MEMBERS OF IAEA ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF ICRP, UNSCEAR
As documented in the video above, few people realize that the same people who are part of the IAEA, are also members of the UNSCEAR organization and are also members and/or leaders/ of the IAEA and ICRP.
UNSCEAR MEMBERS HAVE VESTED INTEREST IN NUCLEAR POWER AND ARE PAID BY NATIONS THAT PROMOTE NUCLEAR POWER
British researcher blasts U.N. report on Fukushima cancer risk as unscientific
Baverstock said a report released in April by the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) was “not qualified to be called ‘scientific’” because it lacked transparency and independent verification. He added that the committee should be disbanded. He also questioned UNSCEAR’s neutrality, given that members are nominated by nations that have a vested interest in nuclear power. He noted that such nations provide funds to the committee.
Baverstock also suggested a conflict of interest, as committee members are not required to disclose their history working in the nuclear industry or sign pledges stating that no conflict of interest exists in evaluating radiation risks.
IAEA IS COLLUDING WITH WHO TO COVER UP RADIATION DAMAGE
So when you think you are hearing from three different and individual scientific or international bodies, they are actually all one and the same. So what is the IAEA? The IAEA is a marketing arm of the nuclear industry, with it’s budget paid for by the nuclear industry. For the details and proof plus a history lesson, click on the following links.
WHO/IAEA Collusion – Negative Health Impact of Fukushima: Warnings and Recommendations by Michel Fernex; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/12/whoiaea-collusion-negative-health.html
IAEA, WHO, NRC And Others; A Web Of Deception? via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/05/iaea-who-and-others-web-of-deception.html
MaidenHeaven July 24, 2014 ‘So for the last 40 years the English government has been lying to the people. And the American, the Canadian, the Australian, they have been lying. They have been lying to protect industry, to protect their profits, to protect themselves from lawsuits….So they are really just liars and it is provable, sanctioned by the World Health Organization, without a shadow of a doubt. It is the same people that sit on the ICNAP certificate, sit on our government health protection agencies, sit on the World Health Organization . . . . it is the same people. There are probably no more than 20 of them.”
“But, yes, they are going to, in my opinion, commit the worst genocide this planet has ever known, not just people, but animals and plants. They are probably going to cause more destruction than a global war, and in several hundred years time, people will look back, whoever survives, and look at what we tried to do to stop them. [..]”
”British physicist and electronic warfare expert, Barrie Trower.
As the British physicist points out, WHO is not protecting public health, but rather, industries and profit making enterprises. Why would it be any surprise that the other organizations also have the same hidden motivations underneath their ‘public’ face and PR spin, which always sounds good and reasonable?
ICRP CAUGHT MANIPULATING AND FAKING SCIENTIFIC DATA
How many common sense people would trust an organization that manipulates and fakes scientific data in order to make their own industry look good?
ICRP [International Commission on Radiological Protection] Caught Manipulating And ‘Faking’ Scientific Data; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/05/icrp-international-commission-on.html
IAEA AND OTHERS PAID AND/OR SUPPORTED BY NUCLEAR INDUSTRY, BUT CLAIM TO BE ‘NEUTRAL’
So on the one hand, we have the pro nuclear marketing arm of the nuclear industry, represented by the IAEA, WHO, NRC, UNSCEAR and ICRP, plus their allied politicians that receive ‘donations’ or fees (maybe they should be called bribes?) from the nuclear industry. They seem to care only about short term profits and protecting the ‘image’ of the nuclear industry, even inside of ‘peer reviewed’ studies..
On the other side, (featured in this article) we have the pro human rights, pro healthy children medical doctors and pro environmental groups who represent average people and communities that want a green, healthy and sustainable future. These ‘outsider’ groups are reporting on the ‘true’ science and medical research. These caring professionals are reporting on actual medical and scientific studies, representing them just as they are, with no industry bias or profit motive.
No one other than an industry ‘insider’ can get published, and then only if the conclusions are pro nuclear. Outsiders that disagree with the nuclear industry positions are attacked personally via ad hominem attacks, and labeled as distributing ‘fear porn’ or other degrading terms.
Which ‘expert’ would you listen to? Your medical doctor below, or a pro nuclear industry insider?
Which one would you trust?
NATIONAL COUNCIL ON RADIATION PROTECTION (NCRP)
At first glance, the council sounds really good… They are providing radiation protection and information… how could that be bad?
“The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) seeks to formulate and widely disseminate information, guidance and recommendations on radiation protection and measurements which represent the consensus of leading scientific thinking.”
