PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Nuclear Weapons”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1984

Nuclear weapons, nuclear war and the health professions. Curriculum development in medical schools.

The role of health care professionals in educating the public and policymakers about nuclear weapons, nuclear war and issues involved in preventing thermonuclear warfare is increasing. It is based on the professional and ethical responsibility to promote public health and prevent epidemic disease and death wherever possible. In the case of nuclear war, which has been called "the final epidemic," increased public knowledge is a primary method of working for its prevention. Policymakers in the United States and internationally are turning to physicians and scientists with important questions about the effects of nuclear war, questions about human behavior under stress, questions about long term ecological effects and survivability, and questions about technical aspects of the weapons themselves. The profession itself is asking questions about its proper role in these issues and the ethical basis for political activity on behalf of public health. Thus, concerned physicians are seeking education in these areas. Many medical schools have developed courses, one of which is described here. Consensus on a core curriculum has been achieved and curriculum materials are now available.

Curriculum↗
PubMed2000

Intergenerational issues regarding nuclear power, nuclear waste, and nuclear weapons.

Nuclear power, nuclear waste, and nuclear weapons raise substantial public concern in many countries. While new support for nuclear power can be found in arguments concerning greenhouse gases and global warming, the long-term existence of radioactive waste has led to requirements for 10,000-year isolation. Some of the support for such requirements is based on intergenerational equity arguments. This, however, places a very high value on lives far in the future. An alternative is to use discounting, as is applied to other resource applications. Nuclear weapons, even though being dismantled by the major nations, are growing in number due to the increase in the number of countries possessing these weapons of mass destruction. This is an unfortunate legacy for future generations.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2002

[War and medicine in a culture of peace. 4. Synopsis of nuclear weapons].

The nuclear weapons have a terrifying power of devastation. A civilian nuclear accident has its own dramatic consequences. Both situations are, however, totally distinct with regard to medical consequences. The Gulf war and Balkan war syndromes might be in part caused by uranium used in conventional amunitions. The risk of nuclear terrorism is an emerging eventuality.

Humans↗
PubMed2000

Nuclear weapons, a continuing threat to health.

32,000 nuclear weapons, with a destructive force equivalent to several thousand megatons of conventional explosive, are still deployed. The risk of nuclear war by accident may have increased and new threats include war between newly declared nuclear-weapon-states and the construction by terrorist groups of crude but effective devices. Health workers have drawn attention in the past to the likely major health consequences of the use of nuclear weapons. An opportunity for their global elimination under a nuclear weapons convention arises with the current review conference in New York of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty--a crucial event for efforts to bring about a world free of nuclear weapons.

Humans↗
PubMed2002

Radiation doses to local populations near nuclear weapons test sites worldwide.

Nuclear weapons testing was conducted in the atmosphere at numerous sites worldwide between 1946 and 1980, which resulted in exposures to local populations as a consequence of fallout of radioactive debris. The nuclear tests were conducted by five nations (United States, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, France, and China) primarily at 16 sites. The 16 testing sites, located in nine different countries on five continents (plus Oceania) contributed nearly all of the radioactive materials released to the environment by atmospheric testing; only small amounts were released at a fewother minor testing sites. The 16 sites discussed here are Nevada Test Site, USA (North American continent), Bikini and Enewetak, Marshall Islands (Oceania); Johnston Island, USA (Oceania), Christmas and Malden Island, Kiribati (Oceania); Emu Field, Maralinga, and Monte Bello Islands, Australia (Australian continent); Mururoa and Fangataufa, French Polynesia (Oceania), Reggane, Algeria (Africa), Novaya Zemlya and Kapustin Yar, Russia (Europe), Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan (Asia), and Lop Nor, China (Asia). There were large differences in the numbers of tests conducted at each location and in the total explosive yields. Those factors, as well as differences in population density, lifestyle, environment, and climate at each site, led to large differences in the doses received by local populations. In general, the tests conducted earliest led to the highest individual and population exposures, although the amount of information available for a few of these sites is insufficient to provide any detailed evaluation of radiation exposures. The most comprehensive information for any site is for the Nevada Test Site. The disparities in available information add difficulty to determining the radiation exposures of local populations at each site. It is the goal of this paper to summarize the available information on external and internal doses received by the public living in the regions near each of the mentioned nuclear test sites as a consequence of local fallout deposition.

Atmosphere↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Barriers and solutions in implementing occupational health and safety services at a large nuclear weapons facility.

