Medicine and The Bomb Deceptions From TR PDF

Cover Photograph :
The artificial Aurora created by the high altitude nuclear weapon test named
“Starfish Prime”. Part of the test series known as “Operation Fishbowl” , Starfish
Prime was detonated 400 kilometers above Johnston Island in the Pacific Ocean.
The test took place on 9 July 1962.
Source: Los Alamos National Laboratory Donald M. Kerr Gallery.
http://www.lanl.gov/history/gallery.php?row_num=6&page_num=2&story_id=21
Medicine and the Bomb: Deceptions from Trinity to Maralinga

By Paul Langley, Port Willunga, South Australia.
First Edition published 11 May 2009
This edition Published July 2012
ISBN: 978-0-646-51823-7
! 2
!"#$%&'(&)'*!%*!+&
&
CHAPTER PAGE
Introduction 4
1 A Reintegration of History 7
2 Medicine and the Bomb 24
3 Trinity 48
4 Hiroshima 53
5 The Cold War – Secret Witness 66
6 Born Secret 71
7 The Marshall Islands 73
8 Australia 75
9 Repeated Exclusion 77
10 Insight Fosters Resistance 82
11 The Blessing as a Curse 86
12 Culture, Diet and Targeted Radio Strontium Uptake 87
13 The Left Hand of Darkness 90
14 A Medical Rediscovery but a Military Constant 97
15 The Breach in the History of Medicine 100
16 Progress Toward the First Reactor 103
17 Summary and Conclusions 121
Acknowledgements 124
About This Book 126
! 3
Introduction
The exploding atomic bomb changes - transmutes - its uranium or plutonium fuel into
isotopes of other elements. These substances are radioactive.
The weight of these substances is less than that of the bomb fuel. This is because, unlike a
nuclear reactor, the bomb's explosion destroys the critical mass and the fission reaction
stops.
Authorities stated over many years that there was not very much fallout from atomic
bombs.
This might be true in terms of weight. It is not true in terms of the radioactivity per gram
emitted by the newly created radioactive isotopes. This rate of radioactivity is out of all
proportion to the size of the individual particles. This fact caused Dr Linus Pauling to
call these highly radioactive particles "little bullets". One gram of naturally occurring
radium has a rate of radioactivity of 1 curie. In comparison 1 gram of the fission product
Strontium 89 has a rate of radioactivity of 27,800 curies. A tiny amount of radium taken
into the body can kill. Radium killed many radium dial painters in the 1920s and 1930s.
Strontium 89 is like a machine gun compared to the Radium musket.
The fission of Uranium and Plutonium both create hundreds of fission products as nuclear
fuel is transmuted according to the law of nuclear physics..
The radioactivity emitted by these radioactive substances, now very small in size, is
hundreds and thousands of times greater than the radioactivity per gram of the original
uranium or plutonium fuel. And these fuels also hold specific radio-chemical hazards.
Alpha radiation consists of high speed nuclei. They are relatively large charged
particles. Being relatively large and charged means they collide and affect the atoms
around them. They give up energy to these other atoms, changing the atoms and rapidly
loose energy themselves. This is alpha radiation does not travel far: Alpha is short range
because of its great power as an ionizer. It is potent in its ability to damage living cells.
The particles of nuclear fuel and fission products which comprise nuclear fallout is like
fine dust. A fallout cloud drifts from its point of origin and travels where the wind and
rain take it. The fallout drops from the trailing edge of the cloud in a descending
curtain. The radioactive dust is injected into the environment where the dust
particles can be built into the tissues of plants and animals, including humans.
From the 1930s, early nuclear medicine manufactured and used some of the same
substances that are also created and dispersed by atomic bombs. And any other device
that uses the fission process.
From the early use of Iodine 131, Strontium 89 and Phosphorous 32, medicine developed
treatments that eased pain and sometimes prolonged life. In the days before fission was
confirmed, a device called a cyclotron was used to make these substances.
! 4
The medical use of these substances in people enabled doctors in the 1930s and early
1940s, primarily in the United States, to observe medically useful doses, the damaging
effects of those doses and to develop treatment regimes. The use of these medical
regimes was reserved for painful, debilitating and lethal illnesses. There is always a cost
and benefit to any appropriate medical treatment.
This book tells the story of how the military used this early medical knowledge in it's
attempt to protect workers making the first atomic bombs. This same medical knowledge
was used to predict the radiation effects (radiological effects) of the bombs on healthy
people caught in the fallout of the bombs.
It is a complicated story that I have tried my best to tell simply, while heavily
referencing the source documents that help establish the truth of history.
A single tiny speck, now called a “hot particle”, caught in lung tissue, is sufficient to
shorten life and cause horrific disease. When inside the body's tissue, a hot particle
becomes an "internal emitter".
Authorities claimed they had control of the radioactive fallout and claim that people were
safe. However, imagine this: A Subaru Brumby utility, full of foam bean bag balls in its
back, travelling at 60 miles an hour along a highway.
A plume of bean bag balls trail out of the vehicle, and fall to earth where the wind
determines. No matter how skilled an authority might be, he could track and recover all
of the bean bag balls.
If the bean bag balls were harmful, the kind of harm suffered by life forms
ingesting these balls would be foreseeable. Foresight that some individuals in a group
would be harmed would exist. But no-one would know who exactly would be
harmed. Many things determine the outcome, including whether or not a person had
taken these hot particles into their bodies, how many had been taken in, and so on.
The external monitoring of the area for bean bag balls laying in the dirt might result in a
level of officially declared "acceptable risk". Say 20 bean bag balls per square
metre. Such measures are compromised by the fact that the biosphere and the body of a
person are volumes, not surfaces. How many "bean bag balls" lie just beneath the
surface, with their alpha and beta rays shielded and undetected? How many would end
up inside the bodies of the population?
Those people suffering harm might not know the cause of their illness. The driver of the
Subaru would be long gone and miles away by the time illness struck.
Of course, bean bag balls are many, many times larger than fallout particles. Cause and
effect in the matter of minute, highly radioactive particles finely spread over a wide area
is difficult to prove. Victims continue to suffer without justice or redress. This crime is
hidden within the statistics of the background level of disease.
Fission causes more than the emission of radiation. It causes the emission of radio-
chemical pollutants.
! 5
This is a story of how medicine and the military came together to build a weapon with
foreseen effects. In the process a significant medical treatment came to be suppressed
from 1942 until 1993. As was the memory of the man who defined the substance used
and who originated the treatment. He sought to ease pain. Others had different plans for
the knowledge. For in the early medical data lay the parameters for harm.
I first completed this book in 2009. This edition is rewritten and published now as the
need for the information is great. While nuclear veterans continue to seek access to the
English courts in order to claim justice, in Japan a new generation of nuclear civilians
continue to fight against levels of industrial radio-chemical pollution which are being
imposed by government and industry. This imposition is being increasingly seen as
unacceptable.
There was a time when medical knowledge became a military secret. The people of the
world suffered because they were not told the truth. In order to keep the secret.
! 6
Chapter 1 A Reintegration of History
Frederic Juliot and Irene Juliot - Curie were awarded the 1935 Nobel Prize for Chemistry
“in recognition of their synthesis of new radioactive elements.” [1]
The award to Frederic and Irene had its genesis on New Year’s Eve 1933/34. At that
time the Juliot - Curies synthesized Phosphorous 32 from aluminium by directing
radiation from an alpha source to the aluminium. [2] This creation of the first artificial
radioisotope preceded the 1939 reports of uranium fission by about 5 years. [3]
These events also preceded the operation of the first nuclear reactor on December 2, 1942
by 8 years. [4] This first “Pile” or reactor was based upon two British patents awarded to
Leo Szilard in 1934. Both of these UK patents, numbers 440,023 and 630,726, are
entitled “Improvements in or relating to The Transmutation of Chemical
Elements”. Both describe a method whereby artificial radio-isotopes may be created by
nuclear chain reaction. [5]
The aim of this first reactor “pile” in 1942 was to establish that a chain reaction could
occur in natural uranium, chiefly U 238, so as to produce plutonium by the Szilard
method for use in an atomic bomb. [6]
The first nuclear “pile” had arisen from a pre-existing, coherent body of knowledge.
Artificially produced radioisotopes created by physics from 1934 to1940 had given
nuclear medicine three new therapies by 1940. [7]
Leucopoenia, the reduction in the white blood cell count, was a limitation on the
medically beneficial internally delivered radiation dose. Dr. Charles Pecher reported that
Strontium 89 produced a “much smaller effect” in this regard than Phosphorus 32 in
1941. At that time, Dr. John Lawrence agreed. [8]
The medical work undertaken by Dr. R.G. Hamilton (Iodine 131), Dr. J. Lawrence with
Dr. L.A. Erf (Phosphorous 32), and Dr Charles Pecher (Strontium 89) took place prior to
1943, at the University of California, Berkeley campus, within the Lawrence Radiation
Laboratory. [9] The new isotopes were used as internally administered substances in a
treatment setting.
The Lawrence cyclotron at the University of California, Berkeley, was used to create
these substances. [10]
Dr. Robert Stone began clinical trials treating cancer with external neutron radiation
produced by the Lawrence Berkeley cyclotron 6 years after Chadwick’s 1932 discovery
of the neutron. [11]
The announcement of the discovery of the fission of uranium occurred on the eve of
World War. [12] Soon named “fission”, [13] neutron bombardment caused the
disintegration of the uranium atom into two parts. This created “fission products”, which
are radioactive and which decay in cascades into lighter radioisotopes until stable
elements are formed. On recognizing this, Meitner and Frisch anticipated the creation of
radio strontium on a theoretical basis while Hahn directly detected it as it arose as a result
! 7
of uranium fission. Those authors do not give the isotopic number of the predicted and
observed strontium. [14]
A period of eleven years had elapsed from the time the Juliot - Curies first synthesized
P32 and the first use of nuclear weapons in July and August 1945.
In the interim period nuclear medicine advanced in its understanding and use of both
external and internal radiation, particularly in regard to specific radioisotopes (Strontium
89, Iodine 131) and a neutron activation product (Phosphorus 32) which were also found
to be created by both uranium and plutonium fission bombs. [15]
Human data on the lethal dose 50 (LD50) of the neutron activation product P32 was held
as a military secret by the Manhattan Engineer District from 1942. [16]
Censorship of uranium fission related research was imposed by the United States from
the latter part of 1940. [17] Timely international peer review could not take place from
that time.
The discovery and development of plutonium as a fuel in atomic bombs took place totally
under war time secrecy. [18] Timely International peer review could not take place.
Iodine131 and Strontium 89 were both individually identified as uranium fission products
in the years 1939 and 1940 respectively. [19] Both these and other fission products were
subject to metabolic animal studies by Hamilton from 1942. Hamilton worked initially
under funding from the Office of Scientific Research and Development and from later in
1942 under contract to the Manhattan Engineer District. [20]
The conventional history of the development of fission technology during World War 2
limits the objective of the Manhattan Project’s Metallurgical Laboratory Health Division
to insuring “that no one concerned suffered serious injury from the particular hazards of
the enterprise” to produce atomic weapons in World War 2.
A Search for Scientific Foresight
Smyth’s official history of the Manhattan Project, “Atomic Energy for Military
Purposes”, does not acknowledge scope for any research of the radiological effects to be
inflicted upon human targets by the use of atomic weapons prior to their actual use in
1945. A scope for such research did however exist within the Manhattan Project.
This additional Scope of the Manhattan Project’s Metallurgical Project’s Health Division
is detailed within the document “Metallurgical Project, A.H. Compton, Project
Leader, Health, Radiation and Protection, R.S. Stone, M.D., Division Director,
Health Division Program, May 10, 1943”, document number 717325, Report CH-632
55-A, Originally Secret.
Page 2 of this report gives the following additional Scope of the Health Division:
“I. Scope of the Health Division Responsibility ….4. Evaluation of Effectiveness of

Radioactive Materials as a Military Weapon. A) Defence -Tolerance of and
protection of troops and civilians. B) Offence – Radiations needed to be effective.”
! 8
The distinct role of research conducted under the auspices of the Manhattan Project
pursuant to Scope 4A and Scope 4B appears to have been ignored by history. A study of
the findings and reports from research may enable insight into the military expectations
held for the radiological effects of the weapons, and possible protections against them,
prior to August 1945.
A finding that pre August 1945 study by the Manhattan Project of the induction of
specific acute disease, expected or predicted to result from these radiological effects
produced by the detonation of an atomic bomb upon cities, may be considered to be
evidence of foresight.
Any reports regarding such study of these effects upon people as targets may form
scientific advice that informed the political decision to use the atomic bomb in August
1945.
The incorporation of pre-war medical knowledge regarding the effects of radiation into
the Manhattan Project’s Met Lab’s Health Program provided a means by which the
leadership of the atomic bomb program could indeed predict effects upon target
populations.
A specific acute radiation induced disease suffered by atomic bomb survivors, diagnosed
and treated by the doctors of Hiroshima in August and September 1945, prior to the
arrival of US Occupation Forces with specialist medical knowledge, is documented by
Hersey. I shall show that the disease was one well known to doctors both in Japan and
America prior to 1940. The induction of this disease, diagnosed by the doctors of
Hiroshima on the basis of pre-war medical texts, is evidence of foresight on the part of
the Western Allies involved in the use of the atomic bomb. It is the same condition
observed to be induced in patients when treated with internal emitters by medical
researchers at E.O. Lawrence's Crocker Radiation Laboratory, University of California, in
the pre-war era.
We shall see how the early knowledge was developed and how the secrets were
maintained during the long years of nuclear testing.
The Pre-War Knowledge and the Atomic Weapons Test Era
In the following chapters, the impacts of atomic testing upon vulnerable people, with a
focus upon Aboriginal people in Australia, is examined in the light of the knowledge held
by atomic test authorities. Witness statements of the Black Mist are compared with
military and civilian observations of the same or similar phenomena in the United States
and Pacific. The official Australian response is compared.
The statements of Australia’s atomic test safety authority are examined in the light of
knowledge it held.
The discontinuity of pre 1943 scientific knowledge as applied and communicated in the
post 1950 era is examined. A case study is made of a palliative pain relieving cancer
treatment based upon a radio strontium isotope. This treatment, originated by Dr Charles
Pecher, was in use by 1940. [22] Trials of the treatment ceased in about 1950. Re-
approval of the treatment did not occur until 1993 in the USA. [23]
! 9
The apparent delay in open use of this treatment is examined in the light of both 1942 and
modern medical reports, which find the treatment to be of value and benefit.
The treatment’s “period of obscurity”, [24] and gradual re-emergence from the 1970s as a
result of German medical research is examined. The examination is conducted in
reference to the secret Atomic Energy Commission and secret military use of the actual
Pecher medical papers, including original research, metabolic, dose and response data,
and actual patient medical file information in the period from 1942 to the end of the Cold
War period. During this time it is shown that patient records were classified secret and
that medical staff were ordered not to talk about the treatment even as they administered
it.
This use of Pecher’s data continued during the long term activity known as Project
Sunshine. This ended in Australia in 1978. [25]
This secret use of Pecher’s early 1940s era medical treatment data, denied open use by
the AEC (described by the “Final Report” of the Advisory Committee on Human
Radiation Experiments as the then sole supplier of medical radio isotopes), is examined
in the light of the findings of the “Final Report” as commissioned by President Clinton
in1994.
The current medical prescription data-sheet for the radio strontium medical treatment is
examined and the question is asked, what if this data was released in 1954? What if the
treatment was available in 1954? How tolerant of the atomic test era would voters have
been? How much suffering, if any, was caused by this apparent imposition of secrecy
upon the field of medicine?
The disconnect in the medical history is still in evidence today. The American Chemical
Society website devoted to the Oak Ridge National Laboratories, formerly the Manhattan
Project’s “Clinton” site, is an informational and educational resource. The ACS writes
that “Nuclear medicine began in the 1950s with physicians using iodine-131 to diagnose
and treat thyroid diseases, an extremely successful therapy.” [26]
The record shows that papers reporting the use of Radio Iodine 131 as a diagnostic tool
were published first in 1939. [27] At that time Hamilton successfully treated the thyroid
disease suffered by Glenn Seaborg’s mother. Seaborg et al were the first to synthesis
I131. [28] [29]
The breach in history must be healed. Nuclear medicine arose prior to the discovery of
nuclear fission and prior to the use of atomic weapons. It studied and used some of the
same radio isotopes as generated, induced and dispersed by the use of atomic weapons.
The identification, generation, synthesis and use of such radiations and substances first
occurred years before the discovery of nuclear fission. This breach in history complicates
the understanding of the plain history of the complex fields of medicine and fission
technology. It thus conceals a link between medicine and military science and in the
early ability of the United States to predict the radiological consequences of the use of
nuclear weapons. This same knowledge enabled the prediction of the effects of military -
industrial radiological pollution such as that created and emitted at Hanford and Trinity,
New Mexico.
! 10
A Brief History of Relevant Artificial Radioisotopes used in Pre-War Nuclear
Medicine
The following Synopsis shows the medical use of Iodine 131, Strontium 89, Phosphorus
32 and Neutron ray therapies all preceded the discovery of fission and fission products.
Further , it is shown that discoveries between 1939 and 1941 identified the substances
and neutron radiation as being products of the fission process.
The historic and scientific record shows that the substances and neutron radiation were
synthesized and generated by the Lawrence Berkeley cyclotron prior to the discovery that
these modes of radiation delivery to patients in both external and internal doses were also
generated by the process of uranium fission.
The patient dose response records held by E.O. Lawrence and the medical researchers
located at Crocker Radiation Laboratory became of great military significance by 1941 at
the latest.
Synopsis of Relevant Findings Relating to Nuclear Medicine, Fission Research, and

Military Application 1937 - 1945.
Author, Country, Publication, Date :
D. W. Stewart , J. L. Lawson, and J. M. Cork, Department of Physics and Chemistry,

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. “Induced Radioactivity in
Strontium and Yttrium” Physics Review 53, Issue 9, 901-906, 1937.
Relevant Findings:
First synthesis of Strontium 89 “by the bombardment of metallic strontium with 1

microampere per hour of 16-Mev deuterons.” Via cyclotron. Method is used by Charles
Pecher at the University of California to enable metabolic studies of strontium and
calcium and the development of a palliative pain relieving cancer treatment. [30]
Dr Robert Stone. Use of Neutron Ray Cancer treatment. Lawrence Berkeley Cyclotron.,
1938. Oral History interview of William G. Myers by Sally Smith Hughes, The Bancroft
Library University of California, Berkeley, History of Science and Technology Program,
1986. History of Neutron Therapy, Fermilab Neutron Therapy Facility, (see http://www-
bd.fnal.gov/ntf/history/index.htm)
Relevant Findings:
Commencement of Neutron Ray Therapy at Lawrence Berkeley cyclotron. Treatment

ceases due to war requirements of cyclotron. (Myer, Bancroft Oral History, Berkeley,
CA. Fermilab, “History of Neutron Therapy”.) Treatment ceased also due to “distressing
late effects.” (Sessler, A. M., “An Introduction to Cancer Therapy with Hadron
Radiation”, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, May 2008)
! 11
John Lawrence uses Phosphorus 32 to treat adult Leukaemia, November 1938. Patient
declared disease free in 1940. Ann Intern Med 1941, 15: 487, cited by Brucer, M., “A
Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”, 1990, Heritage Publications, St. Louis,
Missouri, ISBN 0 962577-0-X, pp. 258-259
Relevant Findings:
Lawrence used P32 produced by cyclotron. (Brucer). P32 is induced in the human body,
including bone, by neutron rays. See Shimizu, S., “Historical Sketch of the Scientific
Field Survey in Hiroshima Several Days After the Bombing”, published by Bulletin of
the Institute for Chemical Research, Kyoto University, Volume 60, (2), 1982. Prof.
Shimizu reported that his original 1945 data and reports were confiscated by US
Occupation Forces and had not been returned in 1982. I therefore cannot refer to or cite
the original text until such time as the United States releases the report and data.
Creation of P32 in the person via neutron irradiation is further established by : Lebaron-
Jacobs, L; Gaillard-Lecanu, E.; Briot, F; Distinguin, S; Boisson, P; Exmelin, L; Racine,
Y; Berard, P; Flury-Herard, A; Miele, A; Fottorino, R., “Hair Dosimetry Following
Neutron Irradiation”, “Health Physics”, “Operational Radiation Safety”. 92(5)
Supplement 2:S98-S104, May 2007. “To date, the 32S(n, p) 32P reaction in hair with a
threshold of 2.5 MeV is the best choice to determine the fast neutron dose using body
activation. This information is essential with regards to the heterogeneity of the neutron
transfer to the organism. This is a very important parameter for individual dose
reconstruction from the surface to the deeper tissues.”
Further, Brucer reports that the “Manhattan Project” held the human Lethal Dose 50 (LD
50) data as a military secret and directed Lawrence in this regard. See pages 258 – 263 of
Brucer’s “Chronology of Nuclear Medicine” as previously cited. It is highly probable that
Lawrence et al developed the human trial data which resulted in the Manhattan Project
gaining the knowledge. Lawrence and Erf were the first to use P32 as a human
treatment.
J. J. Livingood, Radiation Laboratory, Physics Department, University of California, and

G. T. Seaborg, Chemistry Department, University of California, Berkeley, California,
“Radioactive Isotopes of Iodine”, APS PROLA Phys. Rev. Volume 54 Issue 10, Phys.
Rev. 54, 775 -782, 1938 Sept 7
Relevant Findings:
Iodine 131 synthesized. In 1939 Joseph Gilbert Hamilton, Mayo Soley and Robley Evans
published the first paper on the diagnostic uses of iodine-131 in patients. [31]
Hamilton uses the substance to cure Seaborg’s mother of thyroid disease. [32]
! 12
O. Hahn, F. Strassmann, Berlin, Germany, “Concerning the Existence of Alkaline Earth

Metals Resulting from Neutron Irradiation of Uranium” , Die Natureissenschaften 27, p.
11-15, 1 January, 1939.
Heritage: Journal Naturwissenschaften Publisher Springer Berlin / Heidelberg ISSN

00281042 (Print) 1432-1904 (Online) Issue Volume 27, Number [Translation in
American Journal of Physics, January 1964, p. 9-15]
Relevant Findings:
After bombarding uranium with neutrons, Hahn et. al. find: barium isotopes:
139,140,141; lanthanum isotopes: 139, 140,141. Rather than increase the components of
the uranium nucleus, as conventional science expected, they find only isotopes of
elements lighter than the uranium.
In his report, Hahn writes: “we really ought to revise the decay scheme ...and insert the
symbols Ba, La, Ce, in place of Ra, Ac, Th.” "as nuclear chemists, working very close to
the field of physics, we cannot bring ourselves yet to take such a drastic step which goes
against all previous experience in nuclear physics. ”
Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann (Berlin Dahlem) Germany, “Proof of the Formation of
Active Isotopes of Barium from Uranium and Thorium Irradiated with Neutrons; Proof of
the Existence of More Active Fragments Produced by Uranium Fission”, Die
Naturwissenschaften, Volume 27, No. 6, pp. 89-95. 10 February 1939 [Translation from
Journal of Chemical Education, May 1989, p. 363-363]
Relevant Findings:
The creation of barium isotopes from uranium was conclusively demonstrated. Some
suggestions are made regarding the atomic weights of the barium isotopes. “A second
group of fission fragments, Strontium [element 38] and Yttrium [element 39], was
determined.” “By an appropriate experimental arrangement, the formation of a noble gas
was established, which in turn decays into an alkali metal. It has not been possible yet to
show if the substances in question are xenon-cesium or krypton – rubidium.”
(And so it was that the world learnt that scientists in Berlin were busily building a list of
radioactive products from the disintegration of uranium and thorium from neutron
bombardment.)
Lise Meinter, German refugee in Sweden, O.R. Frisch, Sweden, “Disintegration of

Uranium by Neutrons: A New type of Nuclear Reaction”, Nature 143, 239-240, 1939,
Feb 11.
! 13
Relevant Findings:
These elemental isotopes are always radioactive and produce decay products. Meinter
and Frisch acknowledge and respond to Hahn et.. al. report of the formation of radio
barium (light element) from the addition of a neutron to uranium nucleus, which they
show causes the uranium to divide into two lighter elements with mass loss.
Meinter equates the mass loss to energy release in accordance with 1905 formula E = MC
Squared. The result, 200 Million electron Volts of energy release per atom fissioned, is
reported in this paper.
Meinter anticipates the radio krypton primary noble gas product and a radio strontium
decay chain.
Frisch applies the name “fission” to this division of the uranium atom.
Lise Meitner, refugee, Sweden. O.R. Frisch, Sweden. “Products of the Fission of
Uranium Nucleus.” “Nature” 143, 471-472 1939, March 18.
Relevant Findings:
Gives the following fission products without giving the isotopic number: Barium,
Lanthanum, Strontium, Yttrium, Xenon, Cesium. Crediting Hahn and Strassman. Meitner
is working without benefit of a lab, calculating the expected elemental isotopes. Hahn’s
laboratory work in Berlin confirms her.
Philip Abelson, Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California,

USA. “An Investigation of the Products of the Disintegration of Uranium by Neutrons.”
“Physical Review”, 56, 1 9, PROLA, 1939, May 11.
Relevant Findings:
Finds the following to be fission products: Antimony 127, 129, Tellurium 127, 129, 131,
Iodine 131.
Tukutaro Hagiwara, Japan, “Liberation of Neutrons in the Nuclear Explosion of Uranium

Irradiated by Thermal Neutrons.” The Review of Physical Chemistry of Japan Vol. 13f
No. 3 (1939).
Relevant Findings:
Predicts Neutron Radiation and fission products upon the fission of uranium and its rapid
chain reaction. “A part of these excess neutrons was found, in fact, to be disposed of by
the subsequent Beta Ray transformations of the fission products,… but another possibility
! 14
of reducing the neutron excess seems to be a direct emission of the neutrons, which
would either be emitted as a part of explosion products almost instantaneously at the
moment of the nuclear splitting or escape from highly excited nuclei of the residual
fragments. It may, therefore, be expected that the explosion process would produce even
larger number of secondary neutrons than one per nuclear fission.”
Segre, E., Wu, C.S., Radiation Laboratory, Department of Physics, University of

California, Berkeley, USA. “Some Fission Products of Uranium” “Physical Review”, No.
57, 552 -552 PROLA, 1940, Feb 29.
Relevant Findings:
Describes the fission products: Antimony, Xenon, Tellurium. Finds the Iodine Decay
Chains given as Sb > Te > I > Xe > And Te > I > Xe > .
G. N. Glasoe, Columbia University, New York, New York.
J. Steigman College of the City of New York, New York, New York Pupin Physics
Laboratories, Columbia University. “Radioactive Products from Gases Produced in
Uranium Fission”, APS PROLA, Phys. Rev. 58, 1 -6, 1940, May 13.
Relevant Findings:
“Two Rb activities have been observed, one of which decays with a period of 15.4±0.2
minutes into an active Strontium with a half-life of 51±2 days”, (Abstract).
“The active Sr into which this Rb decays was obtained under similar irradiation and
collection conditions and was found to have a period of 51+/-2 days. It may be assumed
that this is the same Sr Isotope reported by Stewart (Phys. Rv. 56, 629, 1939) and by
Dubridge and Marshall (Phys. Rev. 56, 706, 1939 & 57, 348, 1939) as obtained from Sr
(d, p) and assigned by them to Sr89. “ pp 6.
Strontium 89 is thus identified as a fission product on May 13 1940. I contend that from
at least this time on, the medical and biological research of Dr. Charles Pecher at E.O.
Lawrence's Crocker Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, became of
military interest.
McMillan and Abelson Radiation Laboratory UC Berkeley USA Isolation of Element 93

1940. "Nuclear Chemistry The Discovery and Isolation of Plutonium", written by Dr.
Frank Settle. http://chemcases.com/2003version/nuclear/nc-04.htm 1940. This
discovery was given a security classification and did not appear in the peer reviewed
journals of the period.
! 15
Relevant Findings:
Discovered the first trans-uranium element, atomic number 93. It was named neptunium
(Np) after Neptune, the planet immediately beyond Uranus. The prelude to plutonium.
1940.
Glen T. Seaborg, University of California, Berkeley.