According to the pro nuclear apologists, this organization has credibility because the AMA, American Society of Med Physicists, HPS, ANS and other organizations ‘cite’ them. and one member commented the proponents of the nuclear industry sees “nothing here that suggests they are in the pocket of special interests. They have the public interest at heart.”
or-well July 24, 2014 As opposed to the orthodoxy of my cult blah blah blah; for bigger profit take bigger risk!
http://vault.sierraclub.org/sierra/201107/images/carlpope.jpg
WHO ARE THE MEMBERS OF THIS SUPPOSEDLY NEUTRAL COUNCIL THAT HAVE ONLY PUBLIC INTEREST AT HEART?
Now let’s dive a little deeper into the nuclear pond that makes up this council. Who belongs to it, and what are their ties to the nuclear industry? Do any of them have biases, conflicts of interest or the profit motive on their agenda? It does not take long to find the industry corruption inside the belly of this organization, just like all of the others; IAEA, UNSCEAR, WHO, etc.
Let’s pick two names at random as of 2014;
BROOKE R. BUDDEMEIER is an associate program leader in the Global Security Directorate of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (council member as of 7/2014)
Would you bite the hands that feed you? Here is a member of the council who also promotes the nuclear industry.. There is absolutely no conflict of interest here, no bias, no favoritism, no hidden motives, right? Let’s all vote that this person is also absolutely neutral, unbiased, not influenced by money or profits in the nuclear radiation for profit business and government nuclear research contracts business, correct?
JUDITH L. BADER was a senior investigator in many cancer clinical trials, genetics and epidemiology research projects, and communications technologies projects during her 22 y in the U.S. Public Health Service at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Instititutes of Health. She has been the Chief of the Clinical Radiation Branch of the Radiation Oncology Branch at NCI, Chief of Radiation Oncology at the Bethesda Naval Hospital (now Walter Reed), and founding physician of two private radiation oncology practices. (council member as of 7/2014)
This sure looks like another promoter and user of nuclear radiation for profit, correct? Everyone will vote that this person is also absolutely neutral, unbiased, not influenced by money or profits in the medical radiation for profit business, correct?
Yup, all of these council members are truly independent, just like the ones paid by the nuclear industry over at IAEA, WHO, UNSCEAR and all of the rest.
CONSENSUS; HOW DOES IT WORK INSIDE OF NCRP, NRPB, UNSCEAR, AND BEIR?
The NCRP claims that they; “represent the consensus of leading scientific thinking.” Do these two ‘leading minds’ sound like they have the public and not the nuclear industry profits in mind during their decision making? Not likely. So how can they form a ‘consensus’ of leading minds, when there are a bunch of PhD’s that disagree with them? Consensus requires agreement among ALL of the global leading minds that are also OUTSIDE of this closed minded pro nuclear circle.
This small pro nuclear circle excludes everyone except those who are pro nuclear industry, pro more radiation exposure and looser radiation laws, with higher radiation exposure allowed around everything. So much for the consensus claim.
“NCRP, NRPB, UNSCEAR, and BEIR, like Fascist dictators, inflexibly demand that their archaic model of radiation effects be the basis for radiation protection. They tyrannize all…”
WHAT IS REAL CONSENSUS?
As a decision-making process, consensus decision-making aims to be:[2]
Agreement Seeking: A consensus decision making process attempts to generate as much agreement as possible.[2]
Collaborative: Participants contribute to a shared proposal and shape it into a decision that meets the concerns of all group members as much as possible.[3]
Cooperative: Participants in an effective consensus process should strive to reach the best possible decision for the group and all of its members, rather than competing for personal preferences.
Egalitarian: All members of a consensus decision-making body should be afforded, as much as possible, equal input into the process. All members have the opportunity to present, and amend proposals.
Inclusive: As many stakeholders as possible should be involved in the consensus decision-making process.
Participatory: The consensus process should actively solicit the input and participation of all decision-makers.[4]
INDEPENDENT NUCLEAR EXPERTS ARE EXCLUSED FROM THE GOOD OLD BOYS PRO NUCLEAR CLUB, NO CONSENSUS IS POSSIBLE, JUST FASCIST CONTROL BY THE MONOPOLISTIC NUCLEAR INDUSTRY
Do you see Arnie Gunderson, Busby or any of the other champions in this group? No? Do you see any whistleblowers? No.
It is very easy to get consensus, if all of the ‘experts’ and ‘leading minds’ are leading the way for the nuclear industry to make more profits, and gain more control, raise the radiation limits constantly, with less and less regulations or protections, wouldn’t you agree?