The Hanford Nuclear Reservation is one of the U.S. Department of Energy's largest nuclear weapons sites. The enormous changes experienced by Hanford over the last several years, as its mission has shifted from weapons production to cleanup, has profoundly affected its occupational health and safety services. Innovative programs and new initiatives hold promise for a safer workplace for the thousands of workers at Hanford and other DOE sites. However, occupational health and safety professionals continue to face multiple organizational, economic, and cultural challenges. A major problem identified during this review was the lack of coordination of onsite services. Because each health and safety program operates independently (albeit with the guidance of the Richland field operations office), many services are duplicative and the health and safety system is fragmented. The fragmentation is compounded by the lack of centralized data repositories for demographic and exposure data. Innovative measures such as a questionnaire-driven Employee Job Task Analysis linked to medical examinations has allowed the site to move from the inefficient and potentially dangerous administrative medical monitoring assignment to defensible risk-based assignments and could serve as a framework for improving centralized data management and service delivery.

Contract Services↗
PubMedDate not supplied

A fast track to zero nuclear weapons: the Middle Powers Initiative and the New Agenda Coalition.

The Middle Powers Initiative is a network of international citizen organizations working to encourage the nuclear weapon states and their influential allies to move rapidly to eliminate nuclear weapons via practical steps including a Nuclear Weapons Convention. The New Agenda Coalition is a group of middle-ranking nations whose governments have also called for the early elimination of nuclear weapons via similar steps. The work of MPI and NAC at the United Nations and elsewhere is described, and their impact on NATO nuclear weapons policy discussed.

Humans↗
PubMed2002

A perspective on public concerns about exposure to fallout from the production and testing of nuclear weapons.

Exposures of the American public occurred nationwide from the testing of nuclear weapons in the United States, the Pacific, and the former Soviet Union. After decades of diminished public awareness on the subject of health risks resulting from exposure to fallout, the release of the National Cancer Institute's 1997 report on nationwide exposure to 131I from the Nevada Test Site (NTS) has led to renewed interest. Public requests for information are focused on individual and family health problems, the right to credible and full disclosure of information, and the need for medical care and assistance for exposure-related health problems. Public concerns have been raised regarding: (a) the lack of information on the potential health risks from exposure to all biologically significant radionuclides in fallout; (b) the lack of independent oversight that includes public participation; (c) governmental portrayal of exposures averaged over very large segments of the population without identification of much larger values for individuals or population subgroups likely to be at highest risk; and (d) a governmental response to known or suspected human exposures that consumes large periods of time and devotes considerable funding to various research-related activities before serious consideration is given to addressing health care responsibilities to exposed individuals. To some extent, these complaints and concerns are rooted in the legacy of government secrecy surrounding the development and testing of nuclear weapons, public distrust of government sources of information about radiation exposures and health risks, and the imposition of past exposures without informed consent. Members of the public participating in the oversight of dose reconstruction projects and epidemiologic studies are requesting information on the total impact from all relevant sources of exposure at each site that might contribute significantly to an individual's risk, including exposure to local releases and to NTS and global fallout. Information is being requested on individual doses and risks from these cumulative exposures, with estimates of uncertainty, including estimates of the absorbed organ dose (as opposed to the effective dose), the risk of disease incidence as opposed to the risk of a cancer fatality, and the chance that a person's diagnosed disease was caused by past exposure (i.e., the probability of causation). This paper attempts to address some of these concerns. We conclude by noting that many individuals exposed in childhood during the 1950's to 131I in fallout from nuclear weapons production and testing would qualify for compensation and medical care if the present rules for the adjudication of claims for atomic veterans and radiation workers at DOE sites were to be extended to the public.

Disclosure↗
PubMed1982

Environmental and health effects of the nuclear industry and nuclear weapons: a current evaluation.

The nuclear weapons industry in the U.S. comprises nine major plants, supported by a network of subcontractors and grantee institutions. Weapons development progresses at the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos Laboratories under the auspices of the University of California. Fissionable materials and tritium are produced at the Savannah River Plant (du Pont) or at Hanford. Reprocessing of plutonium and weapons grade uranium and manufacture of components are carried out at Rocky Flats (formerly Dow, now Rockwell Int.). Large amounts of radionuclides are generated or involved in operations at most of the nine plants. Internal reports of surveillance efforts by weapons plant personnel to monitor emissions of radioactive gases and particulates have now been released by several of the plants (in one case through litigation). Those reports document major releases of radioactive gases and particulates to the environment in the past, and continuing routine releases of some importance. Few investigations have been made of effects from these potent carcinogens in local populations. There have been several preliminary reports (Rocky Flats, Los Alamos and Savannah River) and one comprehensive report [Ambio 10: 176 (1981)]. Evidence of significantly increased rates of cancer of the more radiosensitive organs has been demonstrated. Adequate cancer registry and vital statistics data are essential for the comprehensive investigations of somatic and genetic effects which should be carried out around all nuclear installations near population centres.