Chemcases.Com General Chemistry Case Studies. Glen T. Seaborg Radiation Laboratory
at the University of California, Berkeley, USA. Discovery and Isolation of Plutonium Feb
– May 1941 “Piles and Plutonium, 1939-1941” “The Manhattan Project An Interactive
History”
http://chemcases.com/2003version/nuclear/nc-04.htm This discovery was given the
highest security classification by the USA and did not appear in the peer reviewed
journals of the period. 1941.
Relevant Findings:
“..research by Glenn T. Seaborg revealed that an isotope of neptunium decayed to yet

another trans-uranium (man-made heavier then uranium) element. In February 1941,
Seaborg identified this as element 94, which he later named plutonium. By May, he had
proven that plutonium-239 was 1.7 times more likely than uranium-235 to fission. This
finding made the Fermi-Szilard experiment more important than ever, as it suggested the
possibility of producing large amounts of the fissionable plutonium in a uranium pile
using plentiful uranium-238, and then separating it chemically. Surely this would be less
expensive and simpler than building isotope-separation plants. A second, perhaps easier,
path to the atomic bomb now seemed possible.”
Nishina, Y., Yasaki, T., Ezoe, H., Kimura, K., Ikawa, M. Tokyo Universities, Japan.
“Fission Products of Uranium produced by Fast Neutrons”, Nature, 146, 24-24, 1940,
July 6.
Relevant Findings:
Finds silver and cadmium radio isotopes as fission products.
National Academy of Sciences USA. Report and Memo gives the option of the
development of a dispersal weapon for those fission products which are “violently
radioactive”. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, ACHRE, Final
Report, 1994, Ch.11. The described Report and Memo are dated May, 1941.
Relevant Findings:
Weapon application of fission product knowledge based on an expectation of harmful

effects if reactor produced fission products were released over enemy water storages and
! 16
food producing areas. The National Academy of Sciences Report of 17 May 1941
predicts such fission products could be ready for use by 1943. The primary basis for such
an expectation of harm consisted of the medical knowledge gained in the first instance by
Lawrence, Stone, Hamilton, Pecher and others who conducted biological
and medical research at E.O. Lawrence's Crocker Radiation Laboratory, University of
California, Berkeley. These people had worked since the 1930s with cyclotron produced
radioisotopes which after January 1939 had been shown to be products of uranium
fission. The May 1941 National Academy of Sciences report was co-authored by E.O.
Lawrence.
Manhattan District Engineers ("Manhattan Project"), Memos: Hamilton to Stone, Groves

and Oppenheimer: use of radio strontium as a weapon. USA. Advisory Committee on
Human Radiation Experiments, ACHRE, Final Report, Chapter 11. United States
Department of Energy. Date of memos: 1943.
Relevant Findings:
Under terms of his Manhattan Project contract, Hamilton considers the Health effects of
dispersed radio strontium to be useful as a weapon of war. Hamilton’s contract has him
conducting animal based injection, inhalation and ingestion studies of the fission
products. He is engaged by the Metallurgical Laboratory Health Division and its
Plutonium Project. The contracts awarded Hamilton by the M.E.D. are examined in
more detail in a later chapter.
Dr Joseph Hamilton, Report, “Metabolism of the Fission Products, Progress Report for
Period Ending April 15 1944”
Relevant Findings:
A method of Radiological protection is reported to the Manhattan Project chain of

command:
“The most effective means of reducing the absorption of Sr* from the intestinal tract is
the maintenance of an adequate or high calcium intake. This may be accomplished by
increased use of milk and dairy products, by taking medicinal calcium regularly or by use
of bread fortified with calcium. The important factor is apparently the general level of
calcium intake rather than the amount present in the intestinal tract at the moment.”
This finding was first published as Sr/Ca ratio studies data and conclusions by Charles
Pecher, 1940. [33]
(Sr* denotes “any isotope of Strontium” and is Hamilton’s convention.)
The studies continue unabated from the war years, via Project Gabriel and Project
Sunshine, until approximately 1978. [34]
! 17
Conclusion
The historic scientific record shows that P32, Sr89, I131 and neutron radiation were
synthesized and generated by the Lawrence Berkeley cyclotron prior to the discovery that
these modes of radiation delivery were also generated by the process of nuclear fission.
Prior to the US entry into World War 2, these modes of radiation delivery – internal
emitters and external radiation – had been used in nuclear medicine in prescribed and
described doses to consenting patients in the course of treatments. A large pool of human
dose response data to these substances had been complied by 1942 by the staff at E.O.
Lawrence's Crocker Radiation Laboratory and Cyclotron Facility, University of
California, Berkeley.
From the above synopsis the following is demonstrated: Iodine 131, Neutron radiation,
Phosphorous 32 and Strontium 89 were all used by the E.O. Lawrence Crocker Radiation
Laboratory, University of California from various dates in the 1930s. (Sr89 being used
firstly in animals and from 1940 as a human internal emitter treatment.)
The Synopsis also shows that:
Iodine 131 was identified as a fission product on May 11, 1939. (Abelson).
Neutron radiation was predicted to be emitted in large quantities during the fission
process in 1939. (Hagiwara).
Strontium 89 was identified as a fission product on May 13, 1940. (Glasoe and
Steigman).
Thus, the human response data to these fission products and radiation, gathered in the
course of civilian nuclear medicine dealing with, at that time, fully consenting
patients, by the dates given, likely became of military interest and value pursuant to the
prediction of the weapon effects of the proposed atomic bomb.
Further, the record shows that by May 1941, the National Academy of Sciences report
observed that "violently radioactive" reactor produced substances could be used as a
weapon in their own right if the program to build an atomic bomb failed. The plan
being, in that event, to poison enemy food and water supplies.)
By 1941 the United States had a basis for predicting the radiological effects of the
atomic bomb and the fission products it generated and dispersed.
As we shall see, the medical researchers involved in the pre-war medical research were
all assigned key roles in the health aspects of the Manhattan District
Engineers (Manhattan Project) . With the exception of Dr. Charles Pecher. His death by
suicide in August 1941 was a tragic loss to medicine, humanity, and his family.
! 18
In the following chapters I will show that the occurrence of medically undesirable
effects - chiefly the result of damage to the bone marrow - imposed the medical dose
limits for these treatments.
I propose that the military use of this pre -1942 medical knowledge simply required that
the medically described dose limit be exceeded so as to cause acute casualties. The
biologically active nature of these substances presented a military delivery options of
food- chain contamination and direct deposition. This is in addition to bomb burst
instantaneous radiation delivery of P32 to bone via neutron ray activation of that
substance. The military application relies upon immediate effects. This then was the
focus I believe.
Nuclear weapons are thus shown to be chemical weapons as well.
This then was the state of knowledge in the USA in 1941.
"...and these atomic bombs which science burst upon the world that night were strange
even to the men who used them." H.G. Wells, "The World Set Free", 1914. Only up to a
certain level of enlightenment, Mr. Wells. It was not strange at all, I think, to certain
people.
They knew very precisely what they were doing. They knew what to expect. They had
seen it in their patients.
The blessing those patients experienced at the hands of this nuclear medicine was about
to become a curse which haunts us still.
The medical staff of Ernest Lawrence's Crocker Radiation Laboratory had reason to turn
to injected radioactive substances in preference to external x rays. Why ? Because the
radiation dose delivery is specific to certain tissues, and because the radiation effect the
substances cause to be induced is not like that of an X ray.
Sources
A Reintegration of History
[1] The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1935, Presentation Speech by Professor W. Palm!r,
Chairman of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry of the Royal Swedish Academy of
Sciences, on December 10, 1935, “In recognition of their synthesis of new radioactive
elements”, available at
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1935/press.html ]
[2] Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”, 1990, Heritage
Publications, St. Louis, Missouri, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X, pp 213.
[3] a. O. Hahn, F. Strassmann, Berlin, Germany “Concerning the Existence of Alkaline

Earth Metals Resulting from Neutron Irradiation of Uranium” Die Natureissenschaften
27, p. 11-15, 1 January, 1939. Heritage Journal Naturwissenschaften Publisher Springer
Berlin / Heidelberg ISSN 0028-1042 (Print) 1432-1904 (Online) Issue Volume 27,
Number [Translation in American Journal of Physics, January 1964, p. 9-15] b. Lise
! 19
Meinter, German refugee in Sweden, O.R. Frisch, Sweden “Disintegration of Uranium by
Neutrons: A New type of Nuclear Reaction” Nature 143, 239-240, 1939, Feb 11]
[4] Henry De Wolf Smyth, ““Atomic Energy for Military Purposes” (The Smyth Report),
The Official Report on the Development of the Atomic Bomb Under the Auspices of the
United States Government”, Chapter 6, paragraphs 29-31.
[5] Nhu-Tarnawska Hoa Kim-Ngan1.and Imre Pazit2., “The Discovery of Nuclear Fission
– Women Scientists in Highlight”, Chalmers Reproservice, Goteborg, Sweden, 2007,
second printing 2008. pp 5 – 8. (1.Institute of Physics, Pedagogical University PL-30 084,
Krakow, Poland. 2.Department of Nuclear Engineering, Chalmers University of
Technology, SE-412 96, Goteborg, Sweden.)
[6] Henry De Wolf Smyth, ““Atomic Energy for Military Purposes” (The Smyth Report),
United States Government”, Chapter 6, paragraph 32.
[7] Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”, 1990, Heritage
[8] Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and Strontium,
Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment of Metastatic
Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation Laboratory of the University of
California, Berkeley University of California Publications in Pharmacology. Editor: C. D.
Leake, G.A. Alles, T.C. Daniels, M.H. Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3
figures in text. Submitted by Editors July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University
of California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory
note by C.D. Leake, editor.)
[9] Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”, 1990,Heritage

[10] a. P32, I131: A HISTORIAN'S VIEW OF THE LAWRENCE YEARS ( LBLNEWS

MAGAZINE, NO. 3, FALL 1981)Author(s): HEILBRON, J. L. (LAWRENCE
BERKELEY LABORATORY, U.OFCA) ; SEIDEL, R. W. (LAWRENCE BERKELEY
LABORATORY, U. OFCA) ; WHEATON, B. R. (LAWRENCE
BERKELEYLABORATORY, U. OF CA)Department of Energy Opennet Accession
Number: NV0724922, pp 25. b. Sr89: Pecher, C., Fwd Lawrence, J., “Biological
Investigations With RadioCalcium and Radio Strontium”, 11899 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. &
Med., Vol 46Jan -April 1941.
[11] History of Neutron Therapy, Fermilab Neutron

Therapy Facility, http://www-bd.fnal.gov/ntf/history/index.html
[12] O. Hahn, F. Strassmann, Berlin, Germany “Concerning the Existence ofAlkaline

Earth Metals Resulting from Neutron Irradiation of Uranium” Die Natureissenschaften
27, p. 11-15, 1 January, 1939. Heritage Journal Naturwissenschaften Publisher Springer
Berlin / Heidelberg ISSN 0028-1042(Print) 1432-1904 (Online) Issue Volume 27,
Number [Translation in American Journal of Physics, January 1964, p. 9-15.]
! 20
[13] Lise Meinter, German refugee in Sweden, O.R. Frisch, Sweden “Disintegration of
Uranium by Neutrons: A New type of Nuclear Reaction” Nature 143, 239-240, 1939, Feb
11.
[14] a. Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann (Berlin-Dahlem) Germany “Proof of the
Formation of Active Isotopes of Barium from Uranium and Thorium Irradiated with
Neutrons; Proof of the Existence of More Active Fragments Produced by Uranium
Fission” Die Naturwissenschaften, Volume27, No. 6, pp. 89-95. 10 February 1939
[Translation from Journal of Chemical Education, May 1989, p. 363-363] b. Lise
Meitner, refugee, Sweden. O.R. Frisch, “Products of the Fission of Uranium Nucleus.”
“Nature” 143, 471-472,1939, March 18.
[15] “Evaluation of Radioactive Fallout” , Armed Forces Special Weapons Project,

Washington DC. 1955. AFSWP-978 (Extracted). Prepared for Defence Nuclear Agency,
Washington, DC 20305, 15 May 1981 HRE-0808,pp 7, “Physical Aspects of the Fallout
Problem, Table, “Comparison of Yield Mass Curves for Fission of U235, U238 and Pu
239, Fission Yields for Fission of Pu 239 with Fast Neutrons, discussion to pp 9.
Discussion of neutron induced radioactivity on ground. pp 10,11.
[16] Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”, 1990,

Heritage Publications, St. Louis, Missouri, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X, `pp 259.
[17] Henry De Wolf Smyth, ““Atomic Energy for Military Purposes” (The Smyth
Report), The Official Report on the Development of the Atomic Bomb Under the
Auspices of the United States Government”, Chapter 3, paragraph 3.
[18] Moss, W., Eckhardt, R., “The Human Plutonium Injection Experiments”, Los
Alamos Science, Number 23, 1993. pp 179.
[19] G. N. Glasoe Columbia University, New York, New York. J. Steigman College of
the City of New York, New York, New York Pupin Physics Laboratories, Columbia
University, “Radioactive Products from Gases Produced in Uranium Fission”, APS
PROLA Phys. Rev. 58, 1 -6 1940, May.
13. I131 Philip Abelson Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley,

California, USA, “An Investigation of the Products of the Disintegration of Uranium by
Neutrons.” “Physical Review”, 56, 1-9, PROLA,1939, May 11.
[20] ACHRE Final Report, Chapter 5, footnote 75, footnote 76 giving one of the
Manhattan Engineer District contracts awarded to Hamilton as Number as W-7405-eng-
48-A.
Auspices of the United States Government”, Chapter 8, paragraph 63, see also 2.32, 2.36,
5.32, 6.6, 7.35, 7.41, 7.42, 7.51, 8.34, Chapter 8 from paragraph 63.
! 21
[23] a. DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the Project ACHRE
Report Chapter 6: General Benefits of Radioisotope Research Footnote
96. https://hss.doe.gov/HealthSafety/ohre/roadmap/achre/chap6_5.html b. GE
Healthcare, Canada, http://www.gehealthcare.com/caen/md/metastron.html]
[24] Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology ISSN 1516-8913 verso impressa,
Braz. arch. biol. technol. v.50 n. spe Curitiba set. 2007, doi: 10.1590/S1516-
89132007000600007 NUCLEAR MEDICINE: THERAPY The role of electron-emitting
radiopharmaceuticals in the palliative treatment of metastatic bone pain and for
radiosynovectomy: applications of conversion electron emitter Tin-117m” Suresh C.
Srivastava, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Medical Department, Building 801, P.O.
Box 5000, Upton, 11973-5000, New York – USA, pp 6.]
[25] Minister for Health and Aged Care, M. Wooldridge, M.P., Ministerial Press
Statement MW82/01, Canberra, 5 September 2001.
[26] American Chemical Society, website, Oak Ridge Landmark, “The Production and
Distribution of Radioisotopes”, “Uses of Radio Isotopes”.
http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_AR
TICLEMAIN&node_id=882&content_id=WPCP_008324&use_sec=true&sec_
url_var=region1&__uuid=051a092a-75d3-41e4-853f-84bebfe8e2f8 ]
[27] STUDIES IN IODINE METABOLISM BY THE USE OF A NEW RADIOACTIVE

ISOTOPE OF IODINE, Joseph G. Hamilton and Mayo H. Soley Am J Physiol 127: 557-
572, 1939; Am J Physiol --Legacy Content, Vol. 127, Issue 3, 557-572, September 30,
1939.
[28] Academy of Achievement, Museum, Glenn T. Seaborg interview]
[29] J. J. Livingood Radiation Laboratory, Physics Department, University of California,

G. T. Seaborg Chemistry Department, University of California, Berkeley, California,
“Radioactive Isotopes of Iodine”, APS PROLA Phys. Rev. Volume 54 Issue 10, Phys.
Rev. 54, 775 -782 1938 Sept 7.
[30] Pecher, C., Fwd Lawrence, J., “Biological Investigations With Radio Calcium and
Radio Strontium”, 11899 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. & Med., Vol 46 Jan -April 1941.
[31] Hamilton, J. G., Soley, M.H., “Studies in Iodine Metabolism by the use of a New
Radioactive Isotope of Iodine”, Am J Physiol 127: 557-572, 1939; Am J Physiol --
Legacy Content, Vol. 127, Issue 3, 557-572, September 30, 1939.
[32] Source: Academy of Achievement, Museum, Glenn T. Seaborg interview.
! 22
[33] Pecher, C. “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and Strontium,
note by C.D. Leake, editor.) pp 133.
[34] Minister for Health and Aged Care, M. Wooldridge, M.P., Ministerial Press
Statement MW82/01, Canberra, 5 September 2001.
! 23
Chapter 2 Medicine and the Bomb
In 1939 the announcement of the discovery of nuclear fission from Germany caused
alarm, particularly among scientists who had been forced to flee the Nazi regime. Leo
Szilard was one such scientist resident in the United States at that time. Together with
Eugene Wigner and Edward Teller, he discussed the matter with Albert Einstein, who
agreed to write a letter to President Roosevelt. [1]
In his letter dated 2 August 1939 to Roosevelt, Einstein described in common language
the awesome capabilities of atomic weapons. Einstein wrote: “It may become possible to
set up a nuclear chain reaction in a large mass of uranium, by which vast amounts of
power and large quantities of new radium-like elements would be generated. Now it
appears almost certain that this could be achieved in the immediate future.... A single
bomb of this type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy the
whole port together with some of the surrounding territory....” [2]
Einstein warns of the atomic bomb’s great physical destructiveness. He warns it is so

destructive that the area of devastation would exceed the size of even a large target such
as a port. He warns that the fission process would create “radium like” substances.
In 1925 radium had been identified as the radioactive substance responsible for the
illnesses suffered by the largely female work force of radium “dial painters”. These
workers, employed to paint luminous dials on the faces of clocks, watches and
instruments, had been found to be vulnerable to horrific disease, mainly of the jaw bone.
[3]
Press reports covered the suffering of the dial painters as they fought for compensation
through the law courts. Many suffered horrific deaths. The decline in their health and
appearance was reported in the newspapers. The physical condition of the workers
worsened from one court appearance to the next. The awareness of the dangers of
radioactive radium once inside one’s body was widespread in US culture from 1925. [4]
“The New York Times” of 7 March, 1938 reported that as a result of the introduction of
laws governing the occupational use of radium in New York State, no new radium related
compensation claims had been lodged in that state since 1934. [5]
The Manhattan Project referenced civil medical texts describing the radium dial painter
illnesses in the process of producing the atomic bomb. The “Manhattan District History,
Book 1, General, Volume 7, Medical Program”, Appendix B, References, US National
Archives, lists as item number 1 the text “Protection of Radium Dial Workers and
Radiologists From injury by Radium”, by Robley D. Evans, as published in The Journal
of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, Sept. 1943 Volume 25, No. 7, p 253.
A weapon too powerful to be confined to a specific target and which also generated and
dispersed harmful, “radium like”, substances over a large area. Einstein sought to
communicate these characteristics of the possible bomb as clearly and as plainly as
possible to President Roosevelt.
! 24
In response to the information contained in Einstein’s letter, President Roosevelt
commissioned the formation of the “Advisory Committee on Uranium” on 12 October
1939. [6]
A Synopsis showing the progress of the Advisory Committee on Uranium and the
formation of the Manhattan Engineer District (commonly known as the Manhattan
Project) in 1942 is contained in Appendix 1.
In 1941, Ernest O Lawrence, Director of the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory and

cyclotron at the University of California Berkeley, proposed the electromagnetic
enrichment of uranium. He saw this as a route by which uranium might be enriched in the
key isotope so as to enable an atomic bomb to be built. He advocated this and the work of
his laboratory, which included investigations regarding plutonium, to scientists Compton
and Loomis. These scientists advised V. Bush, head of the National Defense Research
Council, under which the Advisory Committee on Uranium operated. In early 1941 Bush
appointed Lawrence as adviser to the Committee Chairman, Briggs. Funding for the
Lawrence lab at Berkeley was forthcoming. [7]
The index to the redacted listings of the Ernest O. Lawrence Archives show that Ernest
Lawrence was aware of the research being conducted by medical and other researchers
based around his cyclotron at Berkeley. [8]
The work of researchers at the Lawrence Lab had become well known due to press
coverage and magazine articles in the 1930s and 1940s. [9]
In May 1941 Lawrence advised the National Academy of Sciences of the isolation and
study of plutonium by Seaborg and others at Berkeley. He advised that the use of natural
uranium in reactors would produce plutonium. [10]
On May 17, 1941, a National Academy of Sciences review panel that included Lawrence
reported that increased uranium research funding would result in the production of
radioactive materials, the fission products made in atomic reactors, that could be dropped
on the enemy by 1943. [11]
In the summer of 1942 a Health Division was formed within the “Metallurgical
Laboratory” project of the Manhattan District Engineers at the University of Chicago.
Dr. R. Stone was appointed Director. He moved from Lawrence's Lab to Chicago as a
result. [12]
The role of the Health Division is described as ensuring the safety of workers and the
general public during the manufacture of atomic bombs. [13]
However, an internal Manhattan Project document gives one other Scope of Activity.
The report “Metallurgical Project, A.H. Compton, Project Leader, Health, Radiation and
Protection, R.S. Stone, M.D., Division Director, Health Division Program, May 10,
1943”, document number 717325, Report CH-63255-A, Originally Secret, pp. 2, gives
the following additional very significant Scope:
! 25
“4. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Radioactive Materials as a Military Weapon. A)
Defense -Tolerance of and protection of troops and civilians’. B) Offence –
Radiations needed to be effective.”
It is within this scope that the work of Hamilton had particular application in the military
effects of the use of the atomic bomb. In this matter the entire body of knowledge relating
to the effects of radiation, types of radiation and vectors of external and internal radiation
delivery to the enemy become important in the study of the decision to use the atomic
bomb.
The study of the fission products is not only a study of industrial and reactor safety, it is
demonstrably a study of the output of all fission based weapons. Both radiological bombs
powered by conventional high explosive, considered in May 1941, as well as atomic
bombs, disperse fission products. Research pursuant to radiological warfare is applicable
to atomic bombs. Admission of strontium hazard for one is admission for the other.
Atomic bombs in addition emit gamma and neutron bursts [14] that radiological weapons,
powered by conventional explosives, do not.
The Health program of the Metallurgical Division of the Manhattan Engineer District did
have a safety and protective function. It also had a radiological effects prediction role in
relation to the atomic bomb via Scope 4. This is not surprising. The military tend not to
use weapons which are poorly understood and which have unknown effects against an
enemy.
The Health Division had access to medical information regarding the effects of ionizing
radiation dating at least from the 1925 Radium Dial Painters disaster. It employed
persons who had conducted relevant research under Lawrence. The Lawrence “Rad Lab”
prior to 1942 included the Crocker Radiation Laboratory and from 1942, Donner
Laboratory. [15]
Dr Stone had previously conducted medical treatment of patients using neutron ray
therapy at the Lawrence Berkeley cyclotron. [16]
Dr Joseph Hamilton had previously administered Iodine 131 both to animals and
humans. He had assisted Dr Charles Pecher in the administration of Strontium 89 to
animals in early studies, and to people in order to reduce the pain of terminal bone
cancer. [17]
It was for these reasons in fact that Hamilton was chosen to investigate, under contract,
the metabolism of the fission products by the Manhattan Project. [18]
As we have seen, history shows that Ernest Lawrence began using his cyclotron to
manufacture artificial radio isotopes after the Juliot -Curies had made their related
breakthrough in 1934. The formation of the Health Division within the "Manhattan
Project" shows an awareness that the substances and radiations generated by the fission
process produced biological effects that presented as health and safety issues.
As nuclear medicine had previous experience studying I131, Sr89 and P32 in the era
prior to their identification as fission products, Hamilton had at least this prior experience
and the prior findings as a background.
! 26
John Lawrence and L.A. Erf had assisted Charles Pecher in his Sr89 work [19] and had
also originated treatments using Phosphorus 32. [20]
Stone had prior experience with the effects of neutron ray therapy, such that he ceased
such treatment in 1940 after distressing late effects afflicted many of the 250 patients he
treated. [21]
A study of the pre 1943 medical knowledge of Phosphorus 32, Strontium 89, Iodine 131
and neutron ray therapy and the military interest it generated, follows.
Phosphorus 32 (P32) (Dr. J. Lawrence and Dr. L.A. Erf)
First used to treat adult leukaemia by John Lawrence in November 1938, with the patient
free of disease by 1940, [22] cyclotron produced P32 was also used by L.A. Erf to treat
polycythemia vera in 1941. [23]
Brucer describes Erf’s explanation of the effect of P32 as follows: “P-32 did not destroy
red blood cells, rather it depressed hematopoiesis in bone marrow: Because of a red blood
cell’s 120 day life span, immediate relief of symptoms was not expected.......the Red
Blood Count may continue to fall for up to 7 months...After the secrecy of all things
nuclear subsided around 1950, P-32 became the world wide treatment of choice for
polycythemias.” End quote. [24]
“With the initial declassification of MED (Manhattan Engineering District Declassified

Documents), D. Anthony revealed that the LD50 of intravenous P-32 for man (derived
from animal data) was in the range of 270 mCi (10 GBq).” [25]
Both uranium and plutonium fission bombs produce neutron rays. Both produce the
neutron activation products. [26] Where neutron radiation passes through bone, P32 is
created within that bone. [27]
Brucer continues to explain: “Lawrence had been treating leukaemia patients with P-32
for almost 7 years. His P-32 was made at the University until the Manhattan Bomb
Project pre-empted their cyclotron to make the first Plutonium. In order to keep the new
work secret, John (Lawrence) was instructed to continue his P-32 work with lots of
papers and talks. P-32 would be supplied in lavish amounts – one curie per month – from
the new reactor at Oak Ridge” End quote. [28] Using the Oak Ridge (know as
the Clinton facility by the Manhattan Project during the war) reactor, the Manhattan
Project took over the production of P32. Doctors such as John Lawrence were instructed
as to how they should work in regard to the medical knowledge of this substance.
Brucer further explains that in order to maintain secrecy regarding the creation of P 32 at
Oak Ridge, a child who lived near Oak Ridge in 1944, and who suffered leukaemia, was
flown from Knoxville on a DC 3 aircraft to Berkeley for treatment, while the P32 was
flown to Berkeley on a separate military aircraft, also from Knoxville, leaving for
Berkeley at the same time as the patient’s flight. The child was treated with P32 at
Berkeley. Both the patient and the P32 were 3,000 from their respective homes.
Unknown at the time, sadly the treatment was useless in this childhood disease case. P32
being appropriate for adults only. Brucer writes: “the child was said have been thrilled by
his cross country flight.” [29]
! 27
The United States knew the over dose data of P32. The Manhattan Project produced the
substance via reactor prior to the first use of atomic bombs. The Manhattan Project
directed doctors such as Lawrence in respect to their medical use of P32. The creation of
P32 within the bones of people exposed to a detonating atomic bomb was known long
before such a bomb was tested. For pre war researchers around the world found that the
fission of uranium produced neutron rays.
Strontium 89 (Sr89) (Dr Charles Pecher)
From 1940 to 1941 Charles Pecher synthesized Radio Strontium 89 and other
radioisotopes at Ernest Lawrence’s Crocker Radiation Laboratory and Cyclotron, located
at the University of California, Berkeley. [30]
Dr Pecher created Strontium by the method reported by D. W. Stewart , J. L. Lawson,

and J. M. Cork Department of the Physics and Chemistry, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, published as “Induced Radioactivity in Strontium and Yttrium” in
“Physics Review” No. 53, Issue 9, 901-906, 1937. [31]
The production of Strontium 89 resulted in the formation of an isotope of Yttrium as a

