,,.

Paw Four
Jo;athan 14eisgall
January 21, 1982
to the reproductive mechanism and thus to reduce the
‘
number of cells at risk for malignant transformation.
At lower doses, as In the adult group, a greater number
of cells would be spared for malignant transformation.
The authoris are obviously attempting to obsecure the fact
that low-level radiation may Indeed be more dangerous at
Bikini than the islanders might cons~der otherwise, and
it is skjn to a criminal act-to hide this--—information.from”
unsuspecting and unknowle~e..

E9!QE:

“If people will again return to live on Bikini Atoll in the
future, scientists can again use this instrument (whole body
counter) to measure the amount of gama radiation from
radioactive atoms in people’s bodies as a result of their
living on the atoll.”
This is tantamount to admitting that the scientists know in
advance that the Blkinians will be ingesting gantna-emitters
at Bikini, such as cesium-137 and cobalt-60.

E21!212:

“The U.S. Government and many other governments approve
and follow these recommendations.”
The authors, in mentioning the radiation standards of the
ICRP, UNSCEAR, IAEA, and the EPA, neglected to mention that
these radiation standards, far from being unanimously
accepted, are probably the most controversial aspect of
present-day radiation physics. The Blkfnians have a right
to know that there are many radiation scientists who feel
that these radiation standards are extremely lax and that
they grossly underestimate the potential hazards associated
with radiation exposure. When one roads through this booklet,
one gets the definite impression that there is universal
Moreover, the Blkinians
consensus about radiation standards.
have a right to know that researchers such as Gofman, Mancuso,
Carl Johnson, et al. have had their Government-funded studies
terminated because their findings suggested that the accepted
radiation standards underestimated the health risks of
radiation exposure.

.~---”

Page 21-27:

The scenarios and accompanying risk estimates on these
pages are conservative calculations, i.e., “best-cases”
verses “worst-cases.”
The Bikinians have a right to know
this, especially In light of the history of repeated mistakes
by Brookhaven, the DOE, Interior, et al. In the Marshalls.
Specifically, the fact that the “unexposed” Rongelapese who
returned with the “exposed” islanders In 1957 after Bravo
became exposed to residual radiation should be relevant here.
In this connection, the Japanese scientists who came to the
Marshalls in 1973 reported that the Rongelapese should not
have returned in 1957 must be mentioned. Also, the lesson
or the catastrophic Biktni return in the 1970s should not be
ignored.
As an addendum, the authors of the DOE booklet have failed
to mention the psychological impact of the weapons tests In

Select target paragraph3