By that standard, consensus can consist of one person who makes up their mind that the moon is made of blue cheese. Let’s all take a vote. Aye, because it will avoid lawsuits and make us all lots of money! The ayes have it, with no nays, there is a consensus, the moon is indeed made of blue cheese. Wow, that was easy. We should have done this ‘consensus’ thing a LONG time ago.
What these yahoo pretend want to be scientists don’t realize is that science is NOT about consensus in a small closed off group that agrees on fake science results, but about debating back and forth in an open forum that includes all points of view and the truth appears via scientists both inside and outside the nuclear industry deciding for themselves, and the public watching this open process at work.
Since none of this is happening inside the nuclear industry or these agencies, the truth can be hidden away and these closed minded, closed off cells of pro nuclear apologists can PRETEND that they are the icons of truth and virtue, with all of their peer reviewed this and peer reviewed that, but underneath it all, it is a huge pile of you know what, because no debate or disagreement is allowed.
PraisingTruthApril 18, 2015 A Primer in the Art of Deception: The Cult of Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science
“…The mentality that sponsors and endorses the Life Span Study is the same mentality that advocates that nuclear war is winnable, tactical nuclear weapons are useable, and radiological weapons have a place on today’s battlefield. This dogma is dangerous, a product of corrupted thinking perpetrated by the Cult of Nuclearists, that may very well draw the entire world over the edge into limited or total thermonuclear war.
“Exhibit D
“The astute reader may have asked at some point why the history of radiation safety provided earlier in this chapter stopped where it did in the 1950s following publication by the ICRP and NCRP of the first standards of safety for internal contamination. What happened to the second half of the Twentieth Century? This is the million-dollar question.
“The model used today by international agencies formulating safety for internal contamination by radionuclides is essentially the same model, with updated modifications, developed during the Manhattan Project, the Tri-Partite Conferences, and the meetings of the committees on internal emitters of the NCRP and the ICRP.
This model was developed prior to the discovery of DNA!
Since the 1950s, a revolution has taken place in biology. Entire vistas of cellular and molecular biology, totally unsuspected by World War II physicists, have opened up for scientific exploration. The rapid advancement in technology has created powerful tools for imaging cellular structures and probing the mysteries of the molecular chemistry that orchestrates cellular processes. Advances have been so profound that, today, microbeams can deliver individual alpha particles to cells in vitro and the
altered morphology of cellular structures can be determined by DNA sequencing and correlated with functional aberrations. Over this amazing new world of microscopic wonders and the deepening understanding of the cellular and molecular basis of life, the ICRP.
MEDICAL DOCTORS SAY UNSCEAR REPORT GREATLY UNDERESTIMATES AND MINIMIZES NEGATIVE HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OF FUKUSHIMA MEGA NUCLEAR DISASTER
Doctors Say UN Science Report Systematically Underestimates Health Impact of Fukushima Catastrophe
Physicians for Social Responsibility and Human Rights Now talk about how Since the March 2011 nuclear disaster in Fukushima, individuals and communities in Japan continue to be exposed to dangerous levels of radioactivity. There are serious concerns about consequent health effects for citizens in contaminated areas.
Residents have a right to live in a safe and healthy environment, however, sufficient protective measures and support are not being provided. The right of access to medical treatment and the medical data about one’s own body are being seriously denied. Experts will speak about how two UN reports impact policy regarding the lives and health of citizens currently affected after the nuclear disaster, and what should be done to provide immediate relief to protect their fundamental rights.
Residents have a right to live in a safe and healthy environment, however, sufficient protective measures and support are not being provided. The right of access to medical treatment and the medical data about one’s own body are being seriously denied. Experts will speak about how two UN reports impact policy regarding the lives and health of citizens currently affected after the nuclear disaster, and what should be done to provide immediate relief to protect their fundamental rights.
Dr. John Rachow, Ph.D., M.D.
Dr. Rachow is a practicing physician, Board Member and Chair of the Radiation and Health Committee, and Past President (2011) of Physicians for Social Responsibility, Washington, DC. He is also an Assistant Clinical Professor of University of Iowa, Department of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Mari Inoue, Esq., is a practicing lawyer and New York representative of Human Rights Now, Tokyo, Japan.
From the video above; “Human Rights Experts call for immediate action to protect the right to health of citizens affected by the nuclear accident in Fukushima.