by-product. [32] Pecher devised and patented a means by which Yttrium could replace
the use of Radium in industry. The method offered greater safety, economy and
performance in industrial radiography. The patent was one of two granted to Charles
Pecher in America. [33]
Pecher determined the uptake, metabolism and the resultant dosimetry of Radio
Strontium in mammals. It was shown that mammals absorbed and metabolised Radio
Strontium in a manner similar to Calcium. It was also shown that this metabolic similarity
held for all strontium isotopes: “At present there is no significant evidence that living
cells can distinguish an element from its radioactive isotope.” [34]
Dr L. A. Erf and Dr C. Pecher gained a grant from the John and Mary R. Markle
Foundation for Medical Research. The research sought to improve childhood nutrition by
investigating ways to boost the calcium content of cow’s milk. In order to conduct the
experiments required, they needed a suitable radioactive tracer. However, because of the
size of the cow, no radioactive form of calcium emitted radioactivity of a type and
intensity that allowed for its accurate external monitoring. [35]
They required a substance which was a potent beta radiation emitter and which was
biochemically similar to calcium. Pecher selected Strontium 89 which emitted purely beta
radiation of a high energy level for the type. The strontium 89 half life, given at the time
as being of about 55 days suited their purpose and the isotope was produced in high
yield by the Berkeley Cyclotron. [36] This half life period of 55 days would be shown to
be in error by Glasoe and Steigman in 1940, who found Sr89 to possess a half life
of about 51 days. [37] This value is given today by authorities. [38] Pecher continued to
use the 55 day figure in his animal experiments and human treatment trials until his death
from suicide in 1941. [39]
Prior to his death, and with the assistance of Dr. L. A. Erf and Dr J. Hamilton, Charles
Pecher injected strontium 89 chloride into two dairy cows. The radio strontium was
! 28
traced externally from the site of injection through to its secretion over time into the
cows’ milk. The results of the experiment were published in 1940. [40]
Pecher reported that the radiation counter loaned to them by Dr. Willard Libby achieved
readings of greater accuracy using Strontium 89 (Sr89) as a tracer than had been possible
with Calcium 45. [41]
Many experiments were conducted by Pecher et al using Sr89. Pecher described the
binding of strontium to bone. He described the subsequent movement of strontium from
mothers’ bone via other tissues to the fetus and nursing infant in pregnant and lactating
rats. He reported that the offspring became “more radioactive than the mother.” [42]
Pecher originated the use of Sr89 as a cancer treatment. In 1939 Pecher had observed the
uptake of Sr89 by bone tumours in animals. [43]
He found when given to such animals, Sr89 was concentrated at the tumour sites by the
metabolism of bone tumors. As a result these tumors shrank under the intense beta
irradiation of the now concentrated Sr89. Useful periods of treatment per dose were
obtained due to the physical half life of Sr89. [44]
Such was the progress of the animal trials that by 1940 the treatment of human patients
suffering secondary bone cancer was underway. Prior to treatment patients were confined
to bed by great pain beyond the reach of other treatments. Administration of Sr89
chloride by injection produced such pain relief that some patients were able to leave their
beds and walk. One patient returned to work as a teacher. Sadly though, despite the pain
relief, Sr89 was not a cure. The trial was in an early phase and incomplete. [45]
Glasoe and Steigman identified Strontium 89 as a uranium fission product in 1940. Their
paper “Radioactive Products from Gases Produced In Uranium Fission” was published in
“The Physical Review”, Vol 58, No.1, 1 July, 1940.
Identifying and defining the Sr89 creation chain as Uranium + Neutron = Energy plus
Krypton 89 > Rubidium 89 > Strontium 89 with a 51 day half life, > Yttrium 89 (stable),
they contrast this with the non fission means used earlier to create Strontium 89 via
cyclotron by Stewart et al as followed by Pecher. (That is by the bombardment of a
lighter isotope of Strontium with deuterons and protons (d, p), to create Sr89).
As the fission of both plutonium and uranium produce Strontium 89, [46] the Pecher data
appears to be of great value in terms of predicting the effects of exposure to reactor
emissions and fallout from atomic bombs.
Dr Pecher’s final paper, the report on the Strontium 89 cancer treatment, was written in
1941 and published posthumously in 1942: “Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with
Radioactive Calcium and Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive
Strontium in the Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation
Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley, University of California
Publications in Pharmacology. Editors: C.D. Leake, G. A. Alles, T.C. Daniels, M.H.
Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text. Submitted by Editors
July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley,
Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.”
! 29
The work of Charles Pecher defined the metabolic and radiobiological nature of
Strontium 89 and its use in an innovative medical treatment in an era of global war.
Pecher demonstrated that the absorption and retention of Radio Strontium was related to
dietary calcium and to the calcium demand experienced by individual test animals.
Rodents deprived of dietary calcium absorbed and retained greater amounts of Sr89
introduced into their food. [47]
Irradiation of bone marrow by beta radiation emitted from medicinal Sr89 resident in
bone presented as a limiting factor in the course of Pecher’s human treatment trials.
Of this Pecher wrote: “the problem has been studied with respect to: (1) the distribution
of irradiation after the administration of radioactive strontium, (2) the method of
administration of radio-strontium, (3) the chemical toxicity of strontium on the tissues,
(4) the effect of radioactive strontium on the tissues, and (5) the dosage of the substance.”
[48] “ The effect of radio - strontium has been studied in mice, rabbits, and human
beings.....Under the treatment of large doses of radioactive strontium (59 to 200
microcuries) to mice, a definite leucopenia has been observed. Two weeks after the
administration of approximately 180 microcuries to each of five mice, their average white
cell count was 4200 cells per cm., whereas the normal value for mice is approximately
14,000. Nevertheless, the effect on the blood picture is much smaller than that of a
similar amount of radiophosphorus.
Some transitory leucopenia and anemia observed in a patient with metastatic prostate
carcinoma and in another............ after a total administration of 8 and 5 millicuries of
radio-strontium, respectively, must be attributed to the treatment....Dosage: The dosage of
radio-strontium when administered therapeutically is still a difficult and largely
empirical problem. The idea has been to give as much strontium as possible without
producing any serious damage to the marrow... Important information has been given
by the radioactivity determination on the tissues of an adult female who died 3 days after
the intravenous injection of a simple dose of 0.3 millicurie of Sr lactate (170mgm. Sr,
August 19, 1940). The activity of the bones ranges from 0.05 to 0.15 microcuries per
gram wet weight....Similar values were observed in a patient with multiple myeloma who
died two months after receiving 1.7 millicuries of radio-strontium per gram of tissue in
one day gives approximately the same ionisation as a dose of 37 r of X rays, according to
Dr. Aebersold, we may calculate that the total dose given to the bones if no Sr was
eliminated from the skeleton would be equivalent to 500 to 1,500 r. These values are
obviously much too high since strontium is continuously eliminated from the skeleton, as
is evident from the other autopsy data. We may assume that an amount of radiation
equivalent to 200 to 600 r is given to the bony tissues when 1 millicurie of Sr is
intravenously injected in an adult. This rough calculation is only interesting as an
indication of the order of the magnitude of the dose of radio-strontium that should be
necessary to obtain a therapeutic effect on bone tumours. ” End Quote. [49] The attempt
to equate the dose received from Sr89 as an internal emitter to an external dose from X
rays by Aebersold is important and historic.
It is apparent the estimate is the result of a comparison of the known effects of external X
radiation doses and the observed effects of internal Sr89 as it irradiated target tissue, the
equivalence taking into account such complexities as ionising effectiveness and local vs.
whole body dose when comparing internal Beta radiation in bone with external X ray.
! 30
The external equivalent dose arrived at by Aebersold demonstrates the effectiveness of
internal Sr89 as a vector for delivery of radiation doses to specific local tissue compared
to external X ray in treatment. Strontium 89 is a very potent agent of radiation delivery
to internal tissue. It is not like a CT Scan.
Was there an aspect of the work which might arouse military interest in relation to
the spread of this substance over enemy positions by any means?
The “Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments” (US
Department of Energy, 1995) as commissioned by President Clinton states “The first
proposed military application of atomic energy was not nuclear Weaponry but
radiological warfare (RW) --the use of radioactive materials to cause injury. A May 1941
report by the National Academy of Sciences listed the first option as the ''production of
violently radioactive materials , . . carried by airplanes to be scattered as bombs over
enemy territory.” [50] In any such use, what would the military expect to happen to the
enemy? On the basis of what knowledge?
Charles Pecher had spent the previous 15 months [51] manufacturing what turned out to
be a fission product, via non-fission means, at the Berkeley Cyclotron.
He had described its relatively high energy beta radiation and rate of radioactivity. [52] In
the terms used by the National Academy of Sciences report, Strontium 89 was “violently
radioactive”. Strontium 89 has a rate of radioactivity of 27,800 curies per gram and emits
comparatively high energy for a beta emitter. [53] This is 27,800 times more ‘violently
radioactive’ than the alpha emitting radium. Alpha has a greater ionisation effectiveness
than Beta. [54]
War time secrecy had been imposed on some information and activities of the Lawrence
Crocker Laboratory. This had been due to the discovery and isolation of Plutonium by
Seaborg et al there in February 1941. That work received a “Secret, Limited” security
classification. [55] Charles Pecher therefore worked in a classified setting.
John Lawrence wrote an obituary to Charles Pecher which was published in December
1941: “In the death of Charles Pecher at the age of twenty-eight experimental medicine
has lost a brilliant investigator who already had made important contributions in the
application of nuclear physics to biology and medicine…Because of his thorough training
in both physics and medicine, and due to his industry and brilliance, he soon made
important contributions in the new field of artificial radioactivity…in his work using
radioactive strontium he showed that strontium acts physiologically in a manner similar
to calcium in the animal body and because of its localization in bone is now being used
experimentally in the treatment of neoplastic disease of bone.” [56]
The treatment of patients suffering bone cancer continued without Charles Pecher on an
experimental basis at Berkeley and then at San Francisco. [57]
Marshall Brucer notes that Charles had spent only 15 months engaged in Nuclear
Medicine. In that time he originated only the third artificial radio-pharmaceutical to that
time (Strontium 89 chloride), after Phosphorous 32 and Iodine 131, and wrote six papers.
[58]
! 31
The journal “Science” reported: “Patients hopelessly sick with cancer which has spread to
the bones from its original location in the breast or prostate gland are now being treated
with radio-strontium, made by the atom-smashing cyclotron, was announced by the
inventor, Professor E. O. Lawrence, of the University of California. It is too early to
know what the results of this treatment will be, although favorable signs, including
control of pain, have been observed.” [59]
The article reports further on Pecher’s findings : “Vitamin D, these studies have shown,
both promotes the absorption of calcium and in other ways promotes mineralization of
bone”. [60] (That Pecher originated the knowledge is acknowledged later in the article.)
Sunshine is a primary source of vitamin D in humans.
C.D. Leake, the editor of the final Pecher paper, wrote of his own experiences during
World War 1. Attached to the Chemical Warfare Service, Leake’s job was to study the
effects of toxic gases on people. Leake describes Charles Pecher and his work and writes
that Charles “was killed in the war.” Leake further writes that “With the war (WW2)
upon us, we turned our attention to war gases, the use of which had been threatened by
the Japanese.” [61]
An interview, dated 17 December 1979, was conducted by Sally Smith Hughes with the
scientist Kenneth G. Scott, formerly of the Crocker Laboratory. Hughes and Scott discuss
Charles Pecher and his work. Hughes asks about the death of Charles being caused by
warfare. Scott replies in the negative. Hughes and Scott then discuss the war story as
perhaps being a cover. [62] (It is my personal opinion that the LBL has carried the can for
the actions of the Belgian government in regard to the suicide of Dr Pecher long enough.)
The Crocker Radiation Laboratory staff Pecher acknowledges as assisting in his work
included: Professor E.O. Lawrence, Dr. John H. Lawrence, Dr. J.G. Hamilton, Dr. L.A.
Erf, Professor W.F. Libby and Dr Paul Aebersold. [63] To those readers familiar with the
history of the development and testing of nuclear weapons in the Cold War setting, these
names, with exception of Dr L.A. Erf, will be very familiar. Their roles in the Fallout
health effects studies of the Cold War era will be examined in a later section. In this work
the records of Dr Pecher’s research and patient notes take on increasing prominence in
the historical record as the Cold War progressed.
Some Manhattan Project documents which record the later secret work regarding the
biological effects of internalised Strontium 89 include:
Hamilton, J., letter to Robert S. Stone, military application of fission products, pp. 4, May
16 1943. In this letter Dr. J. Hamilton suggested the use of radio strontium as a
radiological weapon. He proposed that it be spread over enemy food and water supplies.
Secret.
Hamilton, J. G., “Metabolism of Fission Products, Progress report for Period Ending
April 15 1944, Argonne National Laboratory”, April 22 1944. Secret.
US Department of Energy document Number QH-2311 Copy 23A, 717338

“Metallurgical Project, A.H. Compton – Project Director, Robert S. Stone, M.D., -
Associate Project Director Health” “Report for Month Ending October 31/1944”. “C.
! 32
Biological Research – K.S. Cole, Section Chief. A. Radioactive Materials – Mammals. 6.
Chronic Effects of Sr89. Report received November 10, 1944.” “II. University of
California – Radiation Laboratory – J.G. Hamilton and Associates, Technical Progress
Report on Metabolic Studies of Fission Products.” Secret.
That the long term military interest and control continued regarding human data relating
to internalised Sr89 is evidenced by the April 6 1954 Letter to Dr L. Dunham from Dr
Joseph Hamilton re medical use of radioisotopes: “Dear Chuck: Please find enclosed the
available data from the University of California Hospital which was compiled by
members of Stone’s staff who incidentally are quite unaware of the classified nature of
this material. I discussed this matter with Dr. Stone and told him that it should not be
discussed with anyone in the Division of Radiology with the exception of the two of us.”
…” The picture is not too clear since a number of patients received stable strontium and
several others received some amounts of radio-strontium.” “Our own experimental
program is progressing very nicely using both rats and monkeys.”
“The use of radioactive strontium, (Sr89) in the treatment of patients...the rationale, based
on experimental animal studies with metastatic carcinoma to bone and in osteogenic
sarcoma was initiated in 1940 by Charles Pecher....Pecher’s experimental findings were
confirmed by Treadwell (Mrs. Anne de G. Low-Beer) , et al, who investigated uptake
of radio-strontium by bone tumours in six patients prior to biopsy or amputation.” Secret.
The papers authored by Pecher disclose treatment doses in humans and over dose
consequences in animals in the period of academic publication from 1940 to 1942.
The metabolic and dosimetry studies commenced by Pecher are shown to be continued
within the work conducted by Dr Joseph Hamilton after 1942. This work was contracted
to Hamilton by the OSRD and then the Manhattan Project from 1942. [64]
Pecher’s 1941 (published 1942) report that variations in dietary calcium varied the uptake
and retention of oral Sr89 has been noted above. See reference 19.
In a periodic Progress Report of 1944 to the Manhattan Project chain of command, Dr

Hamilton wrote “The most effective means of reducing the absorption of Sr* from the
intestinal tract is the maintenance of an adequate or high calcium intake. This may be
accomplished by increased use of milk and dairy products, by taking medicinal calcium
regularly, or by use of bread fortified with calcium. The important factor is apparently the
general level of calcium intake rather than the amount present in the intestinal tract at the
moment.” [65] This is a re report of earlier civilian medical research for military
purposes. The intent to reduce the uptake and retention of any isotope of strontium (Sr*)
in the military context includes that of radio protection of troops on the nuclear battlefield
and of civilians under atomic attack by a foe. If the calcium supply has been
contaminated by radio-strontium, the effectiveness of the displacement regime seems
likely to be less effective than Hamilton's report would suggest.
It has been shown that prior to July 1944 the Manhattan Project possessed knowledge that
Sr89 would be generated over any cities attacked by atomic bombs. Due to Pecher’s
medical reports, the Manhattan Project possessed knowledge that internalised Sr89 above
a cited dose produced a given and quantified degree of damage to the bone marrow and
that this produced a given and negative impact on the white cell count in the first
! 33
instance. This results in harm to the individual. In this regard Pecher reported that the
impact of Sr89 was less than that produced by internalised P32.
Not only did the United States hold the knowledge that P32 would be induced within the
bones of the bomb exposed people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but that organization also
knew what the effects upon the people would be in terms of marrow damage and resultant
blood changes for given range of dosage. In areas affected by fallout, the authorities also
knew Sr89 would have effects as defined by the medicine as practised and reported by
Pecher prior to his death in 1941.
Due to Pecher, Hamilton was able to suggest a protective measure against all isotopes of
radio strontium generated by the fission of uranium and plutonium.
Pecher’s Sr89 palliative pain relief treatment for secondary cancers of breast and prostate
to bone was not approved for use until 1993 in the US and 1986 in Canada. [66]
The delay of many decades in the release of Pecher’s treatment is ignored by the
Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments in its Final Report to President
Clinton in 1995. That report found that the Manhattan Project and Atomic Energy
Commission aided nuclear medicine and “encouraged researchers to explore new
applications”. [67] I discuss reasons for the delay in the use of Pecher’s Sr89 treatment in
a later section.
Radio Iodine 131 (I131) (Dr. J.G. Hamilton)
The synthesis of Iodine 131 via the cyclotron by Dr Glenn Seaborg and Dr J.J.
Livingood, both of the Lawrence Berkeley Radiation Laboratory, was reported in the
Journal “Physics Review”, Vol. 54, of 1938. Dr Joseph Hamilton, also of the Lawrence
Berkeley Radiation Laboratory, immediately commenced using Iodine 131 in animal and
then human tracer experiments. He hoped to create a treatment for conditions affecting
the Thyroid gland. Earlier attempts at using radioactive isotopes of Iodine had been
thwarted by the lack a sufficient half life . The nature of Iodine 131 solved the problem.
The first paper on the use of Iodine 131 in the diagnosis of Thyroid disease by Hamilton,
Soley and Evans was published in 1939. [68]
Iodine 131 was identified as a uranium fission product by Philip Abelson, also at the
Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA, in
1939. His paper describing this discovery, entitled “An Investigation of the Products of
the Disintegration of Uranium by Neutrons”, was published in the May 11, 1939, issue of
“Physical Review”, 56, pp 1-9.
Dr Hamilton commenced war related work with support from the Office of Scientific
Research and Development in 1942. Later he was contracted by the Manhattan Engineer
District to continue this work. The work consisted of conducting metabolic studies on
animals regarding the health effects of injected, inhaled and ingested fission products.
[69]
Under contract, Dr Hamilton issued secret periodic reports entitled “ The Metabolism of
the Fission Products” for various periods and contributed to the wider reporting of the
program known as the Manhattan Project’s Metallurgical Project’s Health Division. [70]
! 34
The Scope under which the Metallurgical Project’s Health Division operated,and under
which Hamilton was therefore contracted to conduct research, included the “Scope” as
follows: “4. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Radioactive Materials as a Military Weapon.
A) Defense -Tolerance of and protection of troops and civilians. B) Offence – Radiations
needed to be effective.” [71]
In 1943 Dr Hamilton issued memoranda recommending the use of Radio-Strontium as a

radiological weapon. [72]
The delivery of fission products to the enemy can be seen as an offensive act intended to
produce casualties or hazard by any means of delivery.
The foresight Hamilton displayed in 1943 in regard to the harms related to the delivery of
fission products is a knowledge base which pre-exists the first use of atomic bombs upon
cities.
Hamilton wrote of one vector of delivery – ordinary explosive plus fission products. The
atomic bomb is another. A device which both creates and disperses fission products to the
target via nuclear explosion in addition to producing gamma and neutron emissions at the
time of detonation. The result is a radiation hazard. Groves’ own observers baulked at the
official denials of radiation hazards present in Hiroshima. [73]
In the 1990s, press reports of Cold War human radiation experiments conducted by
Hamilton and others [74] led to investigations by Secretary of Energy Hazel O’Leary of
her Department’s records and past activities. Her reports to President Clinton in 1994
resulted in the President issuing Executive Order 12891, imposing Openness in regard to
the relevant records. The President also created the Advisory Committee on Human
Radiation Experiments (ACHRE). The ACHRE Committee published its Final Report in
October 1995. [75]
The following quotation from Chapter 5 of the ACHRE Final Report summarizes
Hamilton’s involvement in regard to his investigations of the effects of internalized
fission products :
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RADIATION EXPERIMENTS Final

Report, October 1995, Chapter 5 The California Experiments
While the University of Rochester had been conducting experiments for the Manhattan
Engineer District, a related effort was under way at the University of California at
Berkeley before the war, Drs Joseph Hamilton and Robert Stone had been exploring
medical applications of radioisotopes with the aid of the University of California's
cyclotron.
Hamilton and his colleagues had pioneered using radioisotopes to treat cancer, in
particular iodine 131 in the 1930s. At the time the United States entered the war, they
were investigating another isotope for cancer therapy, strontium 89. Indeed, it was this
area of Hamilton's expertise that attracted the interest of the Manhattan Project. While
Stone moved to the Chicago Metallurgical Laboratory during the war, Hamilton
remained at the University of California's Radiation Laboratory, or "Rad Lab," at
Berkeley. A colleague of both men, Dr. Earl Miller, a radiologist at the University of
! 35
California, reported regularly to Stone on the progress of the Berkeley plutonium
project…..”
“Toward the end of the war, Hamilton began to conduct plutonium studies on humans for
the government. Experiments with humans could be handled expeditiously, Hamilton
wrote, because of the close relationship between the Rad Lab and the medical school at
the University of California at San Francisco.'' End quote.
In conclusion, the work with Iodine 131 originated and conducted by Dr Hamilton from
the 1930s, continues to help people today. The imposition of war upon the work caused a
changed focus in the tasks performed by Hamilton, who from 1942 engaged in war work
that continued into the Cold War period.
The University of California, Berkeley, Bancroft Library/The University Archives,

Berkeley, CA., gathered and made available the document: “Reports and Papers
published by the Metabolism of Fission Products Group at the Crocker Laboratory,
University of California, Berkeley, under the Direction of J.G. Hamilton during the years
1942 through 1946 under contract to the Manhattan Engineer District”.
This document is available via the U.S. Department of Energy Opennet website. The
document lists Dr Hamilton as Director, with the following staff associates: I.L.
Chaikoff, D.H. Copp, C. Enterman, D.M. Greenberg, L. Jacobson, R.
Overstreet, K.G. Scott, L. Van Middlesworth.
The document lists the following technical staff:
D.J. Axelrod, A.J. Barber, M.J. Chace, E.M. Cuthbertson, J. Crowley, H.

Fisher, M.C. Fishler, M. Kaplan, H. Lans, Jr., F. Loomis.
The document lists 34 publications. These include 7 “Progress Reports” in the period Feb
1943 to Sept 1944; metabolism of “product” (ie Plutonium) 1944; “Absorption and
Fixation of Fission Products and Plutonium in Plants”, undated; “The Deposition of
Plutonium and Certain Fission Products in Bone as a Decontamination Problem”, 1946;
“Uptake of Pu, Y and Sr by the Callus of Healing Bone Fractures”, May 1947, Abstract;
“Radioautographic Studies of Distribution of Lewisite and Mustard Gas in Skin and Eye
Tissues”, 1947, “The Metabolic Properties of the Fission Products and Actinide
Elements”, 1948; “The Metabolism of the Radioactive Elements Created by Nuclear
Fission”, 1949; “Deposition of Plutonium, Uranium, and their Fission Products Inhaled as
Aerosols by Rats and Man”, 1949; “Effect of Age and Low Phosphorous Rickets on
Calcification and the Deposition of Certain Radioactive Metals in Bone”, 1951.
The pre 1943 civil medical record was used and built upon by Hamilton and his
associates during the period 1943 to the end of World War 2 and beyond. By July 1945, I
submit that sufficient information had been obtained to enable a basic anticipation of the
radiological effects of the detonation of an atomic bomb over a city. The study of some
fission internal emitters had been continuing for 7 years old by 1943.
Dr Hamilton’s metabolic studies helped set the dose considered safe within the scope of
the Met Lab Project. The legacy remains as a core issue today. The original data for
civilian fission technology has a military base.
! 36
In the year 2000, the US Government finally conceded that plutonium workers had
indeed suffered high levels of work related illness. The true track record of the
plutonium industry is now on the record. The first people to suffer from the bomb and its
related reactor emissions, of which plutonium is one, were American workers. A belated
compensation scheme was set up for plutonium workers. A large proportion of these
workers experience great difficulty gaining access to the funds to which they are
entitled. The nuclear test explosion named Trinity, as we shall see, was not the first
instance of the Manhattan Engineers District (the "Manhattan Project") contaminating
land, air, water and people.
Neutron radiation therapy 1937 on (Dr. Robert Stone)
The foregoing establishes that Ernest Lawrence had established a radiation laboratory that
had been applying innovative nuclear medicine to ease suffering and treat disease over a
number of years prior to the US entry into World War 2. In conjunction with his brother,
John, a medical doctor, the Lawrences were among the first to apply neutron radiation to
the treatment of cancer. His friend Myers related in an interview the risks involved.
Particularly in the early period, shortly after the discovery of the neutron by Chadwick,
cancer patients were sometimes over exposed to neutron rays in this early period from
1937.
In that era the Lawrence cyclotron was only a 37 inch one. During the war years the 60
inch cyclotron became available. Myers: “I knew Stone, he told me he was very sorry he
had ever let neutrons loose on anyone. They really burned the hides off those people.
They lived longer, but they would have been better off dead.“ [76]
From the Myers interview we learn that the neutron was discovered in 1932, and that the
first information on the effects of neutron radiation based medical treatment upon people
was published in three papers : one by Paul Aebersold, one by John Lawrence and the
other by Ernest Lawrence in 1936.
The Fermilab history of Neutron ray therapy confirms the early use of Neutron Ray
Therapy by Stone via Lawrence’s cyclotron. Fermilab further states that Stone’s trials
with this treatment were interrupted by war work occupying cyclotron operation. The
Fermilab history states: “Clinical research began again in 1965 when Dr. Mary Catterall
at Hammersmith Hospital in London began irradiating patients with neutron beams.” [77]
From the foregoing it may be seen that Ernest Lawrence, through the work performed by
researchers located at his Radiation Laboratory, had access to cutting edge nuclear
medical knowledge in regard to the state of the art at that time.
As has been shown, it was soon realized that some products of the fission of uranium had
been previously created via cyclotron and used in human treatments. These substances
were used as internal emitters.
The knowledge also related to human and animal responses to external radiation such as
neutron radiation and X rays. Thus a sophisticated pre war knowledge base existed at the
Lawrence “Rad Lab”, Berkeley and elsewhere.
! 37
Given the prior use in human treatments of Sr89, I131 and P32 as internal emitters, of
which Sr89 and I131 were found to be fission products at various dates after January
1939, and Neutron radiation, also produced by the fission process which activates radio
phosphorus, it is not surprising that Lawrence’s Berkeley “Rad Lab” and its staff were of
intense interest to the Manhattan Project.
Doctor Robert Stone was appointed as Director of the Metallurgical Project’s Health
Division in 1942. [78]
History, including the ACHRE Report, records that the utilization of the Rad Lab and its
staff for military purposes. The pace of work was intense.
In terms of the international race to understand the fission products and identify the
fission products, the Lawrence Rad Lab also made important contributions. Had the
discovery of fission occurred at an earlier time, prior to World War 2, the development of
fission technology may not have occurred in secret and the findings of science would
have been immediately open to international peer review. In the setting of war, this could
not of course occur. [79]
Given that this situation persisted from 1942 to the ending of the Cold War, the actions of
the US President in 1994 regarding Openness remain vitally important.
The United States of America and in all probability, its partner, the United Kingdom,
were aware of the horrific late effects suffered by people in the course of Dr Stone’s
therapeutic use of neutron radiation prior to the US entry into World War 2.
Both nations therefore held prior knowledge of the special suffering people experienced
when Allied atomic bombs were detonated over cities in August 1945. This prior
knowledge is but a part of the total prior knowledge the Allies possessed relating to the
radiological effects of the atomic bomb. This radiological scientific knowledge has been
overlooked in traditional studies of the “Atomic Bomb Decision”. The science of
predicting such effects (and protecting against them) is today called “Health Physics”. It
is a component of Military and Civilian Medicine. The concepts are born of war.
Sources
Medicine and the bomb
[1] Argonne National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, “The "Last Universal
Scientist" Takes
Charge”, http://www.anl.gov/Science_and_Technology/History/Anniversary_Frontiers/u
nisci.html#letter.
[2] Albert Einstein, letter to President Roosevelt, August 2, 1939. A scanned copy of the
letter is available at the Argonne National Laboratory Website
at: www.anl.gov/Science_and_Technology/History/Anniversary_Frontiers/aetofdr. html
]
[3] Brucer, M., “Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, ISBN 0-9625674-0X, Heritage

Publications, St Louis, pp. 198 .
! 38
[4] Time Magazine, 11 August, 1930, “Medicine: Radium Women.”
[5] “The New York Times”, 7 March 1938, “Radium Edict Obeyed; No Compensation
Claims Made in State Since 1934”, pp 19.
[6] Quist, Arvin S., “ORCA. History of Classified Activities at Oak Ridge National
Laboratories”. ORCA – 7, Chapter 2 “Origins of the Manhattan Project”, pp. 2.
www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/rpt/109903.pdf.
[7] U.S. Department of Energy Office of History and Heritage Resources, “The
Manhattan Project An Interactive History:” “Events of the Manhattan
Project” http://www.cfo.doe.gov/me70/manhattan/events.htm Reorganisation and
Acceleration, 1940-1941”, www.cfo.doe.gov.me70/manhattan/reorganisation.htm
[8] “Report and Key Arrangement of Correspondence and Papers of E. O. Lawrence”,

(Redacted) Lawrence, E.O. (University of California) Subject Terms: Human Studies;
Isotopes; Uranium 235, Document Location: DOE/NV Nuclear Testing Archive, P.O.
Box 98521, City: Las Vegas, State: NV, Zip: 89193-8521, Phone:(702)295-0712,
Fax:(702)295-1808, Email: cic@nv.doe.gov, Department of Energy Opennet
Document 16357581.pdf, available at Department of Energy
Opennet, https://www.osti.gov/opennet/ . Correspondence relating to Dr Charles
Pecher is listed on page 29 for 3 periods, 1940 – June (folder 19),1941, July1941 – 1947
(Folder 20) and Patents (Folder 21). Correspondence relating to Dr. Joseph Hamilton is
listed on page 19, covering the years 1938 -1968 in folders No. 14 – 24.
[9] “Cyclotron for Cancer”, Time Magazine, Monday, 28 Nov. 1938.
Auspices of the United States Government”, Chapter 4, paragraphs 24 to
28. Full text available online at:

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/SmythReport/index.shtml
[11] Cochrane, R.C., “The National Academy of Sciences The first Hundred Years, 1863
– 1963”, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1978. ISBN 0-309-02518-4,
pp 419-421.
See also:Henry De Wolf Smyth, ““Atomic Energy for Military Purposes” (The
SmythReport), The Official Report on the Development of the Atomic Bomb Under the
See also: Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, Final Report,

Chapter11, October 1995, Unites States of America, which states: “A May 1941report by
the National Academy of Sciences listed the first option as the “production of violently
radioactive materials….carried by airplanes and scattered as bombs over enemy
territory”. ACHRE Final Report gives the following information in its footnote Number
54:Quoted in Richard Rhodes, The Making of the Atomic Bomb (New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1986), 365. See also Henry DeWolf Smyth, Atomic Energy for Military
Purposes (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, September 1, 1945), 71. Princeton
! 39
physicists Henry DeWolf Smyth and Eugene Wigner reported later that year that the
fission products produced in one day's operation of a 100-megawatt reactor could render
a large area uninhabitable. Eugene Wigner and Henry D. Smyth, National Academy
Project, 10 December 1941 ("Radioactive Poisons") (ACHRE No. NARA-033195-A).
Available at:http://www.hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/ohre/roadmap/achre/chap11_2.html]
Auspices of the United States Government”, Chapter 6, paragraphs 4 and 5.
[14] Glasstone, S., Dolan, P.J., “Effects of Nuclear Weapons”, Third Edition, prepared
and published by the United States Department of Defense and the Energy Research and
Development Administration, 1977, Chapter 8, “Initial Nuclear Reaction”, “Gamma
Rays”, from pp 326 -339, “Neutrons” from pp 340 – 348.
[15] The original “Rad Lab” was a building made available to Lawrence by Professor
Sprout, President of the University of California, in 1931. By 1935, the growing numbers
of staff, including the medical team headed by his brother John, required more space. A
new building was erected and named the Crocker Radiation Laboratory, after the
University of California Regent William Crocker, who donated the required funds. An
Historical Perspective on the Lab's Legacy: A Year-Long Series in The View Part One:
Berkeley Lab@75: A Time to Reflect and Celebrate, From A Small Wooden Building to
a National Laboratory A Legacy of Achievement: the 1930's By Lynn Yarris
http://www.lbl.gov/Publications/75th/files/04-lab-history-pt-1.html
See also: The Journal of Nuclear Medicine, “Newsline”, Volume29 No. 4 April 1988 pp
433.
[16] Stone, R. S., J. H. Lawrence, and P. C. Aebersold. “A preliminary report on the use
of fast neutrons in the treatment of malignant disease.” Radiology 35:322–327.1940. and
Greco, C., Radiotherapy of Prostate Cancer”, Informa Health Care, 2000, ISBN
9057024829, 9789057024825, pp297.
See also: “An Introduction to Cancer Therapy With Hadron Radiation”, Andrew M.
Sessler Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720 May,2008: “J.S.
Stone and John Lawrence (both MDs) used neutrons for therapy in patients, starting in
late 1938, with a major program (250 patients) starting in 1940. Quoting Stone:
“Distressing late effects” and “Neutron therapy…should not be continued “No further
neutron work for 25 years…” See also: “A Brief History of Radiation Oncology at
UCSF” T. L. Phillip available
at: www.ucsf.edu/radonc/academics_training/ABriefHistoryOfRadiationOncology UCS
F.pdf and Linton, O.W., “Medical Applications of X Rays”. “Beamline, Summer 1995,
pp 29. Beamline is the journal of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Centre, a United States
Department of Energy Laboratory.
! 40
Leake, G.A. Alles, T.C. Daniels,
M.H. Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text. Submitted by
Editors July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley,
Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.)
[18] Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, “Final Report”, Chapter 5,

“The Manhattan Experiments, section “The California Experiments”, “Hamilton and his
colleagues had pioneered in using radioisotopes to treat cancer, in particular iodine 131 in
the 1930s. At the time the United States entered the war, they were investigating another
isotope for cancer therapy, strontium 89. Indeed, it was this area of Hamilton's expertise
that attracted the interest of the Manhattan Project. While Stone moved to the Chicago
Metallurgical Laboratory during the war, Hamilton remained at the University of
California's Radiation Laboratory, or "Rad Lab," at Berkeley.”
note by C.D. Leake, editor.) See also: Erf, L.A., Pecher, C.,Proc. “Secretion of Radio-
Strontium in Milk of Two Cows Following Intravenous Administration”, Soc. Exp Biol.
& Med. Vol 45, Oct-Dec 1940, 11825P, pp. 762-764. See also: Pecher, C., Fwd
Lawrence, J., “Biological Investigations With Radio Calcium and Radio Strontium”,
11899 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. & Med., Vol 46 Jan -April1941.
[20] Lawrence, J., Ann Intern Med 1941, 15: 487 and Erf, L.A., Anl M, 15:487, 1941, as
cited by Brucer.
[21] “An Introduction to Cancer Therapy With Hadron Radiation”, Andrew M. Sessler
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720 May, 2008: “J.S. Stone and
John Lawrence (both MDs) used neutrons for therapy in patients, starting in late 1938,
with a major program (250 patients) starting
in 1940. Quoting Stone: “Distressing late effects” and “Neutron therapy…should not be
continued “No further neutron work for 25 years…”
Phosphorus 32 (P32) (J. Lawrence and L.A. Erf)
[22] Lawrence, J., Ann Intern Med 1941, 15: 487.
[23] Anl M, 15:487, 1941, as cited by Brucer.
! 41
Heritage Publications, St. Louis, Missouri, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X, `pp 258 – 259.
[25] ibid pp 259.
[26] a. “Evaluation of Radioactive Fallout” , Armed Forces Special Weapons Weapons

Project, Washington DC. 1955. AFSWP-978 (Extracted). Prepared for Defence Nuclear
Agency, Washington, DC 20305, 15 May 1981 HRE-0808, discussion of neutron induced
radioactivity on ground. pp 10, 11. b. “Australian Participants in British Nuclear Tests in
Australia, Vol. 1, Dosimetry”, May 2006. Michael Carter, Francis (Rob) Robotham,
Keith Wise, Geoffrey Williams and Philip Crouch. Copyright Commonwealth of
Australia 2006 ISBN 1920720 383 Department of Veterans Affairs, Canberra. pp 24
“3.3.3 Delayed Exposure Sources, Activation Products result from neutrons produced in
the explosion, being absorbed by stable non radioactive atoms....which then become
radioactive.”
[27] Shimizu, S., “Historical Sketch of the Scientific Field Survey in Hiroshima Several
Days after the Bombing”, published by the Bulletin of the Institute for Chemical
Research, Kyoto, University, Volume 60, (2), 1982, pp 47.

