No Unanimity On Fall-Out Danger

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29894, 7 August 1962, Page 8

No Unanimity On Fall-Out Danger

“Statements recently published in the press suggest that those who emphasise the dangers of fall-out from continued nuclear weapons testing are causing undue anxiety," says Mrs M. Woodward, secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, in a statement. However, even scientists who are specialists in this field vary in their assessment of the dangers involved; and a judgment on whether these dangers are justified involves matter on which the scientist is no better qualified to speak than any other concerned and responsible citizen," she says.

“One reason is that so much is still unknown about the effects of radiation. ’Safe figures for exposure were originally designed for the protection of radiation workers, and were not meant to be applied to the whole population. Moreover, these figures have been lowered consistently as more has been learnt—often at the cost of very considerable human suffering, which need not have occurred if man had been more responsible in his dealings with the unknown.

“The fact that so much is still unknown has been used as an argument against undue concern about fall-out. It may also be seen as an absolute argument against increasing dangers whose effects are irretrievable, longlasting, and at present little understood,” says Mrs Woodward.

“It is, for example, not known for certain whether continued small doses of strontium 90, such as result from present levels of fallout. will cause diseases such as bone cancer or leukemia (both of which are very painful, at present uncurable and most likely to be produced in children who are still growing.) However the report issued by the Dominion XRay Laboratory states that, according to information at present available, there could in time be 10 extra deaths

in New Zealand from leukemia attributable to present fall-out. “Moral Judgment” “These figures cannot be measured for certain for many years. We may hope that they are too high, but if they are too low the damage cannot be undone later. They represent a tiny fraction of deaths already occurring from leukemia, but the judgment that therefore they are of little concern is a moral judgment, not a scientific one. No murderer so far has escaped censure because so many people die from natural causes than from murder. “Lack of knowledge is an important consideration in assessing the -effects of high natural radiation levels on the population in some areas. No statistics have been kept for any significant period of time in these areas and therefore effects cannot be assessed with any degree of accuracy. Differing Opinions “Lack of knowledge is also the basis for the differing opinions as to the value or danger of the high-altitude tests, which, according to published statements are primarily ‘to determine how defence systems would weather an enemy attack;' any contribution to the field of non-military human knowledge will be incidental. Many eminent scientists with special knowledge of the facts. including Professor Martin Ryle, head of the Mullard • Radio-Astronomy Laboratory at Cambridge and Sir Bernard Lovell, director of Jodrell Bank, have expressed dismay at the tests.. An American scientist was quoted as saying ‘these weapons are terribly destructive and we don't know what will ultimately happen.' When so little is known, dogmatic statements cannot be made, but lack of knowledge should induce caution," says Mrs Woodward. “There is by no means the same uncertainty over the genetic effects of fall-out caused by caesium 137 and carbon 14. There is no argument among geneticists over

the fact that radiation docs cause mutations, whether received in small doses over a period of time, or in one large dose. There is argument over the proportion of mutations already occurring as a result of background radiation, and estimates range from two to 20 per cent. ‘This, of course, affects the estimate of the increased mutations to be expected as the result of increased radiation through fall-out. No geneticist says that there will be no increase at all. The results of doubling the background radiation (if the amount of present fall-out were increased 100 times* would be serious indeed. “It has been stated that the damage caused is the price we must pay for progress. Such a statement is not one of scientific fact, but one involving judgments on both moral and practical issues. It is a statement which assumes that we are morally justified in harming future generations (and those now living in neutral countries not involved in our disputes* for our own good. It assumes too that nuclear weapons testing is for our own good —that is. that it keeps us safe by maintaining the deterrent.

. “It is on these grounds that the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament bases its objections to nuclear weapons testing. We do not consider that we have the moral right to endanger the health or reason of others. And from a practical point of view we consider that the dangers of an increased tempo in the arms race far outweigh any supposed safety to be found in improved weapons devised as the result of continued bomb testing by any country whatever,” says Mrs Woodward.

Expected Today.—Miss Lesley Nichols, runner-up in the “Miss New Zealand” contest, and one of the 15 finalists in the “Miss Universe” beauty fiageant in Miami, is in Honoulu and is expected to arrive in Auckland this morning (P.A.)