argument that the individual in the population doesn't have anything to say about it falls flat with me, because the ordinary individual doesn't have anything to say about the casualties of war. 7 A fourth reason why concern has been expressed about health risks from fallout may be a confusion of casual relationships, i.e., the identifying or association of nuclear tests with nuclear war. In August of 1963 Marquis Childs writing in the Washington Post about fallout from nuclear tests and the debate on the test ban treaty stated: " |. . Whatever the scientists and statisticians may say, the fear of nuclear pollution - strontium-90 in the Nation's milk doubled in the past year - and the threat of nuclear war are greater than the fear of the Soviet Union Ww If this be so, what a miszalculation! To place in the same category the health risks from fallout from nuclear tests to those from a nuclear war - if this were intended is completely contraty to all that is known. The health risks from nuclear test fallout may not be zero, but they are minuscule compared to those of nuclear warfare. Also, there may lave been established in the minds of some that nuclear weapons testing and nuclear war go hand-in-hand, i.e., abolish one and the other is automatically abolished. Such a discussion is beyond the scope of this booklet, yet one point must be made. As a matter of technical fact, nuclear weapons of proven performance would not have been possible without the testing of nuclear devices and verifying nuclear concepts that were incorporated into