Heritage Publications, St. Louis, Missouri, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X, pp 263.
[29] ibid, pp 263.
Strontium 89 (Sr89) (Dr Charles Pecher)
[30] a. Lawrence, J., Obituary to Charles Pecher, “Science”, Vol 94, No. 2449, 5 Dec
1941, pp. 53. Brucer gives 1939 as the date Charles Pecher arrived at the Crocker
Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley. b. Pecher, C., Fwd Lawrence, J.,
“Biological Investigations With Radio Calcium and Radio Strontium”, 11899 Proc. Soc.
Exp. Biol. & Med., Vol 46 Jan -April 1941. c. Brucer, pp. 222 d. “Cyclotron for Cancer”,
Time magazine, 28 Nov. 1938)
[31] Pecher, C., Fwd Lawrence, J., “Biological Investigations With Radio Calcium and
Radio Strontium”, 11899 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. & Med., Vol 46 Jan -April 1941, pp 86.
[32] Pecher, C., “A Long Lived Isotope of Yttrium”, Phys. Rev. 58, Issue 9, Nov 1940,
pp. 843.
[33] US Patent Office, Patent Number 2,302,470, “Material and Method for
Radiography”, Charles Pecher, Berkeley, assignor to Research Corporation, New York.
Application May 14, 1941. Serial Number No. 393,416.
[34] Erf, L.A., Pecher, C.,Proc. “Secretion of Radio-Strontium in Milk of Two Cows
Following Intravenous Administration”, Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 45, Oct-Dec 1940,
11825P, pp. 762-764.
[35] ibid.
! 42
[36] ibid, pp 763. Note: The energy level of the Beta emissions from Sr89 is given in this
text as “750,000 electron volts”. This is in error. Pecher gives the correct value as : “1.5
million electron volt beta-particles” in the text of “Biological Investigations with
Radioactive Calcium and Strontium”, pp. 86, which was published as paper 11899, Proc.
Soc. Exp. Biol. & Med. Vol. 46, Jan-April 1941.
[37] G. N. Glasoe (Columbia University, New York, New York), J. Steigman (College
of the City of New York, New York, New York Pupin Physics Laboratories, Columbia
University), “Radioactive Products from Gases Produced in Uranium Fission”, Phys.
Rev. Vol. 58, Issue 1, 1 -6 (1 July 1940, paper submitted 13 May 1940) (APS PROLA).
pp 4 & 5. The authors describe a 51 day half life and denote the isolated Strontium
radioisotope as Strontium 89 citing the earlier work of Stewart, (Physics Review 56, 629
(1939) and Dubridge and Marshall, (Physics Review 56, 706 (1939); 57, 348, (1939).
[38] The US ADTSR “Toxicological Profile of Strontium” gives the energy of beta
radiation emitted by Sr89 as 1.495 Million electron Volts (MeV). The half life of Sr89 is
given as 51 days by this authority. (ADTSR, Toxicological Profile of Strontium, Chapter
4, CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, and RADIOLOGICAL INFORMATION, Table 4-3
Percent Natural Occurrence and Radioactive Properties of Isotopes of Strontium, pp 196.
ADTSR supplied pdf document TP159-c4.)
[39] a. Lawrence, J., Obituary to Charles Pecher, “Science”, Vol 94, No. 2449, 5 Dec
1941, pp. 53. b. Brucer, M., “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine”, ISNB0-9625674-0-
X, Heritage Publications In St Louis, pp. 229.
[40] Erf, L.A., Pecher, C., “Secretion of Radio-Strontium in Milk of Two Cows
Following Intravenous Administration”, Proc. Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 45, Oct-Dec
1940, 11825P, pp. 762-764.
[41] Pecher, C., Pecher, J., “Radio-Calcium and Radio-Strontium Metabolism in

Pregnant Mice”, Proc. Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 46, Jan -April 1941, 11900, pp.92.
[42] ibid. pp. 91-94.
[43] “Historical Timeline, Important Moments in the History of Nuclear Medicine”,

Society of Nuclear Medicine Resource Centre.
[45] ibid.
[46] “Evaluation of Radioactive Fallout” , Armed Forces Special Weapons Project,

Washington DC. 1955. AFSWP-978 (Extracted). Prepared for Defence Nuclear Agency,
! 43
Washington, DC 20305, 15 May 1981 HRE-0808, pp 7, “Physical Aspects of the Fallout
Problem”, Table, “Comparison of Yield Mass Curves for Fission of U235, U238 and Pu
239, Fission Yields for Fission of Pu 239 with Fast Neutrons, discussion to pp 9.]
note by C.D. Leake, editor.) pp 133.
[48] ibid. Appendix pp 135.
[49] ibid. pp 136 – 138.
[50] Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) Final Report, pp.
518, 1995, US Government. See also Staff Memorandum, ACHRE 28/6/94, Historical
Background, “Rad Warfare & Human Experiments”, Advisory Committee on Human
Radiation Experiments, U.S. Department of Energy.
[51] Brucer, pp. 229
[52] The cyclotron operates by way of particle acceleration via magnetic fields. See
Brucer, pp. 209.
[53] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) TOXICOLOGICAL
PROFILE FOR STRONTIUM 4. CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, AND RADIOLOGICAL
INFORMATION Table 4-3. Percent Natural Occurrence and Radioactive Properties of
Isotopes of Strontium, pp 196 TP159-c4.pdf
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp159.html
[54] Greene Shepherd, “Types of Radiation: Basic Theory explained for the non
physicist”, Chapter 13, pp 138, “Medical Response to Terrorism: Preparedness and
Clinical Practice “By Daniel C. Keyes, Jonathan L. Burstein, Richard B Schwartz,
Raymond E. Swienton Edition: 2, illustrated. Published by Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins,2004. ISBN 0781749867, 9780781749862
[55] Moss, W., Eckhardt, R., “The Human Plutonium Injection Experiments”, Los
Alamos Science, Number 23, 1995, pp. 179.
[56] Lawrence, J., Obituary to Charles Pecher, Science, 5 December, 1941,Vol 94, Issue
2449, pp 533
[57] Oral History of Dr. Patricia Wallace Durbin, Ph.D. Conducted November11, 1994.
United States Department of Energy Office of Human Radiation Experiments July 1995,
HUMAN RADIATION STUDIES: REMEMBERINGTHE EARLY YEARS.
! 44
[58] Brucer, M., “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine”, ISNB0-9625674-0-
X,HeritagePublications In St Louis, pp. 229.
[59] Science, Supplement, Vol. 94, No. 2442, 17 Oct. 1941, pp 8. (Pecher is credited
later in the article.)
[60] ibid.
[61] Leake, C.D., “How I Am”, Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Vol
16, 1976, pp 7 – 9.
[62] Scott, K.G., Hughes, Sally Smith, “ Radioisotope Research in medicine: oral history
transcript/ 1979 (c1986), Berkley, Calif. : University of California.1986. Bancroft
Library, History of Science and Technology Program.
note by C.D. Leake, editor.).
[64] DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the Project ACHRE
Report Chapter 5, “Experiments With Plutonium, Uranium, and Polonium”, The
California Experiments, footnote
75. http://www.hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/ohre/roadmap/achre/chap5_fn.html#f n100
[65] Hamilton, J.G., “Metabolism of Fission Products, Progress Report for Period
Ending April 15, 1944”, declassified 1947, re-issued by US Atomic Energy Commission,
MDDC -1001, Argonne National Laboratory, Conclusions, pp 26.
[66] a. DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the Project ACHRE
Report Chapter 6: General Benefits of Radioisotope Research Footnote
96. https://hss.doe.gov/HealthSafety/ohre/roadmap/achre/chap6_5.html b. GE
Healthcare, Canada, http://www.gehealthcare.com/caen/md/metastron.html ]
[67] DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the Project ACHRE
Report Chapter 6, “The AEC Program of Radioisotope Distribution”, General Benefits of
Radioisotope Research, sentence number
1. https://hss.doe.gov/HealthSafety/ohre/roadmap/achre/chap6_5.html
Radio Iodine 131
[68] Soc. Nuc. Med. Resource Center, About Nuclear Medicine, Historical Timeline
Important Moments in the History of Nuclear Medicine ie start of tracer diagnostics.
[69] ACHRE Final Report, Chapter 5, footnote 75, footnote 76 giving one Manhattan
Engineer District Contract awarded to Hamilton as Number as W-7405-eng-48-A
! 45
[70] For example, Hamilton, J. G., Metabolism of Fission Products Progress Report for
Period Ending April 15, 1944. Technical Information Division, Oak Ridge Operations,
AEC, Oak Ridge. Wider reporting by Hamilton within the Metallurgical Project is shown
for example by the document “Metallurgical Project, A.H. Compton, Project Leader,
Health, Radiation and Protection, R.S. Stone, M.D., Division Director, Health Division
Program, May 10, 1943”, document numbers 717325, Report CH-632 55-A, Table of
Contents, item V. Metabolism of Fission Products – J.G. Hamilton, I. L. Chaikoff, D.
Greenberg.
[71] “Metallurgical Project, A.H. Compton, Project Leader, Health, Radiation and
Protection, R.S. Stone, M.D., Division Director, Health Division Program, May 10,
1943”, document numbers 717325, Report CH-632 55-A, pp. 2
[72] 1. Report to Groves of May 1943, entitled “”Review of Possible applications of

Fission Products in Offensive Warfare”. 2. May 26 1943 letter to Dr Robert Stone,
Metallurgical Laboratory, University of Chicago. Secret classification. 6 pages.
[73] a. “US Department of Energy Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap

to the Project, Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) :
Introduction The Aftermath of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The Emergence of the Cold War
Radiation Research Bureaucracy” quoting: "I could hardly believe my eyes," Stone
wrote, "when I saw a series of news releases said to be quoting Oppenheimer, and giving
the impression that there is no radioactive hazard. Apparently all things are relative."
(cited from Robert S. Stone, M.D., to Lieutenant Colonel H. L. Friedell, U.S. Engineer
Corps, Manhattan District, 9 August 1945 ("As you and many others are aware, a great
many of the people . . .") (ACHRE No. DOE-121494-D-1). b. New York Times,
September 12, 1945, in an article written by Laurence quoted General Groves: "The
Japanese claim that people died from radiation. If this is true, the number was very
small." Laurence continued: "The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda aimed at
creating the impression that we won the war unfairly, and thus attempting to create
sympathy for themselves and milder terms . . . Thus, at the beginning, the Japanese
described 'symptoms' that did not ring true."
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0810-01.htm
[74] Albuquerque Tribune, writer, Eileen Welsome, Nov. 15, 16, 17, 1993. Over this
period the “Tribune” ran a 44 page, Sunday Magazine style, article entitled, “The
Plutonium Story”. The importance of this article is described in STAMA Newsletter No.
2, 1995 in its article “Human Radiation Experiment”.
[75] ACHRE Final Report, Executive Summary, Introduction, Appendix E; Presidential

Statement by President Clinton, 1995, The White House, Washington.
See http://www.hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/ohre/roadmap/whitehouse/exesum.ht ml see
also: US Department of Energy Opennet https://www.osti.gov/opennet/
Neutron radiation therapy (Dr. Robert Stone)
[76] Oral History interview of William G. Myers by Sally Smith Hughes, The Bancroft
Library University of California, Berkeley, History of Science and Technology Program,
1986.
! 46
[77] History of Neutron Therapy, Fermilab Neutron Therapy Facility, http://www-
bd.fnal.gov/ntf/history/index.html
[78] Henry De Wolf Smyth, “Atomic Energy for Military Purposes” (The Smyth Report)
United States Government”, Chapter 6, “The Metallurgical Project at Chicago in 1942”
paragraph 6.5. Full text available online at:
http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/SmythReport/index.shtml
[79] Ibid, Chapter 3, “Administrative History up to December 1941” “Interest in Military

Possibilities”, “Restriction of Publication”, paragraph 3.2.
! 47
Chapter 3 Trinity
Such was the progress in the identification of the hazards of the fission products that
Mark Oliphant (later, Sir Mark) wrote: “In 1943, when the first reasonable large-scale
fission yields were examined by us in Berkeley, (Seaborg and MacMillan), and it was
clear that fission products would be a very great hazard if we ever succeeded in obtaining
chain reactions of military significance, the report was labelled with the reddest of
classifications. I was so horrified by the biological conclusions (radiation hazard) of John
Lawrence and Dr Stone…” [1]
Here, Sir Mark confirms that secrecy had descended upon the findings of Charles Pecher
and the other medical researchers, as developed and extended by Hamilton under his
Manhattan Project contract.
As we have seen, Strontium 89 and Iodine 131 are among the fission products. The
biological effects had been studied since the late 1930s, first in medicine and later by
Hamilton for the Manhattan Project. Neutron rays and Phosphorus 32 were also produced
by the bomb and had also been studied earlier. “ Labelled with the reddest of
classifications” with the rest of them as shown by Brucer.
Precautions against the hazards posed were taken for the 16 July 1945 detonation of the
fist atomic bomb in New Mexico. These included the deployment of 160 mobile troops to
evacuate remote towns and farms if deemed required. Radiation monitors were located in
towns many miles distant. Press articles providing cover stories anticipating possible
contingencies were written in advance. The appropriate article would become a press
release after the detonation of the bomb. [2]
A Top Secret Memo dated 21 July 1945 by Shields Warren to Groves details radioactive
contamination of people, animals and land by fallout from the 16 July 1945 explosion.
Warren expressed his opinion that the test site was too small. Fallout dust was detected
200 miles from Trinity. Warren recommended any future test site be sited within a 150
mile radius devoid of any population. [3] The weapon effect most like the gas chemical
warfare of World War 1, nuclear fallout, was proving, like its early ‘counterpart’, to be
very inaccurate; it could not be contained to the confines of small, defined military
targets. It was indiscriminate and the fission products are deadly chemicals in such
circumstances.
Fallout Particles From an Atomic Bomb
The radio-autograph shown above is of one type of fallout particle produced by an

atomic bomb. It is taken from the publication "THE NATURE OF INDIVIDUAL
! 48
RADIOACTIVE PARTICLES VI. FALLOUT PARTICLES FROM A TOWER
SHOT, OPERATION REDWING”, Research and Development Technical Report
USNRDL-TR-208 NS 081-001, 2December 1957, C. E, Adams, J. D, O’Connor,
Chemistry- Technical Objective Radiation and Radiochemistry AW-7. Applied Research
Branch.
It is particles such as those pictured above that provide the means by which radioactivity
is mobilised - by uplift, wind and rain - away from the target assigned to an exploding
nuclear weapon. The particles pictured above emit ionising radiation. Primarily the type
emitted is not like that of a CT Scan. Such particles may, in general, emit alpha radiation
(the fuel), beta radiation (the fission products) and gamma. Some particles emit both beta
and gamma radiation.
There are a number of types of fallout particles produced by nuclear weapons. The types
vary in size and composition. (Source: Ibid.). The particles shown above are
comparatively large.
The Manhattan District Engineers Project (The Manhattan Project) was concerned with
the fallout from the Trinity blast. As we have seen earlier, towns in New Mexico many
miles away from the bomb blast suffered fallout from the Trinity detonation.
Controversy has raged for many decades over the health effects of nuclear fallout -
whether produced by the bombs themselves, by the reactors which produce the
plutonium which fuels the bombs, or from waste disposal and uranium mining, milling
and transport.
A detailed account of the path the fallout cloud produced by the Trinity explosion is
given by Ernest Sternglass in Chapter 10 of his book "Secret Fallout, Low Level
Radiation from Hiroshima to Three Mile Island".
A number of sources confirm that towns, farms and countryside were contaminated by
fallout from the Trinity nuclear test. A short list of some of these sources include:
Memo, From Colonel Stafford L. Warren Chief of Medical Section

Manhattan District To: Major Gen. Groves, SUBJECT: Report on Test II at
Trinity, 16 July 1945, U.S. National Archives, Record Group 77, Records of
the Office of the Chief of Engineers, Manhattan Engineer District, TS
Manhattan Project Files, folder 4, "Trinity Test." 21 July 1945. Available at:
http://www.dannen.com/decision/trin-rad.html
"Day of Trinity", Lansing Lamont, 1965, ISBN-10: 0689706863 ISBN-13: 978-

0689706868. Available at Amazon. Sternglass cites Lamont's book in his discussion of
the contamination of the town of Carrizozo, located 40 miles NNE of the Trinity site.
Lamont was a witness to the Trinity test of July 1945 and a reporter for Time magazine.
"Trinity's Children", Tad Bartimus and Scott McCartney, 1991, ISBN: 0-15-167719-0.
Available from Amazon. These Associated Press journalists describe unusual clusters of
cancers among the rural communities Downwind of the Trinity Test Site.
! 49
The radiological and chemical emissions of the Hanford plant have been a thorn in the
side of the USA for many years. By the 1950s, Karl Morgan was most concerned about
the hot particle emissions from the plant. "The Angry Genie", University of Oklahoma
Press, ISBN 0-8061-3122-5, by Morgan, describes the complex routines nuclear
authorities perform in order to minimise perception of risk and of harm - both within the
industry and in the general public.
General Groves and other US authorities maintained for decades that America's
Plutonium workers were safe. The error of this stance was finally revealed by the Clinton
Administration in 2000: "U.S. ACKNOWLEDGES RADIATION KILLED
WEAPONS WORKERS By MATTHEW L. WALD, Published: January 29, 2000
WASHINGTON, Jan. 28— After decades of denials, the government is conceding that
since the dawn of the atomic age, workers making nuclear weapons have been exposed to
radiation and chemicals that have produced cancer and early death.
The new finding — that the exposure led to higher-than-normal rates of a wide range of
cancers among workers at 14 nuclear weapons plants — raises the prospect of
compensation to them. Although officials cautioned that any decision on that was a long
way off, they said a package could amount to tens of millions of dollars for a group that
might well include hundreds of families.
The new conclusion comes from the government’s most comprehensive review of studies
of worker health and related raw health data. The review accepts the conclusion of many
of those studies, some done under contract for the government, that workers were made
sick by their exposure...."
Of the new conclusion, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said in an interview, ”This is
the first time that the government is acknowledging that people got cancer from radiation
exposure in the plants.”
"The finding is detailed in a draft report prepared by officials of the Energy Department
and the White House with the cooperation of a dozen government agencies.
President Clinton ordered the study in July, when the Energy Department concluded that
some workers at plants that had supplied beryllium to the government for bomb-making
had developed beryllium disease, an incurable lung ailment. The president asked then for
a broad study that would look at the effects of radiation and chemical hazards from
uranium, plutonium and other substances.
Mr. Clinton also asked the group to develop a policy on compensation, but that work has
not been completed.
Legislation proposed by Representative Paul E. Kanjorski, a Pennsylvania Democrat

whose constituents include some of the beryllium disease patients, calls for payments to
an estimated 500 to 1,000 former workers who either have the illness or are at high risk
of developing it. Under that bill, total payments in the beryllium cases could range from
$15 million to $30 million a year, officials said....."
! 50
"In the 57 years since the Manhattan Project began processing radioactive material to
produce bombs, the government has until now minimized the hazards of radiation and
chemicals, criticized epidemiological research that raised questions related to them and
spent tens of millions of dollars in defending itself against lawsuits charging that the
bomb plants had made workers sick...."
"One expert on nuclear weapons manufacture, Robert Alvarez, a former Energy

Department official, welcomed the government’s conclusion that many of its critics had
been correct."
”A review of the studies by a body impanelled by the president is official recognition,”

Mr. Alvarez said. ”That’s what makes this a big deal.”
Daniel J. Guttman, a lawyer for the Paper, Allied-Industrial Chemical and Energy
Workers Union, which represents employees at 11 weapons factories, said of the draft
conclusions, ”That’s stunning.”
”The prior story line is, ‘What’s the big deal, the risks were marginal,’ ” said Mr.
Guttman, former executive director of a commission formed by the Clinton
administration to look into improper radiation experiments using human subjects."
"Richard D. Miller, a policy analyst with the union, said the change was remarkable
because the Energy Department and its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, had
”spared no resources in seeking to defeat claims” by employees who said they had been
made sick by radiation or chemicals."
"One plant that figures in the report is K-25, a now-shuttered Tennessee factory for
enriching uranium. There, Mike Church, the president of the Energy Workers’ local, said,
”It would be a start in the right direction, trying to get help for these people, that the
government is finally stepping forward.”
The industrial process used at the plant exposed workers to radiation and chemical
hazards from uranium, plutonium and fluorine. The union says workers at the plant have
higher-than-expected rates of leukaemia, cancer of the lung and bladder, vision
difficulties and chronic fatigue syndrome, among other health problems...."
"The cancers were found among nearly 600,000 people who have worked in nuclear
weapons production since the start of World War II. They range from leukaemia and
Hodgkin’s lymphoma to cancer of the prostate, kidney, salivary gland and lung."
"The draft does not sum up the instances of cancer resulting from the exposure, although
a senior government official familiar with its contents and preparation said in an
interview that ”my guess, we could be talking about hundreds of cases, in a population of
hundreds of thousands.”
But Mr. Alvarez, the expert on nuclear weapons manufacture, said the number of victims
would depend on how many diseases were linked to radiation. If, as some
epidemiologists believe, radiation damages the human immune system and thus leaves
people vulnerable to a wide variety of diseases beyond those cancers usually associated
with radiation, then the number could rise to the thousands..."
! 51
"Some of the findings are drawn from epidemiological studies performed from the mid-
1960"s onward, a number of them disavowed by the government when they were
published. Others are from data gathered by the Energy Department, which now owns the
plants, by the Atomic Energy Commission, or by their contractors. None of the research
was done specifically for this study." End quote. The New York Times, 29 January, 2000.
The first nuclear victims were isolated by their own government. The template of
suppression and denial was first applied to America's own before it was applied to the
population of an enemy land. During the following nuclear test era, the techniques of
denial and suppression spread world wide.
Trinity was the first bomb, it was not the first release of nuclear fallout. The Manhattan
Project's reactors and industrial plants have that distinction.
The management of the public perception of risk and actual harm seems to have been a
part of the nuclear project from it's earliest days.
Sources
Trinity
[1] Mark Oliphant (later Sir), writing to Hedley Marston, 12.9.56 (AAS –Marston; 21),
cited by Dr Roger Cross , "Fallout – Hedley Marston and the British Bomb Tests in
Australia, R. Cross, Wakefield Press Copyright Roger Cross, 2001, ISBN 1 86254 523 5.
[2] Walker, S., “Shockwave - the Countdown to Hiroshima”, John Murray Publishers,
London, ISBN 0 7195 6773 4, pp. 37 – 39.
[3] Memo, From Colonel Stafford L. Warren Chief of Medical Section Manhattan
District To: Major Gen. Groves, SUBJECT: Report on Test II at Trinity, 16 July 1945,
U.S. National Archives, Record Group 77, Records of the Office of the Chief of
Engineers, Manhattan Engineer District, TS Manhattan Project Files, folder 4, "Trinity
Test." 21 July 1945. Available at: http://www.dannen.com/decision/trin-rad.html Leo
Szilard Online, in honour of Dr Szilard.
! 52
Chapter 4 Hiroshima
In 1946 John Hersey reported that one week after the atomic bomb had flattened
Hiroshima, “Already Japanese physicists had entered the city with Lauritsen
electroscopes and Neher electrometers”. [1]
Reporting on the early radiation surveys conducted by Japanese scientists from very soon
after the bombing, Hersey also writes, “ Japanese physicists, who knew a great deal about
atomic fission (one of them owned a cyclotron), worried about lingering radiation at
Hiroshima..” [2]
There were a number of such radiation surveys, many commencing prior to the
announcement by President Truman that confirmed the bombs used against Hiroshima
and Nagasaki were indeed atomic bombs. [3]
By the evening of the 6thAugust 1945, 10,000 victims of the atomic bomb had arrived at
the Red Cross Hospital in Hiroshima. The building itself had suffered damage from the
blast of the atomic bomb. [4]
Hersey relates how Dr Sasaki and his colleagues working at the Hiroshima Red Cross
Hospital began to recognise the apparently mysterious and in-congruent illness that now
afflicted so many people in Hiroshima, including those who had escaped any other
consequence of the bomb. “The apparently uninjured people who had died so
mysteriously in the first few hours…” [5]
The Hiroshima doctors ascribed three stages to the disease. Each stage was carefully
noted. [6]
The physical symptoms of the disease’s early stages gave way to sudden and wild
changes in the blood of victims. Commencing 25 to 30 days after the bomb, the white cell
count dropped. Bleeding occurred and infection set in. The fever and the blood changes
gave the Hiroshima Doctors the evidence they needed to make a diagnosis. It became
clear that key aspects of the illness resembled that of “over exposure to X rays”.
Although the doctors may have had no training in gamma and neutrons rays, they related
the effects of the weapon to the effects of excess to X Rays. These are all forms of
ionising radiation of course. So their observations led them to the most correct diagnosis
and treatment of which they were capable, in the absence of any other information. “..the
white blood cell count dropped sharply.” [7]
They began the standard treatment for that illness. As far as they could, they gave patients
liver extracts, blood transfusions, and vitamins, especially vitamin B1. They suffered a
severe lack of supplies. [8]
On 8 Nov, 1895, Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen (accidentally) discovered an image cast from
his cathode ray generator, projected far beyond the possible range of the cathode rays
(now known as an electron beam). The age of the medical use of X Rays would shortly
follow. [9] The concept of the medical X ray was well known by 1945. The Japanese
doctors did have a relevant body of knowledge to use, even if X rays are not exactly the
same in their biological effects as gamma or neutron rays and the other forms of radiation
such as alpha and beta. [10]
! 53
The Hiroshima doctors further considered the stages of the illness suffered by so many in
the city. John Hersey in his 1946 book “Hiroshima”, describes the Japanese medical
observations and diagnostic considerations: “Since the blood disorders were, in the long
run, the predominant factor in the disease, some of the Japanese doctors evolved a theory
as to the seat of the delayed sickness. They thought that perhaps gamma rays, entering the
body at the time of the explosion, made phosphorous in the victims’ bones
radioactive, and that they in turn emitted beta particles, which, though they could
not penetrate far through flesh, could enter the bone marrow, where blood is
manufactured, and gradually tear it down. ...Not all the patients exhibited all the main
symptoms. People who suffered flash burns were protected, to a considerable extent,
from radiation sickness. Those who had lain quietly for days or even hours after the
bombing were much less liable to get sick than those who had been active. Gray hair
seldom fell out. And, as if nature were protecting m an against his own ingenuity, the
reproductive processes were affected for a time; men became sterile, women had
miscarriages, menstruation stopped.” [11]
Were these 1945 Japanese medical observations and the Doctors’ conclusions correct? If
the Japanese doctors could diagnose and attempt to treat the illnesses on the basis of their
existing knowledge, did the Manhattan Project have access to the same medical
knowledge before the bomb was used? Did they know the bomb would create illnesses
akin to “overexposure to X rays”? Had the doctors read the work of Lawrence, Erf,
Hamilton, Stone, and Pecher as published in the medical and biological literature
published from 1937 to 1942? Of course. What better experts to consult on the new
weapon than experts in both external and internal radiation.
Professor Sakae Shimizu was a member of the Kyoto University team that made repeated
visits to Hiroshima in order to monitor radiation levels, map the contamination of the city
and to gather samples for study. The findings of the Kyoto team, and the personal events
Dr Shimizu experienced, provide both technical and medical underpinnings that
compliment and confirm the observations, conclusions and medical responses of the
Hiroshima Doctors.
In 1982 Prof. Shimzu wrote a paper which was published as: “Historical Sketch of the
Scientific Field Survey in Hiroshima Several Days after the Bombing”, Prof Sakae
Shimizu, 1982, published by Bulletin of the Institute for Chemical Research, Kyoto
University, Volume 60, (2), 1982. That text is the source for the following.
Prof. Shimizu and the rest of his team first entered Hiroshima on 10 August 1945. This
was some days after the bombing. The team attended a conference at Hiroshima Army
Ordinance Depot, which is located South East of Hijiyama Hill (as such it was a shielded
location). The conference had been convened by the Imperial HQ Joint Army-Navy. A
report drafted by Lt Col Seiichi Niizuma, Imperial HQ Survey Team, records this
meeting. The meeting was told that Hiroshima had been destroyed by an atomic bomb.
The results of radiation surveys conducted at Hiroshima prior to 10 August 1945 were
reported to the meeting. The observations of patterns caused by blast and residual
radiation caused by subsequent activation products of the initial direct radiation burst
from the weapon enabled the Japanese scientists to state that the USA had detonated an
Atomic Bomb. A resultant hypocenter was determined at Long. 132 27 minutes 29
seconds East by Lat. 34 degrees 23 minutes 29 seconds North with an error of about 15
metres. This point is located on the grounds of Shima Hospital, 160 metres from the A
! 54
bomb Dome. This August 1945 Japanese finding gives the bomb a detonation (burst
point) altitude of 580 metres with a plus or minus error tolerance of 15 metres. [12]
Fascist governments are well known for their inhumanity. In war they deserve to be
defeated according to the rules of war. This difference defines the civilized from the
barbaric. Had Fascists, of any nation, gained the bombs first, no doubt they would have
used them in the same manner as Groves did. I believe suitable acceptable and purely
military targets, such as Poison Gas Island, did exist. The island is located about 5
minutes from Hiroshima via B29.
The Kyoto University team made more than one survey of Hiroshima. From direct
measurements of Hiroshima and from the study of soil and other samples taken to Kyoto
for analysis in the laboratory, Prof Shimizu was able to confirm the presence of beta
radioactivity. Prof Shimizu wrote: “ It was expected that if the bomb was a uranium
bomb, a great number of neutrons....might have emitted from the centre of the explosion
and the substances on the ground might be induced to be radioactive by intense neutron
radiation.....it was also expected that in some areas under the mushroom shaped cloud
there could be found various fission products. [13]
The strongest source of beta radiation detected by the Kyoto University team from
samples taken from Hiroshima and studied at the Kyoto Laboratory was that measured
from horse bone. This returned a reading of 637 counts per minute per minute. The
Kyoto University finding of August 1945 attributes this radioactivity to the horse bone
tissue reacting to the neutron radiation which bombarded it. The resulting phosphorous
32 (P32) and to a lesser extent radio calcium produced the radiation readings. [14]
“On in the night of the 19th I spat out much bloody sputa, and I was forced to lie on a bed
for about 13 months.” [15]
Prof Shimizu describes the radiation sickness he suffered as a result of his visits to
Hiroshima. He arrived in Hiroshima some days after the bombing. His radiation
sickness commenced after Japan had unconditionally surrendered.
The illness suffered by Prof. Shimizu appears to be the result of his exposure to
Hiroshima dust and debris. The Shimizu reading of 600 + counts per minute Beta for
horse bone is probably indicative of the intensity of the radioactivity induced in all bone,
human or animal, at the same distance from the hypocenter at the moment the bomb
detonated, flooding the city with neutron and gamma rays.
Allied Occupation Forces arrived in Hiroshima via the Atsugi Air Base and the Chugoku
Military District on September 8, 1945. Under the command of General Farrell the
immediate actions of these Forces resulted in the interruption of the Japanese radiation
surveys, and the start of US command and control of relevant Japanese research and
publication. After arrival, the Red Cross ordered the US to issue a portion of its supplies
to the victims of Hiroshima. The resulting release of 15 tons of medical supplies took
place early that September. [16]
Within Hersey’s reporting of the Hiroshima Doctors’ conclusions regarding A Bomb