Critical Analysis of the UNSCEAR Report “Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and tsunami” by
Physicians for Social Responsibility, USA
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War / Physicians in social responsibility, Germany
Physicians for Global Survival, Canada
Mexican Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Mexico
Association of Guatemalan Physicians and Scientists for the Prevention of War, Guatemala
Physicians for Social Responsibility / IPPNW, Switzerland
Danish Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (DLMK), Denmark
Medical Association for the Protection of the Environment and Against Nuclear and Biochemical Threat, Greece
French Physicians Against Nuclear Weapons (AMFPGN), France
Physicians Union Lege Artis, Serbia
Dutch Medical Association for Peace Research (NVMP), The Netherlands
Irish Doctors Environmental Association, Ireland
Association of Physicians and Medical Workers for Social Responsibility / IPPNW, Kenya
Society of Nigerian Doctors for the Welfare of Mankind, Nigeria
Physicians for Social Responsibility, Egypt
Physicians for Peace and Preservation of the Environment, Israel
Indian Doctors for Peace and Development (IDPD), India
Physicians for Peace and Social Responsibility, Malaysia
Austrian Physicians against Violence and Nuclear Dangers (OMEGA), Austria”
via CiscoJuly 20, 2014
UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL DISAGREES WITH ICRP
Mr. Anand Grover, Esq.
Mr. Anand Grover, appointed by UN Human Right Council at its eighth session in June 2008, is the UN Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. The position is honorary and he is not a staff of the United Nations nor paid for his work. He is also a practicing attorney in the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court of India. From November 15 to 26, 2012, Mr. Grover was on a country mission to Japan to conduct an independent investigation on issues related to the enjoyment of the right to health, including availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of health services, goods and facilities. Additional aspects investigated are, the underlying determinants of health in Japan within the context of the Great East Japan Earthquake, the events leading to it (including emergency response, recovery and mitigation with a particular focus on challenges and actions taken in response to them), as well as lessons learned and good practices. The mission involved meetings with Japanese government officials, non-governmental organizations, and local citizens affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake, tsunami and the nuclear disaster in Fukushima. Mr. Grover’s report on his findings and recommendations was submitted to the Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in May 2013, and will be reported to the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly in New York on October 25, 2013.
UN Human Rights Council Fukushima Report Extremely Critical Of TEPCO And Government; via @AGreenRoad
HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION DISAGREES WITH ICRP
HUMAN RIGHTS NOW
On 10/24/2013, Human Rights Now, along with 64 Japanese civil society organizations, has issued a statement requesting the UNSCEAR and the General Assembly Fourth Committee to revise the report and its finding from a human rights perspective.
hrn.or.jp/eng/activity/area/worldwide/japanese-civil-society-requests-that-the-reports-of-the-united-nations-scientific-committee-on-fukus/
hrn.or.jp/eng/activity/area/worldwide/japanese-civil-society-requests-that-the-reports-of-the-united-nations-scientific-committee-on-fukus/
PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY DISAGREES WITH ICRP
PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Please refer to the more detailed full-version commentary:
(Contact: alfred.c.meyer@gmail.com (PSR USA), alexrosen@gmx.net (IPPNW Germany) for the PSR/IPPNW commentary.)
Source; description under video above
In Germany, medical doctors are very critical of the UNSCEAR report saying that there will be no harm from Fukushima radiation to anyone.
IPPNW PHYSICIANS GROUP FIND 10 GRAVE ERRORS IN UNSCEAR REPORT
Effects Of Internal Low Level Nuclear Radiation
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/p/effects-of-internal-low-level-nuclear.html
ICRP IGNORES 111 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS EXPOSING ICRP CONCLUSIONS AND POSITION
IAEA, ICRP, NCRP, And UNSCEAR Are All Staffed By The Same Pro Nuclear Industry Apologists, 2104 UNSCEAR Report Labeled Criminal
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/04/iaea-icrp-and-unscear-are-all-staffed.html
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/04/iaea-icrp-and-unscear-are-all-staffed.html
Website and contact page
A Green Road Project – Science Of Sustainable Health Open Source Commons Knowledge Database
– Click in search box in upper right corner and type in search term to find any related article(s)
– Click on ‘pages’ in upper left corner to see index of all subjects
AGR Free Press 
“The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) joined the controversy June 4, with a 27-page “Critical Analysis of the UNSCEAR Report ‘Levels and effects of radiation exposures due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and tsunami.”
“Physicians find ten grave failures in UN report”
“The majority of the IPPNW’s report details 10 major errors, flaws or discrepancies in the UNSCEAR paper and explains study’s omissions, underestimates, inept comparisons, misinterpretations and unwarranted conclusions.”
Read IPPNW’s 10 major errors at