is only accessible to
> subscribers
> >
> > but it is free on
> http://www.nuwinfo. se/tickell200809 03newscientist. html
> >
> > and http://www.pharmacy choice.com/ News/article. cfm?
> Article_ID=93531
> >
> >
> >
> > The Low Level Radiation Campaign plays a key role in all
> this. LLRC funds much of Dr. Busby's research. It was LLRC's
> publicity material that alerted Professor Schnug to Dr. Busby's
> existence, and our office put them in touch with each other. It was
> our journal Radioactive Times that alerted New Scientist to the
> imminent publication of Busby and Schnug's new paper.
> >
> >
> >
> > LLRC does all this and much more on a microscopic budget,
> but we need money. Please consider a donation.
> http://www.llrc. org/donation. htm tells you how you can give
money —
> cheques, Standing Orders, transfers, and Paypal (you don't need to
> have a Paypal account of your own)
> >
> > Clicking on this link takes you to our Paypal account,
> which is a safe way to send money and costs you nothing.You can do
> this even if you don't have a Paypal account - when the payments
page
> opens, scroll down to find where you can pay with plastic.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
> ----
> >
> > 1. "Advanced Biochemical and Biophysical Aspects of Uranium
> Contamination" . Chris Busby and Ewald Schnug: Institute of Plant
> Nutrition and Soil Science, Federal Agricultural Research Centre
> (FAL), Bundesallee 50, D-38116 Braunschweig, Germany in "Loads and
> Fate of Fertilizer Derived Uranium", pp. xx-xx Edited by L.J. De
Kok
> & E. Schnug © 2007 Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands
> >
> > 2 Busby C (2005) Depleted Uranium weapons, Metal
> Particles, and Radiation Dose European Journal of Biology and
> Bioelectromagnetics Vol 1 No 1 p 82-93 www.ebab.eu. com
> >
> > 3. Busby C (2005) Does Uranium Contamination amplify
> natural background radiation dose to DNA?
> >
> > European Journal of Biology and Bioelectromagnetics Vol 1
> No 2 p 120-131 www.ebab.eu. com
> >
>