Disease, the reader may discern a characteristic of living tissue and its response to
ionizing radiation which has, at least in the past, been named the “Oxygen Effect”. I
quote from Peter Alexander, who wrote the following in 1957: “ The changes produced
! 55
by X and gamma rays in all kinds of living matter are much greater in the presence than
in the absence of oxygen. The radio -sensitivity depends on the amount of oxygen
present, and from Fig. 37 it can be seen that it reaches its limiting value when this is the
same as in air. Enriching the normal atmosphere with oxygen does not increase
sensitivity, but removal of oxygen from the air decreases it.
That means that if a certain change is produced by 100 r in air, then 200-300 r will be
necessary to achieve the same effect in the absence of oxygen. The remarkable aspect of
this oxygen effect is its universality; it applies equally to the lethal dose for animals, the
production of chromosome breaks in bean root or pollen grains, the killing of tumour
cells or bacteria, and the production of mutations in fruit flies. There are two schools of
thought about the mechanism: the presence of oxygen modifies the primary chemical
changes produced by radiation, or the presence of oxygen influences the metabolic
processes necessary for the development of the minute initial chemical change into the
observed injury. No crucial experiments have been made to distinguish unambiguously
between these two possibilities, but the chemical theory seems the most
plausible......Moreover, oxygen must be present during the irradiation itself, and the radio
sensitivity is unaffected by changes in oxygen immediately after irradiation. Since it takes
some time for the injury to develop, one would expect on the metabolic theory that
oxygen would be needed after irradiation...” [17]
Those who were resting at the time of the A bomb explosion were less affected by the
consequent irradiation of their bodies compared to those who were exerting themselves.
This observation by the Hiroshima Doctors is consistent with the Oxygen Effects as
explained by Alexander, 1957.
The human dose response to irradiation is complex. A given cohort of survivors retain
very individual variations. This may upset the Australian Government’s obsession with
statistics in regard to our Australian radiation victims.
On page 188 of his book, Alexander describes one fundamental route by which the effect
may be observed. “Chemical experiments show that oxygen reacts very rapidly with the
hydrogen radical formed by the indirect action of radiation to give another radical, HO2
i.e., H+02 .........> HO2. Oxygen also increases the amount of hydrogen peroxide
produced by radiations of low specific ionization...” [18]
This action is an injurious chemical action caused by the detonation of an atomic bomb.
The weapon caused the formation of hydrogen peroxide to arise from water present in the
living cells of its victims.
To the extent that the Hiroshima Doctors could observe, make consistent conclusions
upon and diagnose injury and recommend treatment based upon evidence presented by
their patients in 1945, to what extent was the Manhattan Project able to predict these
observed outcomes? For the Hiroshima Doctors relied upon only the resources to hand,
which included their own medical knowledge. Knowledge which could not have accessed
the special knowledge acquired by that Allied Project pursuant to the use of the bomb.
Such knowledge became secret some time before 1945. The knowledge of civil medicine
was open. The knowledge of the bomb was secret. The Japanese were however able to
apply one to the other. If that insight was possible in the post bomb chaos and carnage of
Hiroshima, the same medical insight must have been available to the Manhattan Project
! 56
planners and medical scientists as they discussed the weapons’ capabilities and hence,
their plans. This is foresight. The civilians of Hiroshima were not guinea pigs. They were
targets. And so has been every victim since.
“John Lawrence was most interested in the therapeutic possibilities of the cyclotron and
the isotopes that poured out of it. In his first paper describing the therapy of chronic
leukaemia’s with P-32 (Phosphorous 32) he mentioned polycythemia vera therapy almost
as an after thought. It would be reported separately because this job had been assigned to
Lowell Erf. [19] Erf explained that the P-32 did not destroy red blood cells, rather it
depressed hematopoiesis in bone marrow: Because of a red blood cell’s 120 day life span,
immediate relief of symptoms was not expected.......the Red Blood Count may continue
to fall for up to 7 months...After the secrecy of all things nuclear subsided around 1950,
P-32 became the world wide treatment of choice for polycythemias.” [20]
“With the initial declassification of MED (Manhattan Engineering District Declassified

Documents), D. Anthony revealed that the LD50 of intravenous P-32 for man (derived
from animal data) was in the range of 270 mCi (10 GBq).” [21]
As Brucer explained: “Lawrence had been treating leukemia patients with P-32 for
almost 7 years. His P-32 was made at the University until the Manhattan Bomb Project
pre-empted their cyclotron to make the first Plutonium. In order to keep the new work
secret, John (Lawrence) was instructed to continue his P-32 work with lots of papers and
talks. P-32 would be supplied in lavish amounts – one curie per month – from the new
reactor at Oak Ridge.” [22] In respect to neutron radiation, to the extent that Dr Stone
published knowledge on the immediate and late effects of this form of ionising radiation,
the Manhattan Project had prior knowledge. The Allies possessed at least partial insight
into what those within range of the neutron radiation initiated at the instant of the atomic
detonations would, in part, suffer, including the delayed effects of the exposure to
neutron rays as described by Stone in 1940. One of the causes of A bomb disease was
neutron induction of P32 in the bones of the exposed people. This is radio-chemical
warfare. [23]
The Hiroshima Doctors had already suffered under the Japanese Totalitarian Regime.
Confined to their field of treating patients, their written records, created in 1945 and in
the Japanese language, may still survive as a record of the events that did occur. The
informal reports, issued doctor to doctor, likewise might form an “underground record”
of events which escaped the Japanese and American censorship regimes. I hope this is so.
It can be shown that the same considerations that applied to the neutron activation
chemical P32 also apply to the fission products in the case where there was a pre war
medical knowledge of a specific radioisotope. Two examples of this are Strontium 89 and
Iodine 131.
! 57
Visible fallout -The Black Rain Wall
A section of wall from a building in HIroshima. The Black Rain penetrated the damaged roof, and ran
down the walls, which remain today. (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Museum, used with permission.)
The Black Rain began falling 1 to 2 hours after the detonation of the atomic bomb: “This
rain, which almost had the consistency of tar, was a combination of the ash, radioactive
fallout, and water. In at least some cases, severe radiation burns resulted.” (David Field,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Text and Photograph provided by Oak Ridge National
Laboratory , Copyright 1999, used with the kind permission of Mr. Paul Frame, Curator,
Oak Ridge Associated Universities Museum.)
There remains a profound aversion on the part of the World War 2 Allies to admit that
fallout contributed to deaths. “Severe Burns” is as far as we seem prepared to go. The
people had open wounds, suffered exposure, and were malnourished. They had the
intensely radioactive, biochemically active fission products dumped on them. Some of
them were pregnant, some of them were nursing infants. They had high calcium and
Iodine nutritional demands. The chances of internalization of fission products were very
great. The Black Rain was not only an external hazard.
The people of the Black Rain have struggled for decades with a range of intractable
health conditions which conventional experts fail to grasp. Despite decades of advocacy
by people such as Dr. Shuntaro Hida, the plight of survivors is downplayed by
government. Fatigue features strongly in the syndrome of conditions suffered by Black
Rain survivors. Government blames mental stress and anxiety for this. However, the
same authorities recognise fatigue as a condition caused by radiation exposure in the case
! 58
of oncology patients. I believe the attitude toward people who suffered contact with the
Black Rain is a sign of the isolation and exclusion of victims for reasons of political, not
medical, considerations. This isolation and exclusion has followed nuclear
technology around the world since.
The inaccuracy of the atomic bomb remains appalling. This inaccuracy exists both in
relation to the target area and in time. The injury and deaths in the suburbs due to this
inaccuracy have been downplayed for decades.
Dr. Hida has treated over 6,000 Atomic Bomb survivors who suffer Bura Bura disease, a
type of radiation induced fatigue. (Source: The Mainichi Daily News, Japan,
http://mainichi.jp/english/english/features/news/20120123p2a00m0na013000c.html)
References to Dr Shuntaro Hida and his work with Black Rain and other Hiroshima
victims include Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuntaro_Hida
Dr. Hilda's biography can be read at http://wcpeace.org/Hida_bio.htm
Modern Western medical accounts of radiation fatigue due to medical treatment dose
radiation exposure, which are accepted by governments, include the following paper:
Radiation Therapy–Induced Fatigue Linked to Inflammation. Roxanne Nelson,

Medscape:
August 18, 2009 —" Fatigue is one of the most common and disabling adverse effects of
(Radiation)…… treatment, but exactly why it occurs has not been well understood. Now,
preliminary data suggest that activation of the pro-inflammatory cytokine network may
be largely responsible for fatigue that is experienced during
radiotherapy...." http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/707572
Metabolic and other illnesses arise form radiation exposure. The impacts of the atomic
bomb continue to be suffered by people who did not arrive in the afflicted cities until
after the bombs were detonated. These victims of fallout, along with the victims of the
Black Rain,. continue to be isolated and largely ignored by government.
In 2012, despite strong supporting evidence and positive outcomes in the courts, the
Japanese government refused to widen the area acknowledged as being affected by the
Black Rain. As a result, many survivors of the Black Rain who lived in the wider areas
in 1945, failed to gain recognition and medical aid.
Refusal is often the lot of the radiation victim. Cancer is not the only outcome. There are
whole range of still poorly defined and officially denied effects of radiation which do not
fit the conventional, narrow and unrealistic list of health consequences from radiation
exposure.
The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have lived with them since August 1945.
! 59
The Black Rain Map by Takada et. al.
Study of the 1945 effects of the two atomic bombs continues today in Japan. In 1983 a
paper entitled “Uranium Isotopes in Hiroshima “Black Rain” Soil”, written by JUN
TAKADA, MASAHARU HOSHI, SHOZOH SAWADA and MASANOBU
SAKANOUE, was published in the “Journal of Radiation Research”, Vol.24 ,
Vol.3(1983) pp.229-236:
“Abstract: Uranium isotopes were studied to clarify the fallout from the Hiroshima
atomic bomb. The 234U/238U activity ratios of uranium leached from the soil in the
Hiroshima fallout area were significantly higher than those of other areas according to
alpha ray spectrometry. The correlation of specific activity of the fission product 137Cs
and the 234U/238U activity ratios was studied. Two different correlations were
established inside and outside the fallout area. The results of this study suggest that
manifestations of fallout from the Hiroshima atomic bomb are still detectable in the
“black rain” area.” [25]
The research conducted by Takada et al enabled that team to create a map of the areas
affected by enhanced fallout due to Black Rain. The map is reproduced here with kind
permission of the authors and Radiation Research. [26]
! 60
Foresight and Denial
Due to its long life, the radioactivity of the uranium that remained un-fissioned has
enabled modern researchers to map the Black Rain affected area of August 1945. The
fission product radio-chemicals were not confined to a few scattered walls. The rain
encompassed square miles of dense suburbia. People died directly as a result. Because of
the Black Rain, modern researchers are able still write and so warn the world. By the
1950s visible fallout took place a number of times.
Most commonly it presented as a Black Mist, a portion of the cloud separated by

atmospheric conditions which then rolled like a sticky black mist. US nuclear forces
described the nature of fallout clouds as generally containing two or more components.
A thick, black heavy component, and a fractionalised – separated lighter, blue – ish
coloured, less sticky component. Such clouds were seen by Aboriginal Australians in
1953. A account by Jessie Lennon reported these clouds in plain and precise language,
which clearly describe a two part, fractionalised cloud, consisting of a light bluish part
and a heavy, sticky black part. Jessie Lennon described this event with precision similar
to that of trained personnel. The Australian government continues to ignore the surviving
witnesses. [27] [28]
Despite the foresight demonstrated at the Trinity test, on 12 September 1945, the New
York Times published a story claiming that the reports of illness among Japanese
survivors of the atomic bombings of their cities were false. The reporter, Laurence,
wrote: “the Japanese described 'symptoms' that did not ring true." Groves was quoted as
saying: "The Japanese claim that people died from radiation. If this is true, the number
was very small.” [29] In response to similar press reports, Dr Robert Stone, head of the
Metallurgical Division’s Health Program wrote the following to Colonel H.L. Friedell,
U.S. Engineer Corps, Manhattan District, on 9 August 1945: "I could hardly believe my
eyes when I saw a series of news releases said to be quoting Oppenheimer, and giving the
impression that there is no radioactive hazard. Apparently all things are relative." [30]
The illnesses and death caused among civilians resident in Hiroshima and Nagasaki via
radiation insult to bone marrow had been reported by Charles Pecher in 1941. In relation
to animal and patient responses related to his Sr89 based cancer treatment. He wrote:
“Two weeks after the administration of approximately 180 microcuries to each of five
mice, their average white cell count was 4200 cells per cm., whereas the normal value for
mice is approximately 14,000. Nevertheless, the effect on the blood picture is much
smaller than that of a similar amount of radio-phosphorus….” “Some transitory
leucopenia and anemia observed in a patient with metastatic prostate carcinoma and in
another….. after a total administration of 8 and 5 millicuries of radio-strontium,
respectively, must be attributed to the treatment....The idea has been to give as much
strontium as possible without producing any serious damage to the marrow... Important
information has been given by the radioactivity determination on the tissues of an adult
female who died 3 days after the intravenous injection of a simple dose of 0.3 millicurie
of Sr lactate (170mgm. Sr, August 19, 1940). The activity of the bones ranges from 0.05
to 0.15 microcuries per gram wet weight....Similar values were observed in a patient with
multiple myeloma who died two months after receiving 1.7 millicuries of radio-strontium
per gram of tissue in one day gives approximately the same ionisation as a dose of 37 r of
X rays…” [31]
! 61
On the basis of the above, I consider the following official Manhattan Project report came
as no surprise to those who ordered the atomic attacks: “Blood counts done and recorded
by the Japanese, as well as counts done by the Manhattan Engineer District Group, on
such patients regularly showed leucopenia (low-white blood cell count). In extreme
cases the white blood cell count was below 1,000 (normal count is around 7,000). In
association with the leucopenia and the oropharyngeal lesions, a variety of other
infective processes were seen. Wounds and burns which were healing adequately
suppurated and serious necrosis occurred. At the same time, similar ulcerations were
observed in the larynx, bowels, and in females, the genitalia. Fever usually accompanied
these lesions.” [32] The Hiroshima Doctors and the pre 1943 “Lawrence “Rad Lab”
Doctors”: Dr. Pecher, Dr Stone, Dr Lawrence, Dr Erf and Dr Hamilton, all agree on the
acute effects of ionising radiation as they observed these to be.
There is a medical and technical consistency and a pre-existing record that reveals the
Groves Lie and which provides perhaps the motivation to separate history into two
hermetic parts. The pre-war record and the post Hiroshima and Nagasaki record. This is
perhaps why the works of Dr Pecher lay largely forgotten by medicine until 1973.
The Pecher work was not forgotten by the weaponeers. The knowledge he originated
remained in classified secret documents which were constantly referred by the nuclear
weaponeers throughout the era of nuclear weapons testing.
The work of the Doctors at Lawrence’s Rad Lab in the pre-war era used ionising
radiation to ease suffering and prolong life. They very often succeeded. Sometimes they
failed. They helped build the basis for modern nuclear medicine. Because of these early
efforts, we today have better treatment choices open to us. The conduct of the Manhattan
Project, which was a US led joint US – British program, is open to question in regard to
the historical suppression of the facts and the use to which it put medical knowledge.
The extent to which medical / scientific advice regarding the radiological effects of the
bomb drove the decision to use atomic bombs has, I believe, been overlooked by history.
Sources
Hiroshima
[1] Hersey, “Hiroshima”, 1946, First Vintage Books Edition, February 1989,
ISBN 0-679-72103-7, pp 63.
[2] Ibid. pp 72.
[3] Shimizu, S., “Historical Sketch of the Scientific Field Survey in Hiroshima
Several Days after the Bombing”, published by Bulletin of the Institute for
Chemical Research, Kyoto University, Volume 60, (2), 1982.
ISBN 0-679-72103-7, pp 46.
[5] Ibid. pp 76.
! 62
[6] Ibid. pp 76.
[7] Ibid. pp 77.
[8] Ibid. pp 77.
[9] Brucer, Source: Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine,

1600 – 1989”, 1990, Heritage Publications, St. Louis, Missouri, ISBN 0-
9625674-0-X pp 51.
[10] For an explanation of the modern unit of dose equivalent, see the
explanation of the Sievert Unit at http://www.sizes.com/units/sievert.htm
ISBN 0-679-72103-7, pp 78.
[12] Shimizu, S., “Historical Sketch of the Scientific Field Survey in Hiroshima
Several Days after the Bombing”, published by Bulletin of the Institute for
Chemical Research, Kyoto University, Volume 60, (2), 1982, reference 13,
citing Hubbell Jr et al 1969. Shimizu places other early Japanese sources as
placing the hypocenter 130 metres North West.]
[13] Ibid. pp 45.
[14] Ibid. pp 46 - 50.
[15] Ibid. pp 50.
[16] Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum virtual display.
[17] Alexander, Peter, “Atomic Radiation and Life, 1957, Penguin Books,
Chapter 4, “Protection”, Para Heading “OXYGEN EFFECT”, Chester Beatty
Research Institute, Institute of Cancer Research: Royal Cancer Hospital,
London, S.W. 3, pp 166 – 167.
[18] Ibid. pp 188.
[19] Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”,

1990, Heritage Publications, St. Louis, Missouri, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X, pp
258.
[20] Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”,

1990, Heritage Publications, St. Louis, Missouri, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X, pp 258
– 259.
[21] Ibid. pp 263.
[22] Ibid, pp 263.
! 63
[23] Sessler, A. M., “An Introduction to Cancer Therapy With Hadron
Radiation”, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720 May,
2008: “J.S. Stone and John Lawrence (both MDs) used neutrons for therapy
in patients, starting in late 1938, with a major program (250 patients) starting
in 1940. Quoting Stone: “Distressing late effects” and “Neutron
therapy…should not be continued” . “No further neutron work for 25 years…”]
[24] Albert Einstein, letter to President Roosevelt, August 2, 1939. A scanned

copy of the letter is available at the Argonne National Laboratory Website at:
www.anl.gov/Science_and_Technology/History/Anniversary_Frontiers/aetofdr.
html
[25] “Uranium Isotopes in Hiroshima “Black Rain” Soil”, written by JUN

TAKADA, MASAHARU HOSHI, SHOZOH SAWADA and MASANOBU
SAKANOUE, was published in the “Journal of Radiation Research”, Vol.24 ,
Vo.3(1983)pp.229-236. This text is available for download at:
http://www.journalarchive.jst.go.jp/english/jnlabstract_en.php?cdjournal=jrr196
0&cdvol=24&noissue=3&startpage=229
[26] Ibid.
[27] Lennon, Jessie, “I’m the One that Know this Country-The Story of Jessie
Lennon and Coober Pedy” Compiled by Michele Madigan, ISBN 0 85575 351
X, Aboriginal Studies Press for AIATSIS.
[28] Clark, J. C., “Operation Sandstone Radiation Injuries”, 27 July 1948,

LASL document released through US Dept Energy. Document number
0403351 Pdf download at http://worf.eh.doe.gov/data/ihp2/3351_.pdf
The document describes the fractionalized fallout deposits and the beta burn
injuries suffered by US service Personnel after contact with fractionated fallout
condensate from Aircraft filter pads.
[29] Laurence, W. L., New York Times, 12 September 1945, as related by

Amy Goodman and David Goodman in “Hiroshima Cover-up: How the War
Department's Timesman Won a Pulitzer” at Commondreams.org News Centre
[30] US Department of Energy Openness: Human Radiation Experiments:
Roadmap to the Project, Advisory Committee on Human Radiation
Experiments (ACHRE) : Introduction The Aftermath of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki: The Emergence of the Cold War Radiation Research Bureaucracy”
(ACHRE No. DOE-121494-D-1).
[31] Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium

and Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the
Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation
Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley University of California
Publications in Pharmacology. Editor: C. D. Leake, G.A. Alles, T.C. Daniels,
M.H. Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text.
Submitted by Editors July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University of
California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge University Press, London, England.
Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.) pp 133 -138.
! 64
[32] “The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki”, “Radiation Injuries”,
by The Manhattan Engineer District, June 29, 1946 . Sourced from “Atomic
Archives.com” at http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/index.shtml
! 65
Chapter 5 The Cold War - Secret Witness
The popular mythology has Strontium 90, as a long-range, accretion hazard from nuclear
fallout, in pre-eminent place as a substance of concern. Of the numerous fission isotopes
of Strontium, Strontium 89 is one important contributor to immediate fallout radiation
dose and disease.
Strontium 89 is produced more abundantly than Strontium 90 by nuclear weapons. 1

gram of Strontium 89 has a radioactivity of 27,800 curies. 1 gram of Strontium 90 has a
radioactivity of 143 curies. [1]
1 curie is the rate of radioactivity of 1 gram of Radium.[2]
Further, 2.62 x 104curies of Strontium-89, and 2 x l02 curies of strontium-90 form per
Kiloton of fission yield. [3]
The popular culture is imbued with awareness of Strontium 90. This cultural awareness
results from the official pronouncements that are limited to possible future harms from
the gradual build up of strontium, not the actual immediate doses suffered from all fission
products, including the highly radioactive Strontium 89 which gives a very high
immediate dose if internalized. Precisely why it is used in the palliative care of the
terminally ill bone cancer patient.
The wartime secrecy imposed on knowledge related to radio strontium continued after
1945. For example, Hamilton’s “Metabolism of the Fission Products” series of
publications remained secret until 1946, and from then on security provisions related to
the Atomic Energy Act took effect. [4]
Dr. Pecher’s 1940 description of Radio strontium secretion in Cow’s milk is cited in the
context of nuclear fallout in the secret Project Gabriel and Project Sunshine documents of
the 1950’s. [5]
The purpose of Project Sunshine, as explained by the Atomic Energy Commission, is to

"inquire into the nature of the various large-scale disasters which conceivably might
result from the detonation of large numbers of nuclear and/or thermonuclear weapons."
"By “large scale” we here imply areas many magnitudes larger than the immediate
destruction area, and thereby also connote an expanded temporal quality.” [6]
Time and distance were the keys to understanding Project Sunshine and the timed
disclosures related to it. Both have a direct bearing on the doses received from fission
products according to type and rate of radioactivity and half life.
The decision to confine Project Sunshine to the study of accumulating long range global
fallout forms the basis of a deception embodied in public statements made by the US
Atomic Energy Commission and its equivalents world wide.
In his paper “Sunshine and Darkness”, Ralph Lapp describes the deceptive public release
of information regarding Project Sunshine by the AEC’s Libby (the same man who
! 66
witnessed Dr Pecher’s 1940s Strontium 89 trials) : “The existence of Project Sunshine
has been known since January 19, 1956 when Dr. Willard F. Libby revealed it in a
speech.“ [7] Lapp points out that the projected human uptake of radio strontium from
long range global fallout made by the Atomic Energy Commission was underpinned by
secret data.
Libby did not disclose that the AEC at the time was studying Charles Pecher’s pre war
treatment of bone cancer in a review of the data that was secret and related to the dangers
of bomb fallout: “Dear Chuck: Please find enclosed the available data from the
University of California Hospital which was compiled by members of Stone’s staff who
incidentally are quite unaware of the classified nature of this material. I discussed this
matter with Dr. Stone and told him that it should not be discussed with anyone in the
Division of Radiology with the exception of the two of us. … The picture is not too clear
since a number of patients received stable strontium and several others received some
amounts of radio-strontium…. The use of radioactive strontium, Sr89 in the treatment of
patients. The rationale, based on experimental animal studies with metastatic carcinoma
to bone and in osteogenic sarcoma was initiated in 1940 by Charles Pecher”. [8]
The AEC’s secret study of the work of Charles Pecher may be seen as a study of the
immediate effects of radio strontium conducted inside the parameters of a partially
declassified study of long range effects of accumulating radio strontium 90 from fallout.
The nub of the issue lies in the high immediate yield and rate of radioactivity of
Strontium 89 with it’s shorter half life when compared to Strontium 90 lower yield, lower
rate of radioactivity and much longer half life. The choice to study long range effects
rather than short term immediate effects is a false one. Both were needed if one was
going to let off atomic bombs of any type.
Authorities saw fit only to periodically release self serving data that implied risk and
harm only existed as one possible future out come. The claim was that no immediate
danger existed. For example, the AEC had estimated that, "the nuclear bomb yield
required to bring the population of the world up to Maximum Permissible Concentration
is larger than 25,000 megatons.” The information, sourced from the August 6, 1953,
Sunshine document, is cited by Lapp, who quotes further from the document : “…there
may be significant variations of the Maximum Permissible Concentrations levels for
different cultural populations; this factor, together with the large variations in local
fallout, may well result in localized dangerous levels.” [9]
This confirms that the concepts of vulnerable cultures and vulnerable sites (i.e. areas of
high local fallout) were familiar to the AEC. Such a concept can be traced to Hamilton’s
World War 2 use of Pecher’s data regarding diet, calcium concentration and strontium
uptake and retention as I have previously demonstrated. These things, in relation to
strontium., are dependent upon the calcium concentration of the diet.
The AEC’s solution to dangerous levels of local fallout was to suggest a “biomedical
effort on carcinogenic action of ingested and inhaled radioactive materials.” The
Sunshine authors then offer the “possibility of prophylactic control of Sr90 should the
world wide or a local area ever reach what might at that time be considered a dangerous
level. This would be through dietary control.” [10] Diet as a controllable variable in the
context of human uptake of radio strontium is raised by the AEC and its Sunshine
! 67
personnel. As we have seen, Pecher determined that the body cannot distinguish an
element from its radio isotopes. Therefore, the AEC is saying the uptake of all radio
isotopes of strontium, as well as the natural element may be controlled by dietary means.
If diet can be used as a protective measure against the uptake of radio strontium, it is
plausible that diet may also be used to increase the uptake of radio strontium, and so
inflict more harm upon an enemy. Diets vary according to culture. Populations deemed
enemies of a State may be of a different culture. If that enemy diet is comparatively
calcium dilute, that enemy is rendered comparatively more vulnerable to radio strontium
deposited by bombs. This comparative harm lies at the heart of much military planning,
particularly, I believe, in wars of attrition.
Project Sunshine documents cite the research work of Charles Pecher in the period 1940
– 1941. As discussed earlier, Pecher’s work aimed to improve nutrition in the diet of
children and used strontium 89 as a tracer in milk composition and secretion studies in
dairy cows. [11]
As we have seen, the National Academy of Sciences first identified fission products as
the basis for radiological weapons in 1941.
Nutrition had been specifically conceptualized as a component of radiological warfare,

not from 1954, but from 1943. ACHRE notes that: ” Another idea, entertained briefly in
1943 by Robert Oppenheimer and Berkeley physicians Joseph Hamilton and Robert
Stone, two of those subsequently involved in the plutonium injection story, was to put a
radiological agent like strontium in the enemy's food and water supply.” [12] Radio
strontium deposited onto growing crops, pastures and livestock would of course “get
into” the tissues of the body as it is a calcium analogue. Calcium is absorbed and
metabolized, as is strontium and its radio isotopes. [11] [12]
In this light, I see Project Sunshine as the long range monitoring component of a
strontium attack methodology clearly adapted from Hamilton’s application of Pecher’s
1940 observations made in his attempt to improve childhood nutrition. One link remains
in the chain to a “useful weapon”. A method to enable the targeted uptakes from the
blanket fallout deposition.
Sources
The Cold War - Secret Witness
[1] “Toxicological Profile for Strontium”. Extracted from “Table 4-3, Percent
Natural Occurrence and Radioactive Properties of the Isotopes of Strontium”,
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S.A., 2004.
[2] Pauling, L., No More War, pp. 46, Dodd, Mead & Co, ISBN 0 396 08157 6,
1958.
[3] Maxwell, R.D., Palne Jr, R. W., Shea, Jr, T. E., Mitchell, H., Balllnger, E.
R., “EVALUATION OF RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT WEAPONS EFFECTS”
! 68
WEAPONS EFFECTS DIVISION September 1955, AFSWP TECHNICAL
REPORT AFSWP-978 DIVISION September 1955, HEADQUARTERS,
ARMED WEAPONS PROJECT Washington 25, D. C .
[4] Hamilton, J., “Metabolism of Fission Products, Progress report for Period
Ending
April 15, 1944”. Argonne National Laboratory. Date Declassified May 14,
1947.
See also:
b Letter to Dr J. Hamilton from H. D. Young, Director, Information Division,
Argonne National Laboratory, March 20, 1947, discussing declassification and
requesting “original Ditto Copies” of selected reports by Hamilton. (DOE
Opennet Document 16357271.pdf)
[5] Report on Project Gabriel, US Atomic Energy Commission. 1954, which

cites Pecher, C., University of California Publications in Pharmacology #11
117-150 (1942). University of California Press. "Biological investigations with
radioactive Ca and Sr", "Preliminary report on use of radioactive Sr in the
treatment of metastatic bone cancer".(U) as reference 24 and Pecher, C. and
Pecher, J. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. 46 91-94 (1941)."Radio-calcium and radio-strontium
metabolism in pregnant mice". (U) as reference 25. Appendix B “Sr
and Ca metabolism” table references the pregnant mice. Appendix D,
“Experimental Data on Radioactive Strontium Toxicity”, table l references
human patient treated with Sr89 in “early 1940s” at University of California.
Staff involved in Project Sunshine refer to the work of Charles Pecher
regularly. For example, Dr Dudley’s letter to Dr Hamilton of March 31, 1954,
which seeks more information relating to Pecher’s Sr89 cancer treatments.
[6] “WORLD-WIDE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC WEAPONS PROJECT