Environmental Exposure↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Doctors' attitudes on civil defence and nuclear weapon issues.

97 out of 219 doctors responded to a questionnaire on medical aspects of nuclear weapons. A majority of the respondents considered that the then-current civil defence planning was not a valuable use of National Health Service resources, and that an attack with nuclear weapons would cause a degree of suffering beyond the profession's capacity to treat; thought doctors should have a special voice on nuclear issues; and believed Britain should not be increasing its nuclear weapons, and that if expenditure on them were reduced, the savings should go on health. The high support for organizations like MAPW was gratifying.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Japan's anti-nuclear weapons policy misses its target, even in the war on terrorism.

While actively working to promote the abolition of all nuclear weapons from the world since the end of the cold war, Japan's disarmament policies are not without problems. Promoting the elimination of nuclear weapons as Japan remains under the US nuclear umbrella creates a major credibility problem for Tokyo, since this decision maintains a Japanese deterrence policy at the same time that officials push for disarmament. Tokyo also advocates a gradual approach to the abolition of nuclear weapons, a decision that has had no effect on those countries that have been conducting sub-critical nuclear testing, nor stopped India and Pakistan from carrying out nuclear tests. Consistent with Article 9 of the Constitution, the Japanese war-renouncing constitutional clause, Tokyo toughened Japan's sizeable Official Development Assistance (ODA) programme in the early 1990s. Because of the anti-military guidelines included in Japan's ODA programme, Tokyo stopped new grant and loan aid to India and Pakistan in 1998 after these countries conducted nuclear tests. However, because of the criticism Japan faced from its failure to participate in the 1991 Gulf War, Tokyo has been seeking a new Japanese role in international security during the post-cold war period. Deepening its commitment to the security alliance with the US, Tokyo has become increasingly influenced by Washington's global polices, including the American war on terrorism. After Washington decided that Pakistan would be a key player in the US war on terrorism, Tokyo restored grant and loan aid to both Islamabad and New Delhi, despite the unequivocal restrictions of Japan's ODA programme.

Humans↗
PubMed1992

Comparison of the uptake of radiocaesium from soil to grass after nuclear weapons tests and the Chernobyl accident.

In order to compare the transfer factors of 137Cs deposited after the fallout from the Chernobyl accident with 137Cs from nuclear weapons testing, soil and vegetation samples have been collected from a semi-natural ecosystem in western Norway. For the 137Cs from Chernobyl, 85% is found in the upper 5 cm of soil, whereas most of the nuclear weapons test 137Cs is found between 3 and 12 cm in the soil profile. The transfer factors from soil to vegetation are calculated to be 0.41 +/- 0.07 m2 kg-1 for the nuclear weapons test 137Cs and 0.40 +/- 0.22 m2 kg-1 for Chernobyl 137Cs. Hence, the results show no significant difference between the two fallouts. The effective ecological half-life of 137Cs for this ecosystem is estimated to be between 10 and 20 years. Wash-out and binding effects seem to be of minor importance for the uptake.

Accidents↗
PubMed1986

A graphical method for forecasting radiation exposure from multi-aged fallout from nuclear weapons.

After a nuclear attack it may be necessary for emergency workers, such as firemen, utility workers and medical personnel, to perform urgent tasks in areas highly contaminated by radioactive fallout. To assist the control of radiation exposure of these workers, it will be useful to provide means to forecast radiation exposures both inside and outside the fallout shelter. The method described in this paper is intended for use during the first few days to weeks after the attack, after which time more sophisticated methods may become available. This method requires only a radiation-rate meter, special graph paper, and a timepiece. Communications with Emergency Operating Centers or other sources of information are not necessary. The method permits the determination of the age of fallout and future exposure rates for a location that might be subjected to a number of different fallout clouds, without requiring knowledge of the weapon yields or times of detonation. This method will provide results with less accuracy if different-aged fallout clouds arrive simultaneously. The method is self-correcting so that if the actual decay rate is different than that which is assumed, the forecasted rates will have less error than results obtained by previous methods.

Nuclear Warfare↗
PubMed1989

[Injuries caused by nuclear weapons--providing medical care].

Destructive factors of nuclear weapon's action are briefly reviewed. Actions of general and local irradiation are scrutinized which can take place in the radiation field of nuclear explosion or on the region contamined with its products. Also measures of protection from both internal and external irradiation are listed. Diagnosis and management of acute irradiation disease as well as local radiation damage are analyzed with the addition of basic medical and evacuative strategy. The present work is based on available literature data and reflects author's points of views without inclusion of certain obligatory approaches in providing irradiated persons with medical and evacuative requirements.

Delivery of Health Care↗