© n/a
Last April 20 the
New England Journal of Medicine (
NEJM) published an on-line article entitled "
Short-term and Long-term Health Risks of Nuclear-Power-Plant Accidents" by Dr. Eli Glatstein and five other authors. The article was riddled with distortions and misinformation, and overall was very poor research. As the
NEJM is a peer reviewed journal and has a significant letters section, I wrote a letter pointing out some of the errors committed by the authors, and a longer piece containing a comprehensive critique.
The
NEJM demands that letters to the journal contain material that has not been submitted or published elsewhere, so I had to refrain from submitting my longer piece anywhere until the
NEMJ made a decision on my letter. When my letter did not appear after a couple of weeks I inquired, and was told that the article would soon appear in the printed version of the
Journal, and that no letters about the article could be published until after the print version came out. The printed version finally appeared on June 16.
However, on July 1,I was notified by the
NEMJ that they would not publish my letter due to "space constraints." The four letters that they did publish in response to the article were at most only mildly critical and missed the glaring short-comings of the report. In other words,
NEMJ sat on my letter and effectively stifled my critique of what can only be described as industry propaganda for almost three months until public attention had moved on to other matters. However, with attention once again focused on the still-out of control Fukushima reactors on the first anniversary of the accident, my expose on how the media and academia have joined together to downplay the dangers of nuclear power is a poignant as ever.
Since the nuclear disaster in Fukushima started in March, the media has been full of misinformation about the dangers posed by the nuclear accidents and the damage caused by past accidents such as those at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Whether it is
Jay Lehr on Fox News
1 or
George Monbiot on
Democracy Now,
2 the story line is the same: there were only dozens of deaths from the Chernobyl and none from TMI, the health consequences for the general population are negligible, and all things considered nuclear power is among the safest forms of energy. In some cases the lines are spoken by industry hacks whose true motive is to protect profits, while other times the spokesperson is a global warming tunnel visionist who has lost sight of the fact that we as humans have ingeniously devised a multitude of ways to mess up our planet, including nuclear wars and disasters.
Comment: SEE ALSO: Gerry Armstrong speaks about Scientology
Gerry Armstrong, Ron Hubbard's former personal secretary, talks about his twelve years in Scientology, his reasons for leaving the organization, and Scientologists' attack on his speeches denouncing Scientology. Armstrong talks about psychopaths, sociopaths, Nazis and Scientology's Teachers.
And: Scientology: James Randi on L. Ron Hubbard
And: Panorama The Secrets of Scientology