SUNSHINE”, August 6, 1953 R-25 1 – AEC U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY
COMMISSION, pp 1.
[7] Lapp, R. E., “Sunshine and Darkness”, 1959,
[8] Letter of 4 April 1954 to Dr L. Dunhan, AEC from Dr Joseph Hamilton,

AEC, re medical use of Strontium 89 by Charles Pecher prior to 1942.
[9] Lapp, R., citing “

WORLD-WIDE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC WEAPONS PROJECT SUNSHINE”, August
6, 1953 R-25 1 – AEC U.S. ATOMIC
ENERGY COMMISSION, pp. 8.
[10] “WORLD-WIDE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC WEAPONS PROJECT

SUNSHINE”, August 6, 1953 R-25 1 – AEC U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY
COMMISSION.
Following Intravenous Administration”, Proc. Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 45,
Oct-Dec 1940, 11825P, pp. 762-764.
! 69
[12] STAFF MEMORANDUM, TO: Advisory Committee on Human Radiation
Experiments FROM: Advisory Committee Staff DATE: June 28, 1994
RE: Historical Background on Radiological Warfare and Human
Experiments. Via George Washington University National Security Archives.
! 70
Chapter 6 Born Secret
As much as the AEC might classify its internal documents relating to the Dr. Pecher’s
work secret, all of the original papers had been published worldwide from 1940 to 1942
in specialist journals. Not that in the period from 1945 to 1978 ordinary people had much
chance of gaining access to University repositories, where the published work lay, or of
having much clue of what was in them.
The solution to the Bombers’ problem had already been contrived. The Atomic Energy
Act of 1946 was in effect a “permanent gag order,” according to the Cardozo Law
Review. The provisions of the Act gave rise to a concept which came to be called “Born
Secret”. The AEC gained control of the means by which debate is conducted in an open
society. [1]
When I put questions relating to information I found in Dr. Pecher’s published articles of
the 1940s to Australia’s nuclear regulator, the Australian Radiation Protection and
Nuclear Safety Agency, ARPANSA, the reply came from the Manager, Policy, Security
of Sources Unit. I was informed that the United States had identified strontium 90 as the
greatest long term hazard from nuclear fallout, and that data for other fallout products
could be extrapolated from the Strontium 90 findings. My questions relating to immediate
as opposed to long term hazards went unanswered. I was advised that Australian rainfall,
soil and foodstuffs such as dairy products, grain, vegetables, fruit and meats had their
strontium 90 content studied in the period of Project Sunshine in Australia. [2]
[Aboriginal Australians living a traditional lifestyle consumed none of the monitored
foodstuffs.]
Which does not explain why the immediate doses present in all foods in the period of
nuclear testing was minimized in importance by the official announcements focused on
long term or future risk or why the fallout study was promoted as a purely long term one.
It was not in reality an “either / or” proposition. Both are important.
The terms of the debate about fallout were controlled. In the period of Western nuclear
testing, harms were projected into the future according to the characteristics of strontium
90. The immediate harms were denied by suppressing knowledge first gained in 1940.
The AEC took on the role of issuing such information as it deemed useful and took credit
for its origins. Under the terms of the Atomic Energy Act, sanctions were available for
use against people who used public information and applied that knowledge in the debate
against nuclear testing. The hallowed halls of academe were hard to penetrate by lay
people in the 1950s and qualified experts such as Linus Pauling were hounded, subject to
legal proceedings and not allowed to travel abroad. Though world outcry did result in
Pauling getting his passport back from the US State Department in time to receive the
Noble Prize. His second one. [3] An informed public seem to be a direct threat to nuclear
interests. Immediate hazards imposed by government, when known and understood by a
population, tend to change the intentions of voters. Or so it seems to me.
! 71
Sources
Born Secret
[1] Morland, H., “BORN SECRET”, Cardozo Law Review. VOL 26, NO 4,
MARCH 2005, PP. 1401-8
[2] Letter from Mr Peter Colgan, Manager, Policy and Security of Sources
Unit,
ARPANSA, 9 August 2004, Ref No. S2000/0057.
[3] “Linus Pauling: Nobel Laureate for Peace and Chemistry”, Notable
Americans - Unitarians, Blair, T. Harvard University, 2005. Pauling’s anti
nuclear activism resulted in loss of research funding, and effectively his job at
Cal Tech. The US government denied him a passport to travel to the United
Kingdom to lecture on the nature of protons. He was denied a passport by the
US Government for two years. On winning the 1954 Nobel Prize for
Chemistry, the resultant publicity embarrassed the United States of America
into allowing one of its most lauded scientists to again travel abroad. He was
monitored and questioned by the FBI. The stated reason for the two year ban
on international travel was that Pauling’s “Anti-communist statements aren’t
strong enough.” Clearly the detonation of atomic bombs by the Free World
was reducing freedom, not defending or enhancing it.
! 72
Chapter 7 The Marshall Islands
The victims of the Castle Bravo fallout disaster of 1 March 1954 were studied intensely
and official descriptions presented a minimised portrayal of their suffering: “The skin has
been carefully observed at 6 months, 12 months, 2 years, and 3 years after exposure, and
there is no evidence at the present time of any breakdown in the early burns of the skin,
there is no evidence of the development of cancer at this time. In time the depigmented
scars are still evident. The individuals have been seen on two occasions by a plastic
surgeon, Dr. Bradford Cannon, of the Harvard Medical School, who feels that no plastic
repair is necessary and that the prognosis in general is good.” [1]
Would Dr Cannon have felt the same had his wife or daughter been a victim?
The Marshall Islanders suffered major contamination by nuclear fallout. This was both
external as a skin dose; it was also internalized. Hundreds of claims from victims of
cancer were eventually accepted by the United States. The external harm, the Beta
radiation burns, was an indicator of the risk of internalization of the fission products. [2]
“In June 1983,…the U.S. recognized the contributions and sacrifices made bythe people
of the Marshall Islands in regard to the Nuclear Testing Program and accepted the
responsibility for compensation owing to citizens of the Marshall Islands for loss or
damage to property and person resulting from that testing….” “of [the] 1,999 awardees,
more than 1,000 have died receiving only partial payment awarded for their personal
injuries. As of December 31, 2006, a total of $73,261,198 paid to those awardees or their
heirs, leaving an unpaid balance of $18,140,802.” The 36 medical conditions for which
the payments have been made are: 1. Leukaemia (other than chronic lymphocytic
leukaemia). 2. Cancer of the thyroid. 3. Cancer of the breast. 4. Cancer of the
pharynx. 5. Cancer of the oesophagus. 6. Cancer of the stomach. 7. Cancer of the
small intestine. 8. Cancer of the pancreas. 9. Multiple myeloma. 10. Lymphomas
(except Hodgkin's disease). 11. Cancer of the bile ducts. 12. Cancer of the gall bladder.
13. Cancer of the liver (except if cirrhosis or hepatitis B is indicated). 14. Cancer of the
colon. 15. Cancer of the urinary tract. including the urinary bladder, renal pelves, and
urethra. 16. Tumours of the salivary gland. 17. Non-malignant thyroid nodular disease
(unless limited to occult nodules). 18. Cancer of the ovary. 19. Unexplained
hypothyroidism (unless thyroiditis indicated). 20. Severe growth retardation due to
thyroid damage. 21. Unexplained bone marrow failure. 22. Meningioma. 23. Radiation
sickness diagnosed between June 30, 1946 and August 18,1958, inclusive. 24. Beta
burns diagnosed between June 30, 1946 and August 18, 1958, inclusive. 25. Severe
mental retardation (provided born between May and September 1954, inclusive, and
mother was present on Rongelap or Utirik Atolls at any time in March 1954). 26.
Unexplained hyperparathyroidism. 27. Tumours of the parathyroid gland. 28. Bronchial
cancer (including cancer of the lung and pulmonary system). 29. Tumours of the brain,
including schwannomas, but not including other benign neural tumours. 30. Cancer of the
central nervous system. 31. Cancer of the kidney. 32. Cancer of the rectum. 33. Cancer
of the cecum. 34. Non-melanoma skin cancer in individuals who were diagnosed as
having suffered beta burns under number 24 above. 35. Cancer of the bone. 36.
Autoimmune thyroiditis. [3]
! 73
Sources
The Marshall Islands
[1] JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY SUMMARY-ANALYSIS OF

HEARINGS MAY 27-29, AND JUNE 3-7,1957 ON THE NATURE OF
RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT AND ITS EFFECTS ON MAN AUGUST 1957
[2] ibid.
[3] Marshall Islands Nuclear Claims Tribunal, June 11, 2007
! 74
Chapter 8 Australia
That there was immediate danger is established by matching the Australian Aboriginal
experience and history with the technical data. Jessie Lennon’s description of the 1953
Atomic Cloud incident known as the Black Mist for example, matches that of military
radiation experts trained to report observations based on the technicalities of fallout
component fractionalisation. [1] Jessie describes the differing characteristics of the
differing fractions. [2]
In response to the persistence of reports which related the horror of the Black Mist
incident, in 1980 Professor Titterton told national radio : “No such thing can possibly
occur. I don’t know of any black mists. No black mists have ever been reported until the
scare campaign was started. …If you investigate black mists sure you’re going to get into
an area where mystique is the central feature.” [3]
US military photographs of Black Mists in Nevada have existed for decades. A cloud
spreading both horizontally at ground level and vertically is contained in the University
of Houston’s Digital History site at :
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/do_history/decisions/images/atomic_cloud.jpg
A photograph taken in 1953 of a Black Mist in Twin Springs, Nevada was supplied to
Carol Gallagher by Martha Bordoli Laird and Joe Fallini. Martha: “I have pictures here to
prove it. There’s a big cloud coming in. You could see where the cloud was coming in
with the radiation of a blast.” [4]
Lallie Lennon’s description of the origins of the burns she suffered to her arms and legs,
as recorded in the film “Backs to the Blast, an Australian Nuclear Story”, Composite
Films, Producer: Harry Bardwell, (1981), is striking in its similarity to the experience of
the Marshall Islanders who also suffered Beta Radiation Burns from fallout.
Aboriginal Australians were and are ignored by authorities. I believe many people were
misdiagnosed and denied access to their own hospital records after they suffered Beta
radiation burns, deaths of elders and deaths of children in the Australian bush. To this day
some Aboriginal victims of fallout have to bath in tar based solutions in order to ease the
skin condition they suffer as result. [5]
The ability of authorities to deny their own knowledge and consequent foresight in
relation to the harms they cause rely upon the control of the historical record by any
means. It includes lies, denial, racial taunts, and suppression of evidence. Including the
suppression of knowledge originated in the 1940s by Charles Pecher. Marshall Brucer
observed: “Well over 10,000 papers should have listed Pecher in their bibliography. But
very few give him credit.” [6] Dr Pecher’s name and part of his knowledge base has been
suppressed from the popular and scientific culture. And along with that suppression went
a much firmer hope of justice in the courts for the nuclear victims. Dr Pecher's work was
suppressed to deny the power of knowledge to the victims. This is the salient
feature. Had the public known what they were actually being dosed with, the bombs
would have stopped earlier than they did. Perhaps the fate of the nuclear reactor industry
hung in that balance as well.
! 75
Sources
Australia
[1] Clark, J. C., “Operation Sandstone Radiation Injuries”, 27 July 1948,

LASL document released through US Dept Energy. Document number
0403351 Pdf download at http://worf.eh.doe.gov/data/ihp2/3351_.pdf
The document describes the beta burn injuries suffered by US service
Personnel after contact with fractionated fallout condensate from
Aircraft filter pads. The condensate was fractionated.
See also Report on Project Gabriel, US Atomic Energy Commission. 1954,
for description of fractionation.
[2] Lennon, Jessie, “I’m the One that Know this Country
-The Story of Jessie Lennon and Coober Pedy” Compiled by Michele
Madigan, ISBN 0 85575 351 X, Aboriginal Studies Press for AIATSIS.
[3] “The British Nuclear Weapons Programme 1952 – 2002”, Editors Douglas
Holdstock and Frank Barnaby, Cross, Roger, Chapter Nine, “British Nuclear
Tests and the Indigenous People of Australia”, pp 81, ISBN 0- 7146-8317-5,
Frank Cass & Co, London.
[4] Gallagher, Carol, Contributor Keith Schneider “American Ground Zero

The Secret Nuclear War”, Published by MIT Press, 1993 ISBN 0262071460,
9780262071468, pp 116, 117.
[5] An Interview with Lallie Lennon and Michele Madigan, Port Augusta, May
2006. Transcribed by Paul Langley 26.5.06
[6] Brucer, M., “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine”, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X,

Heritage Publications In St Louis, pp. 229.
! 76
Chapter 9 Repeated Exclusion
An Australian government document described the exclusion of Aboriginal Australians

and Nuclear Test Participants from official health considerations are follows:
“Two population groups are excluded from the (Exposure Dose) calculations. They are
the Aboriginals living away from population centres and the personnel involved directly
in nuclear test activities. Otherwise, the total population is represented in the estimated
radiation doses.” [1]
In other words, those most affected were excluded.
The Howard government originally promised to include Aboriginal people and

Pastoralists in the nuclear test health study announced in 1999. The responsible minister,
Bruce Scott, MP, stated: “I have announced the compilation of a nominal roll of ex-
service personnel involved in the testing and also civilians, aborigines and pastoralists,
for whom information is available. This nominal roll will be used to conduct mortality
and cancer incidence studies of Australians involved in the UK nuclear tests. This will
enable the Government to determine if current compensation and assessment
arrangements are sufficient.” [2]
In March 2006 the then responsible minister, Mr Bruce Billson, MP, emailed me as
follows: “Indigenous Australians were excluded from the study because there is no
available list of Indigenous Australians who were present in the areas of the tests at the
time. In the 1950s and 1960s the indigenous population was not counted in the census
and there were no records kept of Indigenous Australians who lived in the test areas.” [3]
This exclusive act is abhorrent and disgusting. The authorities did not want to know in
the 1950s. And today Ministers of the Crown justify an exclusion from study on the
grounds of lack of knowledge. Rather, admitted ignorance is a call to study to any
enlightened mind.
So again, the obvious signs of external contact with Beta emitters - residual Beta
radiation burn damage - has been ignored, along with the incipient internal dose, as
recently as 2006.
The beta burns carried by Australians date from 1952 to 1957. Every official instrument
created to examine the impact of the atomic tests has failed to admit the evidence these
beta burns present. For they represent both as proof of suffering and as technical
biological markers of external dose received. The skin lesions can be read as a form of
dose marker from which actual external dose can be determined. [4]
What did the Australian Government find and conclude about the state of health of those
who were included in the health survey?
In regard to Australia’s Nuclear Veterans, the “Mortality and Cancer

Incidence Main Findings” document of the "Australian Participants in British
Nuclear Tests in Australia Study", Department of Veterans Affairs, Commonwealth of
Australia, June 2006, states the following:
! 77
“The cancer incidence study showed an overall increase in the number of
cancers in test participants, similar to that found in the mortality study. The
number of cancer cases found among participants was 2456, which was 23%
higher than expected. A significant increase in both the number of deaths and
the number of cases was found for (figures in brackets show increase in
mortality and incidence):
• all cancers (18% and 23%)
• cancers of the lip, oral cavity and pharynx (50% and 41%)
• lung cancer (20% and 28%)
• colorectal cancer (24% and 16%)
prostate • cancer (26% and 22%).
The number of cancer cases (but not the number of deaths) was also
significantly greater in test participants for the following cancers (figures in
brackets show increase in incidence):
• oesophageal cancer (48%)
• melanoma (40%)
• all leukaemias (43%)
all leukaemia’s except chronic lymphatic leukaemia (61%).
Other findings included:
• of the 26 mesothelioma cases in test participants, 16 occurred in RAN
personnel, which was nearly three times the number expected
in RAAF personnel, there was nearly double the expected number of deaths
from melanoma, and cases of melanoma were increased by two–thirds.
The increases in cancer rates do not appear to have been caused by
exposure to radiation.”
Full texts of the documents are available for download at the Department of Veterans
Affairs website:
http://www.dva.gov.au/aboutDVA/publications/health_research/nuclear_test/Pages/index
.aspx
It is par for the course that the Australian Government finds that the increased rate of
cancer suffered by the nuclear veterans was not caused by radiation.
It is of course a self serving statement. The scientists involved could not account, they
said, for the increased risk of cancer the veterans suffered. In the draft document, they
guessed that petrol fumes in the desert were to blame. Handy to overlook the obvious
cause, the events which caused the veterans to become a cohort in the first instance: The
series of atomic bomb tests England felt happy to conduct in Australia.
The history of nuclear weapons technology is a history of the isolation and

denial of the claims of personnel ordered into hazardous environments. The
denial of harms to civilians and those in harm’s way continues. Things have
not changed much since 1953.
! 78
Suspected Beta Radiation Burns in the Australian Outback
In 1953 the late Kukkika was a young girl, living in South Australia's northern
areas. October of that year saw the first British bomb test series in South Australia take
place at Emu Field, a large clay-pan in the northern part of the state.
Over a period of many years working in the northern parts of Southern Australia, Sister
Michele Madigan came to know Kukkika.
Kukkika told Michele that one night during the time of the bombs, she had gone to sleep
on the ground. The next day she woke up unwell; her skin was scarred white and
painful.
Kukkika with sound reason believed that the ground upon which she and her people had
camped had been contaminated by fallout from atomic bomb tests.
The photographs taken by Michele show severe de-pigmentation of Kukkika’s skin.

Kukkika suffered this disfigurement for over fifty years with no aid or acknowledgement
from successive governments
I believe the suffering of Kukkika was caused by beta radiation burns. The photographs
accord with those taken of people who suffered similar injuries in the Pacific as a result
of US nuclear weapons tests. The US has acknowledged this.
Kukkika was not the only Australian to suffer in this manner. Many people have, and
do so still.
Lallie Lennon was an adult when the smoke from one of the Emu Field bombs engulfed
her and her son Bruce. The tent in which her two daughters slept was also engulfed by
the thick, heavy, twin coloured smoke.
Lallie and Bruce suffered sickness and painful skin. Lallie also suffered a loss of skin
colour, the affected areas turning white.
The symptoms have lasted ever since. At the time her suffering first started, doctors
refused to give a diagnosis.
Lallie was interviewed in the film "Backs to the Blast", made in the 1981 by Harry
Bardwell. In the film she is asked why her skin is scarred and white in the affected places.
Lallie tells her story on film. [5]
Many other Australian Aboriginal people have suffered the same skin condition from the
bomb smoke. People were blinded and some people died.
When I saw Harry Bardwell's film, and saw and heard Lallie speak, I could not
understand why no-one had told her condition is called Beta Radiation Burn.
That was a little while ago now. The government says Australian Aborigines got sick
because they were scared of the bomb smoke that engulfed them. Maybe. But that is a
! 79
stupid answer to the questions. While did Yami go blind? Why were Kukkika and Lallie
burnt white? Fear cannot do that. It takes a Special Weapon.
Lallie has spoken long and strong about all this. Lallie has written a book entitled
"Maralinga Dust". [6]
Yami Lester has also told his story in his book. [7]
Jessie Lennon wrote a book. [8]
Some people in Australia remember these things.
Sources
Repeated Exclusion
[1] Wise, K.N., Moroney, J.R., “Public Health Impact of Fallout from British Nuclear
Weapons Tests in Australia, 1952 – 1957, Australian Radiation Laboratory,
Commonwealth of Australia, ARL/TR 105, ISSN 0 157-1400, May 1992, (reprint) pp. 2.
[2] “Commonwealth of Australia Parliamentary Debates HOUSE OF

REPRESENTATIVES Official Hansard, TUESDAY, 10 AUGUST 1999, THIRTY
NINTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FOURTH PERIOD, CANBERRA”
[3] The Hon Bruce Billson MP, Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Minister Assisting the
Minister for Defence, Federal Member for Dunkley, email to Mr Paul Langley, March
2006.
[4] IAEA publication “Diagnosis and Treatment of Local Radiation Injuries, Module
XIII”. This is available at :
http://www.pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/eprmedt/Day_3/Day_3-10.pps [5]
[5] Film Title: Backs to the blast [videorecording] : an Australian nuclear story /
production and direction, Harry Bardwell. Other Creators: Bardwell, Harry. Published:
Adelaide : Composite Films [for] Australian Film Commission, Creative Development
Branch, c1981. Physical Description: 1 videocassette (VHS) (50 min.) : sd., col. ; 1/2 in.
Subjects Uranium mines and mining. Uranium industry -- South Australia. Radioactive
waste sites -- South Australia. Nuclear weapons -- South Australia -- Testing. Summary:
A documentary history of the uranium and nuclear industry in South Australia from 1910
to 1980. Incorporates a mass of rare archival footage and contemporary interviews with
workers, scientists and politicians, presenting an analysis of the effects of uranium and its
products. Provides a detailed examination of the uranium mine at Radium Hill, the
uranium oxide refinery at Port Pirie and the British atomic weapons test site at Maralinga.
Credits: Photography, Gus Howard, Philip Bull ; film editor, Andrew Prowse ; narrator,
Martin Vaughan. Notes: Issued also as motion picture. Language: English. Dewey
Number 363.1/79/0994. Libraries Australia ID 5346898. " National Library of Australia.
[6] Maralinga dust / Lallie Lennon

Lennon, Lallie Kantjuringa Local call number: B P957.37/W1 Principal Author: Lennon,
Lallie Kantjuringa Title: Maralinga dust / Lallie Lennon Source: Women of the centre /
! 80
edited by Adele Pring Apollo Bay, Vic.; Pascoe , 1990; p. 88-98; ill., map, port. Imprint:
1990 Annotation: Personal observation of effects of Maralinga testing on health of her
family Collection: Print - Book Analytics Topical: Defence - Missile and weapons testing
- Nuclear weapons Topical: Family Topical: Health - Gastrointestinal system Topical:
Health - Skin physiology and disease Place: Maralinga (Far West SA SH52-12) The
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Mura Library
Catalogue
[7] Lester, Yami & Institute for Aboriginal Development (Alice Springs, N.T.) 1993,
Yami : the autobiography of Yami Lester, Institute for Aboriginal Development, Alice
Springs
[8] Lennon, Jessie and Madigan, Michele I'm the one that know this country! (Revised
ed). Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra, 2011.
! 81
Chapter 10 Insight Fosters Resistance
Oliphant and Titterton, both war time members of the Manhattan Project, brought much
knowledge to Australia. [1]
Oliphant was excluded groundlessly from the Atomic Weapons Test Safety Committee as
a security risk. Titterton, the trusted one, held divided loyalties to Australia due to his
continuing security obligations to both the United States and England. Titterton became
the longest serving Chair of that Committee. [2]
Dr Hedley Marston was a leading Australian bio-chemist. He had worked at Adelaide

University from pre-war days. In response to a specific British request to the CSIRO in
1955, Marston took the opportunity to undertake an independent study. He would survey
the thyroids of sheep for the fission product Iodine 131. The CSIRO reminded Marston of
the strict secrecy required. [3]
By this method, Marston found the fission product to be present in high levels over a
wide area of the country. Marston decided to not only monitor the Radio Iodine, but to
also use the Radio Iodine figures to calculate the Radio Strontium load: “ The I 131 is a
valuable indicator which stresses the capacity of a grazing dairy cow to concentrate
substances of this sort, and virtually channel them via milk into the tissues of infants.
Concentrations of Strontium 90 within the skeletons of youngsters consuming milk from
cows in these areas is a hazard ….And to make matters worse the plumes of five more
explosions are being aimed in this general direction.” [4]
Marston seems to have had a remarkable insight into the nature of the fission fallout
products. As the doyen of the CSIRO’s Division of Animal Nutrition, Hedley could
reasonably be expected to keep his eyes out for publications covering cutting edge
research related to his field. [5]
The “Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine”, volume 45
October – December 1940 was received by the University of Adelaide’s Barr Smith
Library. On page 762, paper number 11825P is entitled “Secretion of Radio-Strontium in
Milk of Two Cows Following Intravenous Administration” by L.A. Erf and Charles
Pecher, introduced by John Lawrence, Crocker Radiation Laboratory, University of
California, Berkeley, California. I cannot prove that Hedley Marston read it. But I
strongly believe he did. And as a result he was “ready to roll” in September 1956.
! 82
Strontium 89 and Strontium 90 Creation and Decay
! 83
Fallout Maps - Nine of Twelve Atomic Bombs Detonated in Australia
Nine Maps showing fallout from nuclear tests conducted in Australia, taken from the
Report of the Royal Commission into British Nuclear Tests in Australia : Conclusions
and Recommendations, J.R. McClelland, J. Fitch, W.J.A. Jonas. Australia. 1985. Maps
for the Hurricane and Totem series of atomic have not been released. The "All Maps
! 84
Combined" graphic is an un-calibrated overlay of the nine official maps produced by P.
Langley.
At the time of the nuclear tests, conducted from 1952 until 1957, each detonation was
declared perfectly safe. The image above visualises the potential for bio-accumulation
and the accumulation of dose the test series actually presented.
The various fission products from each bomb detonation have various half lives which
prevent a linear physical accumulation of total fission yield.
The person experiencing dose from each fallout event however suffers an accumulating
dose. This dose would not have accumulated in Australians if the tests had not taken
place.
At the time public opposition was dismissed as being un-Australian by authorities.
Sources
Insight fosters Resistance
[1] Cockburn, S., Ellyard, D., “Oliphant, the Life and Times of Sir Mark
Oliphant”, Axiom Books, 1981, pp. 114 & 119
[2] Cross, R., “Fallout – Hedley Marston and the British Bomb Tests in
Australia”, Wakefield Press, Adelaide pp 57; Conclusions of the Report of the
Royal Commission in British Nuclear Tests 12.10.102
Australia”, Wakefield Press, Adelaide pp 21 – 24
[4] Letter from Hedley Marston to Mark Oliphant 7 Sept 1956, AAS – Marston;
21. Cross, pp50.
Australia”, Wakefield Press, Adelaide pp. 10
! 85
Chapter 11 The Blessing as a Curse
The 1940 paper by L.A. Erf and C. Pecher commences: “The milk of cows varies
markedly and is quickly influenced by the food ingested. To the paediatrician interested
in infant nutrition this fact carries great significance…”[1] “7.88% of the administered
dose of radio strontium was secreted in the milk of one cow, and 11% of the dose was
secreted in the milk of the second cow.” [2]
From these secretion figures, it can be seen that roughly 90% of the radio strontium dose
did not end up in the milk within the confines of that experimental setting.
Strontium is a calcium analogue. In the context of nuclear fallout one would expect it to
concentrate in the food chain in the same places calcium does.
Marston’s concern for children drinking cow’s milk is well placed in the context of the
diet of European society in Australia at the time. Children cannot go without calcium for
any significant period. How did children without access to bovine dairy milk fare in this
regard? Did the lower concentration of calcium in their diets and lack of strontium
discriminating biological barriers render them actually more vulnerable to radio strontium
uptake?
Are plants able to discriminate against strontium as well as the bovine dairy cow? Do
plants have as high a concentration of calcium as bovine milk? What populations were
exposed to contaminated dust?
The cow, the goat, local meats, the staple fruits, grains and vegetables became Trojan
horses in the conduct of a global contest of attrition during which nuclear weapons were
used. It was called the Cold War. We bombed ourselves. Some of us were more
vulnerable than others. Those with a calcium rich diet were relatively better off than
those with a calcium dilute diet. The risks were not evenly spread. The calcium supply in
all foods, in all diets, was contaminated with radio-strontium from the global and local
bomb tests.
Sources
The Blessing as a Curse
Following Intravenous Administration”. 11825P, “Proceedings of the Society
for Experimental Biology and Medicine”, volume 45, October – December
1940, pp 762.
Following Intravenous Administration”. 11825P, “Proceedings of the Society
for Experimental Biology and Medicine”, volume 45, October – December
1940, pp 764.
! 86
Chapter 12 Culture, Diet and Targeted Radio Strontium Uptake
In 1953 Dr Libby (as we recall, a witness to Dr Pecher’s work of the 1940s), “found
the Strontium to Calcium ratio in milk from 10 farms to be 15% of that of the alfalfa
on which the cows were feeding (range 9-36%, with the spread probably attributable to
sampling errors of various sorts).” [1] The field finding is in keeping with the laboratory
results of strontium secretion into milk as reported by Erf and Pecher in 1940. The 1954
Report on Project Gabriel acknowledged dairy milk as the main source of calcium in the
American diet. (This was a stereotypical diet, a description which ignored the wide
variation in cultures and dietary norms throughout the USA.) Thirteen years after Dr.
Pecher’s originally published data, the AEC were busy secretly conducting field trials
based upon them.
An AEC funded paper reported that : “In the United States, it has been estimated that
from 70 to 80% of the calcium in the human diet originates from milk or milk products.
Fortunately, considerable discrimination against strontium in favour of calcium occurs in
the passage of these alkaline earths from the diet of the dairy animal to the milk. Were it
not for this differential metabolism, the Sr 90 content of the human population would be
about five times higher than otherwise.” [2]
Though the global calcium supply in foods had been contaminated, some diets resulted in
more calcium and less radio-strontium being accumulated. Were diets where bovine
dairy products are absent better or worse off than the Western diet?
A comparison between Western and Non Western diets often reveals differences in
sources of calcium. In 1962, “Science” published an Atomic Energy Commission
sponsored article entitled “Strontium-90 in Man V” which states: “Cities in the Southern
Hemisphere showed levels in bone about half those for cities of Western culture in the
Northern Hemisphere in 1960, yet the fallout in the Southern Hemisphere is only one-
fourth that in the Northern Hemisphere. This is attributed to differences in diet, with a
higher milk component in the Northern Hemisphere”. [3]
The human bones from the Southern Hemisphere held far more radio strontium than
expected on the basis of fallout accumulation alone. Diet was known to be the cause of
this increased uptake of radio strontium. The AEC identified the lack of concentrated
calcium in the diet to be the cause of the higher southern hemispheric radio strontium
uptake.
A comparison of the radio strontium uptakes found in the diets of vegetarians and non
vegetarians provides a measure of the relative protections offered by the dietary
variants. Such a comparison was undertaken in India in 2000. The results show: “..the
internal dose due to intake of 90Sr through diet was 0.42 #Sv per year for the vegetarian
population and 0.32 #Sv per year for the non-vegetarian population.” [4] The results
show a higher radio strontium uptake for vegetarians. The Sr90 levels reflect the remnant
of that deposited by atomic testing.
Kulp was funded by the AEC. Given this official awareness of the greater internal
exposure to radio strontium caused by a lack of concentrated calcium in the diet – i.e.
bovine dairy products, especially milk, it is appropriate to ask if any steps were taken to
protect the most vulnerable.
! 87
Hahn identified radio strontium as a fission product in 1938. Dr. Pecher had described its
biological transport and metabolism and bodily deposition in detail by 1940. The post
World War 2 Project Sunshine was not nutritional medicine. In my view it was a weapon
effects and targeting study.
Put in another way, “The main contributors of Sr90 in the former Soviet diet were cereals
and whole grain (UNSCEAR 1977). Milk and milk products are the major contributors of
Sr90 in western countries. Other food products that may contain Sr90 include fruits,
vegetables (carrots, cabbage, potatoes), meat eggs, spices, and seafood. The National
Academy of Sciences, in 1973, stated, in “Radionuclides in Food”, that “Although Dairy
products represented 58 percent of the dietary calcium, they provide less radio strontium
per gram of calcium than did any of the other items. If an attempt is made to reduce radio
strontium intake by eliminating milk from the diet and increasing the vegetable portion to
make up the deficit of calcium, the resulting intake of Sr90 is greater than that from the
diet containing the milk products”. [5]
The truth throughout the period of nuclear testing was that the entire global dietary
calcium supply had been contaminated with radio strontium. Any advantage was relative,
not absolute. Everyone was exposed to radio strontium in the diet, no matter what
dietary habits were followed.
I conclude that in relation to the use of nuclear weapons:
a. Diet is a mode of delivery of radio strontium.
b. The nature of the diet is a primary determinant of absorption efficiency

of the fission products present in the food chain.
c. Diet is a cultural marker.
d. Culturally based dietary variations provide a means of targeting

different populations within the context of both global and local radioactive fallout.
Harmful effects increase as the calcium concentration of the diet decreases.
Cultures in which dairy milk is absent from the diet are common. The diets of these
cultures channelled radio strontium to the human via different means to the defined
western diet.
Particularly when the diet lacks sufficient calcium, strontium will be used instead.
Charles Pecher reported : "Young mother (mice) and their offspring were fed with a
mouse food in which the 1% of CaCO3 had been replaced by 1% of SrCO3. The young
lived from 5 to 8 weeks, but their weight never exceeded 5 grams although they had the
adult physical characteristics of hair and generally adult behaviour. It appears that the
young animals were unable to develop normally with a strontium supply. Similar
observations have been made by others." [6]
During the atomic test era, authorities possessed knowledge that enabled them to identify
those most at risk from radio strontium and to either protect them, ignore them or render
them more vulnerable. The knowledge by 1952 was twelve years old. The study and
manipulation of diet and nutrition enabled the comparative targeting of populations.
! 88
Such a dietary manipulation occurred when Australian Aboriginal people were removed
from land required by the nuclear test authorities and confined to camps, settlements and
reserves by the Australian government.
While the virtues of cow's milk was and is proclaimed by nuclear authorities, the fact is
that cow's milk, nor any other dietary source of calcium, would have been contaminated
by radio-strontium but for the deployment and use of nuclear weapons and other fission
based technology. The radio-active isotopes of strontium had not existed in the
biosphere until the nuclear era.
Sources
Culture, Diet and Targeted Radio Strontium Uptake
[1] “Report on Project Gabriel”, AEC, July 1954, pp 13.
[2] Wasserman, R. H., et. al., “Comparative Metabolism of Calcium and

Strontium in Lactation”, Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 41 No. 6 812-821, 1958.
[3] Kulp, J.L., and Schulert, A.R., Strontium 90 in Man V, Science 18 May
1962: Vol. 136. no. 3516, pp. 619 – 632
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/136/3516/619.
[4] Narayana, Y., et al “Prominent artificial radionuclide activity in the

environment of coastal Karnataka on the southwest coast of India”. 2000 J.
Radiol. Prot. 20 295-300)
[5] US Nuclear Information Centre, citing the US National Institute of Health,

2004.
[6] Pecher, C., et. al., “Biological Investigation with Radioactive Calcium and
Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment of
Metastatic Bone Cancer”, University of California Publications in Pharmacology Volume
2 No 11, pp. 133, October 23, 1942, University of California Press,
Berkeley, Cambridge University Press, London, England.
! 89
Chapter 13 The Left Hand of Darkness
A sudden reduction in land area available to Australia’s Aboriginal population as a food

source and for other purposes occurred when Atomic Test authorities took 250,000 acres
of Aboriginal Land and rendered it Prohibited. The land, at Sladen Waters (and other
places), was used for the construction of the Giles atomic test weather and fallout
monitoring station. [1]
West Australian Member of Parliament W.L. Grayden recorded the resultant hunger,
disease and cultural disintegration in his Parliamentary Report, tabled in 1956, [2] and a
film [3]. No brief summary by me will substitute for reading and watching these
resources. The film was made during an extended journey throughout the Central
Aboriginal Reserve, Western Australia, with Pastor Doug Nicholls of the Aboriginal
Advancement League.
The 1957 film concretely records extreme physical privation, including malnutrition and
burns.
The response of the Murdoch Press to the Grayden/Nicholls material was cruel. [4]
Titterton later said the Aborigines should have voted the government out of office if so
against the bomb tests. Aboriginal Australians were denied the right to vote until after the
1967 referendum. [5] The film toured Australia, packing out Town Halls even though the
Aboriginal Advancement League could not afford to add a sound track to the film reel.
[6]
The only studies of Indigenous diets and fission product uptake have been retrospective
reconstructions. The problem is world wide. For example: “Native Americans residing in
a broad region down wind from the Nevada Test Site during the 1950s and 1960s
received significant radiation exposures from nuclear weapons testing. Because of
differences in diet, activities and housing their radiation exposures are only very
imperfectly represented in the Department of Energy dose reconstructions. There are
important missing pathways, including exposures to radio iodine from eating small
game.” [7]
! 90
Contaminating the Food of the Vulnerable
The results of a US Federal Radiation Council survey of fission products in milk found
the 1963 concentrations of Strontium 89 to be more than 100 pico curies per litre, while
the Strontium 90 concentration was found to be less than 40 pico curies per litre. The
report, entitled “REPORT NO. 6 revised fallout estimates for 1964-1965 and verification
of the 1963 predictions, October 1964. Report of the Federal Radiation Council”
contains the graph shown above. It is entitled “Table 4 Average Strontium-90 Content of
Milk in the U.S.” Note the immediate dose contributors and the actual comparative roles
of strontium 90 and strontium 89 at the time of the tests.
The situation for people without access to bovine milk was worse. As we have seen the
strontium filtration of the bovine gut and udder and the boosted calcium content of
bovine milk are relatively protective. Ultimately all food containing calcium was
contaminated by radio-strontium. A comparative advantage is not total protection. It is
only a relative advantage. The answer to the problem of food supply contamination by
fission products is to ban the technology which emits and releases those fission
products. Aboriginal Australia suffered far greater impacts during the nuclear test era
than did White Australia.
! 91
The body demands it's daily calcium requirement. Where this is not met, uptake of radio-
strontium from a contaminated dietary supply is much greater compared to situation
where calcium is abundant in the diet.
Hamilton’s World War 2 suggestion of calcium tablets might have had added
advantages. However any government issuing such tablets would be seen to be admitting
that the nuclear bombing of Australia was unsafe.
It is tragically ironic that Pecher's original findings regarding calcium and radio strontium
uptake of the 1940s were made during an effort to improve the nutrition of children. The
Manhattan Project and then the AEC turned this finding on its head as part of a global
human radiation experiment.
The US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has stated: “If there is ever
going to be a study of the health effects of all nuclear weapons tests using original data
the information collection phase must be done soon.” (“Report on the Feasibility of a
study of the Health Consequences to the American Population from Nuclear Weapons
Tests conducted by the United States and other Nations, App. D 1.").
The impact this contamination of global food supplies had on vulnerable cultures with
differing diets occupying areas of high local fallout has never been accurately addressed
in public.
The precarious situation of Australian Aboriginal people from 1952 can only be guessed
at by the public. The fission product biological vectors known since 1941 have been
studied, in secret, by authorities since that time. The Australian government excluded the
affected Australian Aboriginal population from consideration because of a purported lack
of knowledge. No graphs have been released relating fission product concentrations in
traditional Australian Aboriginal foods at Warburton, Coober Pedy or elsewhere.
The drought of 1957 greatly increased the vulnerability of Aboriginal Australians. The
picture is multi factorial and complex. It relates to the contamination of land and the
heightened impact this has when people are forced to concentrate – but yet still traverse a
poisoned land in search of food and water, close in to the bomb test sites.
“We reach the Warburton Mission…These children are from the nearby native camp.
Each day Mr Bill Wade, one of the founders of the Mission, gives them a ration of goat’s
milk. Mr Wade has a small cauliflower patch. The children love the cauliflower stalks
and eat them in the same way as our children eat apples.” [8] The footage shows the
cauliflower being plucked from the ground and immediately being eaten without being
dusted clean or washed. It shows the milking of a goat and the immediate drinking of the
milk.
A leading US Project Sunshine “safety expert” stated in a 1995 interview: “And,

theoretically, if there was somebody drinking goat's milk on a certain farm that had had a
dose of a few hundred rem, the probability that person will develop thyroid cancer may
be 1 percent, which is higher than I would like to see for my children. But suppose it
happens. Suppose we get one or two cases. Those were day.....” (The interviewer
interrupts) [9] Well the figure of 1 percent is moot. The fresh cauliflower and fresh milk
consumption are both examples of enhanced risk in this example.
! 92
Titterton, the Chairman of the Australian Atomic Weapons Test Safety Committee made
crucial disclosures in the following exchange with Royal Commissioner McClelland:
McClelland: “Were you always careful to tell them everything you knew?”
Titterton: “You are near to being libellous now ...”
McClelland: “Perhaps I am Sir Ernest, but would you deal with the question that you
always disclosed everything you knew to your colleagues on the Safety Committee?”
Titterton: “Of course not, I was subject to American control on information .. I was
subject to the Official Secrets Act ...” [10]
The radio strontium, the radio iodine and other fallout isotopes were present –on and in
the cauliflower, and in the goat’s milk, as well as every other dietary and environmental
item at Warburton. Warburton was close in to the nuclear test site. Mr Wade and all
those concerned at the mission had been denied any opportunity of gaining important but
decades old information by the apparently “libellous” proposition that the Chair of the
Australian Atomic Weapons Test Safety Committee should work for his employer, the
people of Australia, rather than his political and scientific Masters, the United States,
United Kingdom and the subservient partners, Australian politicians.
Dr. Pecher had described the adaptive strontium uptake by rodents suffering a calcium
deficient diet. This work was published in the 1940s. Hamilton’s work with radio Iodine
dates from the 1930s. I propose that Titterton was trusted not to “spill the beans” by
foreign powers. Information which would have protected the people was laying forgotten
in archive boxes. The nuclear safety authorities knew about the information, and as we
have seen, those authorities had labelled the information secret.
Sections of the press, having the same loyalties as Titterton, held that Aboriginal
Australians did not suffer greatly and disproportionately due to atomic testing in
Australia in that era. That Aboriginal Australians remain excluded from relevant health
and dietary surveys inclusive of every other section of Australian society raises the same
question mark about every political leader and their followers to this day. Of course,
some would argue that such a question is “libellous”. It is here, in Australia, that the
principles of ethics established by the Nuremburg Trials find a focus. It is a focus
President Clinton and his Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments
grappled with in the American context in the 1990s. [11] [12]
In this context Titterton’s 1962 statement that “little was known” of the sources of
strontium in man, but that it would be “expected to be closely associated with calcium in
the food chain and in the skeleton” [13] can be seen to be a perversion of the facts. The
statement was published in an elite scientific journal. Titterton failed to cite Pecher, citing
Wasserman instead. Titterton et al published this statement one month prior to the
important conference entitled “The Transfer of Calcium and Strontium Across Biological
Membranes”, which took place at Cornell University from 13 – 16 May 1962.
The conference was attended by dozens of leading researchers, including health

professionals specializing in childhood nutrition. The work of Dr. Pecher is cited during
the conference. The report of this Conference enabled me to find the original papers
published by Dr Pecher in the 1940s. The proceedings of the conference are published as
! 93
"“The Transfer of Calcium and Strontium Across Biological Membranes, Proceedings. of
a Conference held at Cornell University, Ithica, New York.” Academic Press”.
In Adelaide it is available at the Flinders University Library. Shortly after this conference
the Limited Test Ban Treaty came into force. A lot was known about “the sources of
strontium in man”. The radio strontium was delivered to the biosphere by nuclear fallout.
In the case of the pregnant and nursing mother, the radio-strontium did not stay confined
to bone. It moved to the sites of greatest biologic demand. To the baby, through the soft
tissue of the mother.
"#$%&'!%(!')#!"%*+,!-%../00/%1!/1'%!2&/'/0)!345,#+&!6#0'0!/1!740'&+,/+!8!5%15,40/%10!+19!
&#5%..#19+'/%10!:!;<"<!=5-,#,,+19>!;<!?/'5)>!@<;<7<!;%1+0<!740'&+,/+<!"%*+,!-%../00/%1!/1'%!2&/'/0)!
345,#+&!6#0'0!/1!740'&+,/+<!ABCD<
Sources
The Left Hand of Darkness
[1] Report of the Select Committee Appointed to Inquire into Native Welfare in
the Laverton-Warburton Range Area, Presented by Mr. W. L. Grayden, on
12th December, 1956. First Session of the Twenty Second Parliament, Perth,
Western Australia, pp. 5
[2] ibid.
[3] Grayden, W., “Warburton Range Film 1957” Video V00356, 20 minutes,
silent, AIATSIS AVA.
[4] Horner, J., Provenance notes to the Warburton Range Film”, 1957,
AIATSIS.
! 94
[5] Cross, R., , “ British Nuclear Tests and the Indigenous People of Australia”,
Chapter 7, page 77, “The British Nuclear Weapons Programme 1952 –
2002”, Editors
Douglas Holdstock and Frank Barnaby, ISBN 0- 7146-8317-5, Frank Cass &
Co, London, citing “Referendum”, in Davidson et al, The Oxford Companion to
Australian History, p.548.
[6] ] Horner, J., Provenance notes to the Warburton Range Film”, 1957,
AIATSIS.
[7] Fromberg, E., Goble, R., Sanchez, V., Quigley, D. “The Assessment of
Radiation Exposures in Native American Communities from Nuclear Weapons
Testing in Nevada”, “Risk Analysis” Vol. 20, No. 1, 2000, Abstract, pp1.
[8] Horner, J., Provenance notes to the “Warburton Range Film”, 1957,
AIATSIS.
[9] HUMAN RADIATION STUDIES: REMEMBERING THE EARLY YEARS

Oral History of Merril Eisenbud Conducted January 26, 1995 United States
Department of Energy Office of Human Radiation Experiments May 1995,
“Merril Eisenbud was selected for the oral history project because of his
former positions as Director of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission's (AEC's)
Health & Safety Laboratory (HASL) and Manager of the New York Operations
Office, and because of his research into the effects of environmental
radioactivity.”
[10] Varney, R. W., “The British Nuclear Tests: Was the Test Policy Indifferent
to Human Suffering?”, Thesis, Master of Professional Studies (Hons), University of New
England (UNE). 2000. Chapter 6, “The Nuclear Tests”, quoting the exchange between
Commissioner McClelland and Titterton during the proceedings of the Royal
Commission into British Nuclear Tests in Australia.
[11] ACHRE, Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, Final

Report, October 1995.
[12] “Human Radiation Experiments Reflections on the Ethics of Biomedical

Research”, lecture, delivered Milano, Italy, 12/5/98. Faden, Ruth R., former
Chair, ACHRE, who stated: “Indeed, we concluded that the secrecy with
which some of these human radiation experiments and also these intentional
releases were conducted was responsible for most of the serious negative
consequences in this period of the American history. And these
consequences were primarily the distrust and suspicion that they engendered
among the American public. When we uncovered that in most cases this
secrecy was not required for national security, but rather was maintained to
prevent legal consequences and also to prevent bad press, it only added to a
sense of skepticism and distrust, and this distrust is a great concern to all of
us who believe in the importance of the advance in science.” Ms Faden is:
Philip Franklin Wagley Professor of Biomedical Ethics and Director, The
Bioethics lnstitute Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland; Senior
Research Scholar, Kennedy institute of Ethics, Georgetown University
! 95
Washington, D.C.
Lecture text available at: http://www.cesil.com/0798/enfade07.htm
[13] "Strontium 90 in the Australian Environment, 1957 to 1960” by Bryant,

Dwyer, Moroney, Stevens and Titterton, of the Atomic Weapons Test Safety
Committee, published "The Australian Journal of Science”, Vol. 24, No. 10, P.
397.
! 96
Chapter 14 A Medical Rediscovery but a Military Constant
Dr Firusian et. al. in Germany rekindled interest in Pecher’s Sr89 cancer treatment by
reporting a successful 1973 trial in a German language journal. [1]
Publication of the results in English by Firusian et. al. occurred in 1974. [2] The doctors
cite Pecher as the basis for their 1970’s Sr 89 treatment trial. The intervening years are
described as a period of “relative obscurity” for Charles Pecher’s Sr89 treatment. [3]
However, within the US nuclear weapons establishment at the same time, those same
“obscure” papers had constantly formed the basis a military knowledge of the
radiological and biochemical nature of the fission product Strontium 89 since the days of
the Uranium Committee in 1941. Dr. Pecher had not been forgotten by the nuclear
authorities. For example, the report by J. G. Hamilton, “Metabolism of Fission Products,
Progress Report for Period Ending April 15, 1944”, Argonne National Laboratory, under
the authority of the Manhattan Project, carries on and extends dietary experiments
involving radio strontium, calcium and rats. The originally classified “Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, (University of California) Monthly Progress Report No.59 for
March 1948” states on page 9: “Comparative studies using radio calcium and radio
strontium have been set up…” The activities closely resemble work carried out by
Charles Pecher.
The military record is a perversion of Dr. Pecher’s nutritional and nuclear medicine. The
military record is replete with secret references to Dr. Pecher’s published medical and
nutritional work, the original publications having been secreted in university archives
decades before. Firusian had independently started his own research before looking and
finding this old work of Charles Pecher.
In an AEC internal memorandum date February 1, 1954, John C. Bugher requests “all the
information that can possibly be developed on the people who were given Strontium 89
in the early 40’s in California….Some of this was published by Dr. Pecher…” “This
study should be given very high priority, and whatever effort is necessary should be
devoted to it.” In July 1954 the “Report on Project Gabriel” had been completed. This
secret report included detailed references to the work of Charles Pecher in regard to radio
strontium in milk, the transport of radio strontium from mother to offspring, and the
administration of Sr89 to human patients as a treatment for secondary, terminal, bone
cancer as reported in 1942.
There is something extremely perverse in Hamilton calling for all stops to be pulled to
find out more about the Pecher work (which he witnessed as Pecher worked) while at the
same time ordering that medical staff not talk about it. And so for decades people died in
pain when in fact the nuclear authorities who imposed the secrecy knew that the pain
could be soothed. And they did not help those people. They kept the treatment
secret. Victims of nuclear testing went to court deprived of fair discovery.
In the 1950s the Atomic Energy Commission ordered the editors of Scientific American
to burn an entire monthly issue of that journal: “Referring to the burning of most of the
editions of a recent issue of the magazine “Scientific American”, at the request of the
Atomic Energy Commission, the Council maintained that no one among scores of
reputable readers had found any appreciable volume of information which should have
! 97
been kept secret. "It was not secrets which were thus protected," the Council's statement
said, "it was the raw material for public understanding which went up in smoke." [4]
There are more subtle methods of controlling knowledge than burning scientific journals.
While the burning of the Scientific American was related to technology and not the health
physics of fallout, it is a clear example of generic information control applied at the time
under the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act. A law still in force in the United States.
The military lineage is clear, constant and was secret. Pecher’s knowledge remained
familiar to relevant compartments of the Manhattan Project, the Atomic Energy
Commission and it's Project Gabriel and Project Sunshine, which ended, as previously
explained, in Australia in 1978. The medical line is relatively obscure; the pain relief
treatment originated by Pecher fell into disuse from 1950. The Manhattan Project and its
successor, the AEC, being the sole source of radio-pharmaceuticals in post war USA,
simply did not make Sr89 available to medicine in that era. Hence it was not used and
the old journals which recorded the treatment were forgotten.
I can find no post 1976 medical paper that agrees with John Lawrence’s 1950 statement
“it seems unlikely that radio strontium will be a valuable therapeutic treatment”. The
AEC funded the Lawrence paper which wrote off the Sr89 treatment. (A fuller
description and citation follows in the next section).
Lawrence also writes that Sr89 is more damaging to the marrow than Phosphorous 32, his
treatment of choice. The post 1976 medical reports we have found state clearly that Sr89
is less damaging to the marrow than P32. Pecher found Sr89 superior to P32 as a
treatment partly for this reason in 1941. [5]
Today the search continues for superior treatments. The use of Sr89 and P32 in medicine
is now probably free of the horrible constraints it seems were imposed prior to Dr
Firusian’s rediscovery and testing of the pre war record. This resulted in a new era of
Sr89 treatment trials which culminated in the 1993 US FDA approval [6] of the Sr89
treatment within the parameters of use anticipated by Charles Pecher and Ernest
Lawrence in 1941. [7] That is, for the palliative reduction of pain from secondary cancer
of bone.
It is my view that from 1950 on the AEC felt secure in the knowledge that Sr89 was not
used as a treatment beyond the John Lawrence trial cohort. In 1954 it would not do to
have Sr89 dosimetry described in public medical safety data sheets and prescription
guides for these would have described the immediate effects of Radio Strontium. A
section of the current General Electric description of its Sr89 radio pharmaceutical,
“Metastron” Strontium 89 Chloride (the inject-able form), is included in the next chapter.
Had this document been released in public in 1950 the AEC, I submit, would have
engaged in a fair amount of journal burning. In such a loaded setting, the Lawrence 1950
assessment of the Strontium 89 treatment is unlikely to have had a purely technical and
medical basis. Such organisational, cultural and political pressure affect perceptions. The
AEC was responsible for the supply of radio isotopes for medicine, the detonation of
atomic weapons and the safety of the public. These combined functions amount to an
organised conflict of interest. Medicine and the public came off second best in favor of
nuclear adventures.
! 98
While I can see that John Lawrence may well have been talking about Sr89 in a highly
defined way, his comments are a complete reversal to his views recorded in the final
paper by Charles Pecher which was published in 1942.
Sources
A Medical Rediscovery but a Military Constant
[1] Firusian, N., Schmidt, C.G., Dusch Med Wochenschr. 1973 Dec 7;98
(49):2347-51 4763877 (P,S,E,B) Radioactive strontium for treating incurable
pain in skeletal neoplasms, in German.
[2] Schmidt, C.G., Firusian, N.: 89-Sr for the treatment incurable pain in
patients with neoplastic osseous infiltrations. J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol,
1974; 9: 199-205) and 1976 (Firusian N, Mellin P, Schmidt CG, “Results of
89strontium therapy in patients with carcinoma of the prostate and incurable
pain from bone metastases: a preliminary report”, J Urol. 1976
Dec;116(6):764-8.).
[3] Suresh C. Srivastava, S. C., “The role of electron-emitting

radiopharmaceuticals in the palliative treatment of metastatic bone pain and
for radiosynovectomy: applications of conversion electron emitter Tin-117m” *
Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology ISSN 1516-8913 versão
impressa Braz. arch. biol. technol. v.50 n.spe Curitiba set. 2007. *Brookhaven
National Laboratory, Medical Department, Building 801,P.O. Box 5000, Upton,
suresh@bnl.gov; 11973-5000, NewYork – USA.
[4] New York Times; May 1, 1950; ProQuest Historical Newspapers, The New York
Times pp. 3).
[5] Lawrence, J.H., Wasserman L.R., “Multiplemyeloma: A study of 24

patients treated with radioactive isotopes 32P and 89Sr. Ann Intern Med
1950; 33:41-45.”
[6] GE Healthcare, Metastron ™ Strontium 89 chloride description sheet.
[7] Science, Supplement, Vol. 94, No. 2442, 17 Oct. 1941, pp 8.
! 99
Chapter 15 The Breach in the History of Medicine
"A 65 year old patient with osteoblastic metastases was given 8 mCi (Sr89) lactate in 3
doses: Sep. 1940 and Dec.1940, and in Jan. 1941. His pain disappeared almost
immediately and general condition improved remarkably.” – Charles Pecher, 1941. [1]
“It seems unlikely that radio strontium will be a valuable therapeutic agent”: -Lawrence,
J. H., Wasserman. 1950 [2]
“A significant clinical improvement could be observed in 8 of the 11 patients with

generalized osseous metastases of prostatic carcinoma after the application of 30 mCi. 89
strontium per kg. The effect was long lasting.” : Firusian, N., et. al. and Firusian, N.,
Mellin, P, Schmidt CG. 1976 [3]
“In 1950, Lawrence and Wasserman treated 11 multiple myeloma patients with 32P and
nine patients with a combination of 32P and 89Sr. Although 5 of the 20 patients had a
response to treatment as measured by improved pain control, they concluded that there
was no evidence that the combination of 89Sr and32P proved more effective than32P
alone, they further concluded that it was unlikely that radio strontium will be a valuable
therapeutic agent.” “This (current) report describes a patient with severe rib pain due to
multiple myeloma whose chest radiograph showed multiple lucent lesions throughout the
bones of the chest wall but whose bone scan showed marked osteoblastic activity. The
patient was treated with 89 Sr and received substantial pain relief. ” “Strontium-89 is an
effective agent for the palliation of bone pain from osseous metastasis from breast and
prostate cancer with an overall response rate reported in the range of 60% -80%.”
Edwards, K., et. al. 1994 [4]
“He (Pecher) would have been gratified to see the current clinical results from Metastron
(89SrCl2) for pain relief from skeletal metastases from carcinoma of the prostate.” V.
Ralph McCready 2000 [5]
President Clinton’s Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments Final Report

claims that the conduct of nuclear medicine, under the control of both the military and
then the Atomic Energy Commission from 1944 to the 1970s, “advanced biomedical
science.” [6] This statement is clearly untrue in relation to the Strontium 89 palliative
pain control treatment originated by Dr. Pecher in the period 1939 – 1941. Why is this
so?
Extract from the General Electric Data Sheet for Metastron, Strontium 89
Chloride:
“Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility
Data from a repetitive dose animal study suggests that Strontium-89 Chloride is a
potential carcinogen.
Thirty-three of 40 rats injected with Strontium-89 Chloride in ten consecutive monthly

doses of either 250 or 350 #Ci/kg developed malignant bone tumours after a latency
period of approximately 9 months. No neoplasia was observed in the control animals.
! 100
Treatment with Strontium-89 Chloride should be restricted to patients with well
documented metastatic bone disease.
Adequate studies with Strontium-89 Chloride have not been performed to evaluate
mutagenic potential or effects on fertility.
Pregnancy: Teratogenic effects. Pregnancy Category D. See Warnings section.
Nursing Mothers
Because Strontium acts as a calcium analogue, secretion of Strontium-89 Chloride into

human milk is likely. It is recommended that nursing be discontinued by mothers about to
receive intravenous Strontium-89 Chloride. It is not known whether this drug is excreted
in human milk.
Pediatric Use
Safety and effectiveness in pediatric patients below the age of 18 years have not been
established.” End quote.
Despite this, the substance was spread from every nuclear bomb site from 1945 on with
gay abandon and assurances of safety. The appropriate role for Sr89 is in the treatment of
pain suffered by people within the confines of qualified medicine, not the unqualified
military/ industrial nuclear complex. Sr89 is not like a CT Scan.
Medicine requires medical need, expected benefit and individual informed consent. The
emission of radio-chemicals such as Sr89 is not an individual, does not the informed
consent of the individual within a population and is therefore also not like a CT scan.
Sources
The Breach in the History of Medicine - A Brief Comparison of Papers
[1] Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and

Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the
Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, University of California Publications in
Pharmacology, Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150.
[2] L.R., Lawrence, J. H., Wasserman, L.R., “Multiple myeloma: a study of 24

patients treated with radioactive isotopes (32P and 89Sr.)” Ann Intern Med
1950; 33:41-45.
[3] Friesian N, Mellon P, Schmidt CG. (Germany) “Results of 89 strontium

therapy in patients with carcinoma of the prostate and incurable pain from
bone metastases: a preliminary report.” J Urol. 1976 Dec;116(6):764-8.
[4] “Use of Bone Scintigraphy to Select Patients with Multiple Myeloma for
Treatment with Strontium-89”, Keith Edwards, James Santoro and Andrew
Taylor ,Jr. Ernoty, University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology,
! 101
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Atlanta; and Intercommunity Cancer Center at
Rome, Rome, Georgia, J Nucl Med 1994; 35:1992-1993.
[5] V. Ralph McCready (Joint Department of Medical Physics, Institute of

Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, UK,
Milestones in nuclear medicine Eur J Nucl Med (2000) 27 (Suppl): S49–S79.
[6] ACHRE, Executive Summary, page v. President Clinton established the

Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) in response
to public concern over unethical human radiation experiments and releases of
radiation during the Cold War era. The actual period covered by the
investigations covered the period 1944 to 1975. During this time several
thousand human experiments had been conducted. President Clinton formally
apologized to all subjects of these experiments on behalf of the government.
! 102
Chapter 16 Progress Toward the First Reactor
Time-line
March 1939
Fermi tells Navy conference a controlled chain reaction of uranium
may be possible via slow neutrons (i.e. a reactor) and that an explosive reaction of
uranium may be possible with fast neutrons (i.e. a bomb). [1]
11 Oct 1939
As a result of the famous letter from Dr Albert Einstein President 1939 Roosevelt orders
the formation of a “Uranium Committee”. [2] The “Advisory Committee on Uranium”
was formed 12/10/39 [3]
The Committee consisted of Briggs (Director of the Bureau of Standards) as chairman,

Colonel K. F. Adamson of the Army Ordnance Department, and Commander G.C.
Hoover of the Navy Bureau of Ordnance, and requested this committee to look into the
problem. This was the only committee on uranium that had official status up to the time
of organization of the National Defense Research Committee in June 1940. The
committee met very informally and included various additional scientific representatives
in its meetings. [4]
The committee consisted of both military and civilian members, was to coordinate with
Alexander Sachs and investigate current uranium research and recommend government
actions. [5]
21 Oct 1939
First meeting of the Advisory Committee on Uranium. Attendees include: Lyman
Briggs, his assistant, Adamson (Army), Hoover (Navy), Alexander Sachs, Leo Szilard,
Eugene Wigner, Edward Teller and Richard Roberts. Teller stood in for Fermi, who
refused to attend due to a dispute with the Navy.
The Committee recommended that limited funding be authorized for research on uranium
isotope separation as well as the work of Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard on nuclear chain
reactions at Columbia University in New York City. [6]
1 Nov 1939
The Uranium Committee issued a report to President Roosevelt, stating: "If the reaction
turns out to be explosive in character, it would provide a possible source of bombs with a
destructiveness vastly greater than anything now known" and "we recommend adequate
support for a thorough investigation."
The President read the report and "wished to keep it on file." There it remained for
several months, well into 1940. [7] Eight Recommendations were made at this meeting,
and both atomic reactors and atomic bombs were subject to these. [8]
It was recommended that 4 tons of graphite and 50 tons of uranium oxide be acquired. A
memo by Leo Szilard was a basis for these recommendations. $6000 was transferred for
these purposes. [9]
! 103
28 April 1940
The second meeting of the ACU learned that the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Germany
had undertaken an extensive research program involving uranium. The work of the
Committee gained momentum as a result. [10]
June 1940
Up to June 1940 Fermi and Szilard under Pegram at Columbia University performed
most of the work on the uranium chain reaction.
2 June 1940 A
program for development was proposed on two specific subjects crucial to the reactor.
One was the nuclear constants. The other was lattice design. This was held up by national
shortages. [11]
15 June 1940
A special Advisory Group meeting was attended by Fermi. It was reported
that $100,000 was needed for uranium and graphite and $40,000 for critical
measurements in “intermediate experiments” relating to the chain reaction of uranium
fission. [12]
June 1940
The President transfers the Advisory Committee on Uranium to the new
National Defence Research Committee (NDRC). Vannevar Bush (Carnegie Foundation)
is appointed to head NDRC. Bush reorganises ACU into scientific body and eliminates
military involvement.
Foreign-born scientists are barred from committee membership.

Bush blocks further publication of research relevant to the activities of the Uranium
Committee. The Committee approves all four isotope enrichment paths and provides
funds. [13]
Summer 1940
The many technical and logistics problems of the naval atomic power program had been
identified and solutions proposed. One of these was the need to provide safe working
procedures in an environment of toxic and radioactive materials, and in the case of the
reactor, exposure to the fission products.
The NDRC was using many scientists to work on various urgent military projects. The
priority accorded the atomic bomb was subject to regular review. [14]
8 Nov 1940
First contract let to Columbia University for $40,000, effective from 1 Nov 1940 to 1
Nov 1941. [15]
Other contracts are taken out with Princeton University, Standard Oil, Cornell University,
Carnegie Institute, University of Minnesota, Iowa State University, John Hopkins
University, National Bureau of Standards, University of Virginia, University of Chicago,
and University of California. The number of contracts signed from 1940
until November 1941 was 16, involving the expenditure of $300,000. [16]
! 104
Early1941
E. O. Lawrence conceives of the electromagnetic method of uranium enrichment (isotope
separation). Lawrence is impatient at pace of government action. He advocates on behalf
of his work via Compton and Loomis, who pass Lawrence’s idea to Bush of the NDRC.
Bush meets Lawrence in New York and appoints him to position of Advisor to Briggs.
This results in funding for the plutonium work at the University of California, Berkeley.
Bush asks the National Academy of Sciences to review the Uranium research program.
[17]
Early 1941
Staff at Princeton, Chicago and California Universities expressed interest in the chain
reaction problem. This led to programs being approved at those sites. The work was
coordinated at Columbia University and became one large program. [18]
May 1941
E. O Lawrence reported in a memo to the National Academy of Sciences that element 94
(plutonium) had been studied at the Berkeley Radiation Laboratory. Lawrence reported
that the natural uranium chain reaction could be used to produce plutonium in a reactor.
This meant: 1. Common Uranium 238 could be used without isotope separation to power
reactors. 2. The reactors used to make plutonium could be very small. 3. The plutonium
could be used to make a fission bomb. [19] A second route to the bomb had been opened.
17 May 1941
Headed by Compton and including Lawrence, the National Academy of Science
Committee report is unanimous but fails to provide Bush with any certainty that there
would any return for the US investment in an atomic bomb.
The NAS committee consisted of: Arthur Compton, Ernest Lawrence, John C. Slater,
John H. Van Vlock and William D. Coolidge.
The NAS reports that increased uranium research funding would result in the production
of radioactive materials, the fission products made in atomic reactors that could be
dropped on the enemy by 1943.
This report did not take into account any Uranium work toward the bomb other than slow
neutron research. (This being reactor research, fast neutrons produce the explosive chain
reaction of a bomb. See Fermi’s comments of 1939).
A second NAS report notes the news regarding plutonium but does not mention the
purpose to which it might be put. The report recommended that the uranium program
proceed more vigorously. [20]
On the basis of the May 1941 NAS report and on the oral exposition by Briggs before a
meeting of the NDRC, an appropriation of $267,000 was approved by the NDRC at its
meeting of July 18, 1941. The probability that much larger expenditures would be
necessary was indicated. [21]
“The Uranium Committee as formed in the summer of 1940 continued substantially

unchanged until the summer of 1941. At that time the main committee was somewhat
! 105
enlarged and subcommittees formed on isotope separation, theoretical aspects, power
production and heavy water. It was thereafter called the Uranium Section or the S-1
Section of NDRC. Though not formally disbanded until the summer of 1942, this revised
committee was largely superseded in December 1941.” [22]
Mark Oliphant arrives in US carrying information related to the British Atomic bomb
program. The British are optimistic that a bomb can be built and are concerned at the
slow progress in the US. Oliphant confers with Briggs, Lawrence and others. [23]
Bush asked for a second report with an emphasis on engineering aspects, and in order to
meet this request O. E. Buckley of the Bell Telephone Laboratories and L. W. Chubb of
the Westinghouse Electrical and Manufacturing Company were added to the
committee. (Compton was in South America during the summer and therefore did not
participate in the summer meetings of the committee.) Coolidge submitted the second
report.
As a result of new measurements of the fission cross section of Uranium 235 and
of the increasing conviction that isotope separation was possible, in September 1941,
Compton and Lawrence suggested to J. B. Conant of NDRC, who was working closely
with Bush, that a third report was desirable. [24]
Since Bush and Conant had learned during the summer of 1941 that the British also felt
increasingly optimistic, the committee was asked to make another study of the whole
subject. For this purpose the committee was enlarged by the addition of W. K. Lewis, R.
S. Mulliken, and G. B. Kistiakowsky. Compton submitted this third report on November
6, 1941. It found that the fuel required for a uranium 235 bomb would be in the order of
between 2 and 100 Kg of pure U235, and, being superlatively powerful, would bring a
swift end to the war for the side that possessed it.
There had been progress in many areas, especially in isotope separation. The National
Academy of Science estimated that a bomb might be produced in 3 to 4 years. Thus an all
out effort to build the bomb was justified. [25]
27 Nov 1941
Bush reports to Roosevelt that the third National Academy of Sciences report, though
more conservative than the British reports, is sufficiently optimistic to justify pushing the
program more aggressively. Roosevelt agrees to reorganise the committee,
broaden the program, provide funds from a “special source”, and to a complete
interchange of information with the British. Discussion of policy would be confined to
the President and Vice President, Secretary of War Stimson, the Chief of Staff, Bush and
Conant. This group would be called the “Top Policy Group.” [26]
28 Nov. 1941
Bush announces that the Advisory Committee will transfer to the OSRD as the S1
Committee. The committee at that time consisted of L. Briggs, G.B. Pegram, H.J.
Wenzer, S.K. Allison, J.W. Bearnis, G. Briet, B.U. Condon, R. Gunn, H.D. Smyth, and
H.C. Urey. It was not properly constituted for an all out effort to achieve an atomic bomb.
[27]
! 106
6 Dec 1941
At the meeting of the National Defense Research Committee Dr. Bush explained why he
felt that it was desirable to set up the uranium program outside NDRC. The members of
NDRC agreed to a transfer. Accordingly, the NDRC as an organization had no further
connection with the uranium program, which was administered for some time thereafter
by the OSRD directly through an OSRD S-1 Section and later through an OSRD S-1
Executive Committee. [28]
At a meeting of S1, J.B. Conant, speaking for Bush, announced an all out effort to
achieve an atomic bomb. He also announced the reorganization of the group. The
membership of the reorganized S-1 Section was as follows: J. B. Conant, representative
of V. Bush; L. J. Briggs, chairman; G. B. Pegram, vice chairman; A. H. Compton,
program chief; E. O. Lawrence program chief; H. C. Urey, program chief; E. V.
Murphree chairman of the Separately organized Planning Board; H. Wensel, technical
aid; S. K. Allison, J. W. Beams, G. Bret, E. U. Condon, H. D. Smyth. [29]
Late 1941 to Early 1942

The formation and roles of the Metallurgical Project, Chicago University.
By the end of 1941 the possibility of an atomic bomb was such that research was
expanded. Isotope separation had been assigned to groups under Lawrence and Urey. [30]
The remaining problems – the chain reaction etc, were assigned to

Compton’s group at the University of Chicago. The name of this
part of the undertaking was given as the “Metallurgical Laboratory”
– a deliberately cryptic name. [31]
The aims of the Met Lab were 1. To find a method whereby normal
uranium (U 238) could be used to produce a chain reaction. 2. If
successful, to determine if plutonium could be separated
chemically from the fissioned uranium fuel. 3. To obtain data for
making an explosive chain reaction with either uranium 235 or
plutonium.
The Lab had the objective of planning for the large-scale

production of plutonium for use in bombs. [32]
Sections of the Met Lab were:
1. Experimental Nuclear Physics Group – under Fermi – the prime
concern was getting a controlled chain reaction going. (ie
building a pile or reactor).
2. Chemistry Division – organised by F.H. Spedding (later, in
turn, Allison, Franck, Johnson, Hogness.) Prime concern
was the chemistry of plutonium and separation methods.
3. Theoretical Group, under Wigner.
4. From March 1942 Thomas Moore headed the Engineering
Group.
5. In the summer of 1942 the importance of Health Problems
become apparent and an HEALTH DIVISION was organized
under DOCTOR ROBERT S. STONE. [33]
! 107
Summer 1942
The operation of reactors and the handling of fissioned uranium
fuel in order to chemically extract plutonium presented two types of
radiation hazard:
1. Neutron radiation from the reactor pile.
2. Alpha, Beta and Gamma radiation from the fission products
created by the fission of uranium in the reactor pile.
The amount of radioactive material to be handled vastly exceeded
any prior experience. [34]
The Health Group was charged with planning 3 main programs:

1. Provision of instruments and clinical tests to detect any
evidence of dangerous exposure to personnel.
2. Research on the effects of radiation on persons, instruments
etc.
3. Estimate shielding and formulate safety measures to be
incorporated in the design and plan of operation of the full-scale
plant. [35]
Plutonium was a “new” substance. The study of plutonium was a

major problem for the Met Lab. [36]
To meet its objectives, the Health Group worked along 3 major
lines:
1. Adoption of pre-employment physicals and frequent re-examinations
of personnel, especially those exposed to radiation.
2. Setting of tolerance standards for radiation doses,
developing measuring instruments, giving advice on
shielding, continuous environmental monitoring, measuring
contamination of clothes, laboratory desks, waste water, the
atmosphere, etc.
3. Carrying out research on the direct exposure to radiation of
persons and animals and on the effects of inhalation and
ingestion of various radioactive or toxic materials such as
fission products, plutonium and uranium. [37]
Research – the Scale of the Occupational Exposures was

unprecedented. Animal experimentation was conducted along the 3
main lines:
1. Exposure to neutron, alpha, beta and gamma radiation.
2. Ingestion of uranium, plutonium and fission products.
3. Inhalation of uranium, plutonium and fission products. [38]
These experiments were carried out under the direction of Dr Stone
and were conducted at Chicago, Clinton, and the University of
California, principally by Dr Cole and Dr Hamilton. [39]
In addition to the objectives identified by Smyth, documents

declassified after the 1945 publication of “Atomic Energy for Military
Purposes” give additional significant Scopes.
! 108
The report “Metallurgical Project, A.H. Compton, Project Leader,
Health, Radiation and Protection, R.S. Stone, M.D., Division
Director, Health Division Program, May 10, 1943”, document
numbers 717325, Report CH-632 55-A, originally secret, pp. 2,
gives the following additional very significant Scopes:
“4. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Radioactive Materials as a
Military Weapon. A) Defense - Tolerance of and protection of
troops and civilians.
B) Offence – Radiations needed to be effective.”
The explosive nature of the atomic bomb had been earlier been
scientifically predicted to be “unprecedented.” Aspects of the
radiological threat of the fission Products had been considered by
the May 1941 National Academy of Sciences report which
considered their use as dispersal weapons, spread over the
enemy.
Given the already existing human treatment trials dose response

data of some of the same radio isotopes, the basis for the May
1941 Radiological War proposal is not merely theoretical or calculated. It
was based in part upon observation of, in particular Strontium 89, Iodine 131 and
Phosphorous 32.
The NAS Committee member with direct access to the relevant medical
records of these medical trials, dating from the 1930s at the Ernest
Lawrence Berkeley Radiation Laboratory, was Ernest O. Lawrence.
Scope 4 considers the harms of and protections against the fission

products as a discrete component of the program to operate a
reactor in order to produce plutonium with which to construct an
atomic bomb. Scope 4 applies equally to the fission products
created by both the reactor and the atomic bomb.
The Health Physics Safety Program then, due to Scope 4, also

directs research into the effects of radiological warfare
agents regardless of their delivery method. i.e. Scope 4 anticipates
the radiation effects of the atomic bomb, including that via the
fission products being studied by Hamilton and Cole. The results of
their research contribute additional foresight relating to the total
effects of the atomic bomb, not just its explosive power.
The Metallurgical Laboratory Health Division Program appears to

be “dual use” under the terms of the ACHRE Report of 1995
although this aspect is omitted from the “Final Report”. The
activities of Hamilton ACHRE does report on actually relate directly
to Scope 4 of the Met Lab Program, which relates not only to
worker protection as the conventional history admits, but to
predictive analysis of expected atomic weapon radiological effects.
! 109
The resulting reports produced by Hamilton and Cole are based on
laboratory observations which give military foresight into weapon
effects. The “guinea pigs” were in the lab, not the Japanese cities.
The populations in these cities were targets. The US military had
soundly based expectations for their special weapons. There was
foresight and intent.
Mid January 1942

Compton decides to concentrate the work he was responsible for at
Chicago University. Hence Fermi and Szilard and the rest of the
Columbia group and the Princeton group moved to Chicago in the
spring of 1942.
Electromagnetic separation under E. O. Lawrence at Berkeley was

accelerated. A related separation plant was started at Princeton
University.
Research and development into separation by the diffusion process

and the production of heavy water was continued at Princeton
University under Urey.
Work on the centrifuge was continued at the University of Virginia.

Centrifuge work at Columbia University was transferred to
Standard Oil. [40]
9 March 1942
V. Bush reports to President Roosevelt that all programs were to be
pushed until July 1942. Bush is optimistic, and gives the time a
bomb might be ready as 1944, though this is tentative. Bush
suggests Army be brought in to construct full-scale production
plants in the summer of 1942. [41]
14 May 1942
In a memo Conant advises Bush that all five production and separation
methods were ready for pilot plants. $500 million is needed for full-scale
production.
Conant considers whether atomic bombs would be decisive in the

war or whether they would merely be supplemental weapons. [42]
May 1942
Compton suggests to Bush that rather than have individual S1
members meet, the entire S1 group should regularly come
together.
As a result Bush terminates the OSRD S1 section and replaces it

with the S1 Executive Committee. This is composed of: J. B.
Conant, C.J. Briggs, A.H. Compton, E.O. Lawrence, E.V.
Murphries. H.C. Urey, H.T. Wensel (Technical Aide), and I.
Stewart (Secretary). [43]
! 110
13 June 1942
On June 13, 1942, Bush and Conant sent to Vice- President Henry
A. Wallace, Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, and Chief of Staff
General George C. Marshall a report recommending detailed plans
for the expansion and continuation of the atomic-bomb program. All
three approved the report. Quote: “On June 17, 1942, the report was
sent by Bush to the President, who also approved. The report contained
four principal parts, which dealt with: (a) The status of the development
as appraised by the senior scientists; (b) Recommendations by the
program chiefs and Planning Board; (c) Comments by Bush,
Conant, and Maj. Gen. W. D. Styer; (d) Recommendations by Bush and Conant.
(a) The status of the program.
(1) It was clear that an amount of U-235 or plutonium comprising a
number of kilograms would be explosive, that such an explosion
would be equivalent to several thousand tons of TNT, and that
such an explosion could be caused to occur at the desired instant.
(2) It was clear that there were four methods of preparing the
fissionable material and that all of these methods appeared
feasible; but it was not possible to state definitely that any given
one of these is superior to the others.
(3) It was clear that production plants of considerable size could be
designed and built.
(4) It seemed likely that, granted adequate funds and priorities, full-scale
plant operation could be started soon enough to be of military
significance. The report was sent to President Roosevelt on 17 June 1942, who
approved it and returned it to Bush.” End Quote. [44]
18 June 1942
Colonel J.C. Marshall is instructed to form a new District in the
Corps of Engineers to carry out Special Work (atomic bombs)
assigned to it. The District is designated the Manhattan District and
is officially established on 13 August 1942. Its work was
designated the “DSM Project” (Development of Substitute
Materials) for security purposes. [45]
19 June 1942
Bush sends a copy of the report approved on 17 June 1942 to
General Styer. [46]
13 August 1942
Date of the official formation of the Manhattan District Engineers.
23 Sept 1942
A conference is attended by Secretary of War Stimson, Chief of
Staff C.C. Marshall, Dr J.B. Conant, Dr V. Bush, Major Gen. B.
Somerville, Major Gen, W.D. Styer and Brig. General L. Groves,
(Vice President H. Wallace was unable to attend). General policy
was determined. Military Policy Committee was appointed,
consisting of Dr V. Bush, Dr J.B. Conant, Major Gen. Styer, Rear
! 111
Admiral W.R. Purnell, Brig. General L. Groves was appointed
Executive Officer to carry out policy.
Military Policy Committee approved by Joint New Weapons

Committee, established by US Joint Chiefs of Staff consisting of Dr
V. Bush, Rear Admiral Purnell, Brig Gen L. Groves. [47]
From Sept 1942

Creation of Military Policy Committee places all phases of DSM
Project under control of Bush, Conant, General Sykes, Rear
Admiral Purnell and Maj. General L. Groves. The OSRD Executive Committee
meet about once monthly from June 1942 to May 1943 and one more time
in September 1943. These meetings were generally attended by Major General Groves
after September 1942. Col Marshall and industry represented also
attended from this time.
The Committee served in an advisory capacity to Dr Bush and Brig

General Groves. It also served as the initial liaison point with
industry and production plants. It has been inactive since Fall,
1943. The Planning Board functions were taken over by the Manhattan
District in Summer 1942. [48]
2 Dec 1942
The Chicago Uranium Pile achieved a self-sustaining chain
reaction on 2 December 1942. The experiment was carried out
under the direction of Fermi, assisted by groups headed by W.H.
Zinn and H.L. Anderson. [49]
The aim of the reactor pile was to establish that a chain reaction
could occur in natural uranium, chiefly U 238, so as to produce
plutonium for use in an atomic bomb. [50]
Review
The scientific, technical and industrial might of the United States had been
progressively gathered and redirected toward the problem of fission and the
construction of atomic bombs. The success of the Chicago Uranium Pile on 2
December 1942 occurred very quickly after Hahn’s 1939 report of the disintegration of
uranium by neutron bombardment.
Perhaps this is not surprising, as a key contributor to the American enterprise was Leo
Szilard, who in 1934 lodged two successful patent applications with the British
Government. Patent Applications 440,023 and 630,726, both entitled
“Improvements in or relating to the Transmutation of Chemical Elements”. [51]
In these patent applications, Szilard describes the chain reaction, the
operating principle of the first and every other uranium “pile” or reactor. He
described it in terms that were appropriate to the activities and contexts of the
time.
! 112
A key activity of the period 1934 to 1939 was the creation of artificial
radioisotopes by transmutation (changing) of chemical elements via high energy
particle bombardment. [52]
That the fission of uranium also gave rise to radioisotopes is not a surprise
now, nor was it after Meitner and Frisch explained Hahn in 1939. Meitner in
fact predicted Radio Strontium theoretically and Hahn observed it resulting
from the neutron bombardment of uranium. [53]
From an early date then, chemical elements had been transmuted into
radioactive isotopes of different elements by means other than uranium
fission. Due to the valid and largely successful medical application of some of
these substances a comprehensive body of metabolic, dosimetric and
medical treatment knowledge had been created prior to 1943. [54]
These artificial radioisotopes were used as internal radiation emitters that

targeted specific diseased human tissue. The skill of the doctors lay partly in
the accuracy and subtlety with which they could deliver a treatment dose. In
the medical setting the Doctors – John Lawrence, Robert Stone, L.A. Erf, J.G.
Hamilton, Charles Pecher and others, strove to stay within the medically
useful and least injurious (i.e. most beneficial) band of applied dose. [55]
The method of applying this knowledge to military weapons was simply to

ensure that the dose delivered to the enemy was in excess of any tolerable
dose. The dose at which Bone Marrow Depression occurs is the limit the
Doctors strived to avoid. It is rational to ponder that this is the dose the
military attempted to exceed in order to induce quick disablement to first
responders and as supplementary doses to survivors of the initial blast. [56]
In the case of the healthy enemy the specific fission products mentioned
would still be retained in the body, delivering unneeded radiation doses for
long periods of time because they are either a radioactive form of a chemical
needed by the body (Iodine, Phosphorous) or are “mistaken” by the body for
one (Strontium is “mistaken’’ for calcium, or, “Strontium is a calcium analogue”,
as Doctor Pecher put it in 1939.) [57]
Strontium 89 was identified as a fission product by Glasoe et al in May 1940

(Phys. Rev. 58, 1 – 60 ). In May 1941 the National Academy of Sciences saw it
as a potential weapon. As did Dr Hamilton in 1943. [58]
We have seen the process by which Paul Aebersold estimated the

equivalence exposures of internal Sr89 – a small amount of Sr89 in bone
equates to a external X ray dose. [59]
The point of the history is to show what was known and when it was known.
The targeting of the enemy is a normal military skill in time of war. It is a
deliberate act in order to defeat an opposing military force.
! 113
These simple military principles become complex in the case of nuclear
weapons. As Albert Einstein warned President Roosevelt in 1939, the effects
of the weapon would exceed the size of a local, specific target, such as a port
facility, by a wide margin. [60]
The construction of the atomic bomb was probably made inevitable by the
successes in America and England up to and including 2 December 1942.
The use of the weapon was not inevitable. The decision eventually taken was
informed by political, military and scientific considerations.
Conventional analysis of the “Atomic Bomb Decision” ignores the prior effects
knowledge and ignores the importance of the scientific advice. It ignores the
secrecy of the science as if it were only restricted from the enemy. This is
clearly not the case. It was denied to the American people and the rest of the
world for many decades. Therefore the basis of the Decision remains suspect
and insufficient in conventional histories. This would be true even if Truman
had not authorised the bombings, given the later atomic test period. This
period of testing caused the extension of scientific secrecy. [61]
The protest against the unrestrained use of the atomic bomb started among a
number of the scientists engaged in the Metallurgical Laboratory. Those
scientists who did protest did so not because the atomic bomb “was strange
to them”, but because they understood it and its effects very precisely. [62]
When I, as a common person, take the effort to try to re-join the science of the
period 1934 to 1939 with the science of 1942 to the current era, I feel a
resistance against me. A resistance that exists as a prejudice, an inculcation
that dictates, “no, the modern era started after the 30’s, they didn’t know
enough back then. I am modern and they were not.”
Until the advent of the US Department of Energy Opennet documents, there

were few avenues to use. There were some footnotes in those books and
papers that discussed the later atomic test period. It was a pretty grim
process trying to locate the 1940’s publications containing Dr Pecher’s
original articles on the basis of the footnotes citing them contained in some
atomic test fallout reports dated 1954, such as the “Report on Project
Gabriel”.
The science does join and until it is seen to be so in the “modern” mind, we are all at risk
from lack of knowledge. There is no “Secret Circle” anymore. But my culture does not
know it. The Secret compartments created for the Manhattan Project seem still to remain,
as people do not have the means by which they might choose to understand the true
history of knowledge.
The issue is of People and Fission. The Manhattan Project, though a giant,
still stood on the shoulders of others from an earlier time. The Breach in
History must be healed. Scientific precision considered along with morally and
emotionally troubling issues are difficult to express together. But it must be
done. For the authorities knew precisely what they were doing. And they did it
! 114
anyway. Academics stick to their compartments of knowledge, just as Groves
planned.
Sources
Progress Toward the First Reactor
[1] Henry De Wolf Smyth, ““Atomic Energy for Military Purposes” (The Smyth Report)
United States Government”, Chapter 1, paragraph 1.Full text available online at:
http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/SmythReport/index.shtml hereafter cited as the
“Smyth Report”.]
[2] Albert Einstein, letter to President Roosevelt, August 2, 1939. A scanned copy of the
letter is available at the Argonne National Laboratory Website at:
www.anl.gov/Science_and_Technology/History/Anniversary_Frontiers/aetofdr.html)
[3] Quist, Arvin S., “ORCA. History of Classified Activities at Oak Ridge National
Laboratories”. ORCA – 7, Chapter 2 “Origins of the Manhattan Project”.) (109903.pdf)
www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/rpt/109903.pdf
Alternate link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/17427670/History-of-Classified-Activities-at-
Oak-Ridge-National-Laboratory-by-Arvin-S-Quist
[4] Smyth Report, 3.4
[5] DOE Office of History and Heritage Resources, “The Manhattan Project An
Interactive History: Early Uranium Research 1939 – 1941”,
www.cfo.doe.gov.me70/manhattan/uranium_research.htm.
See also:
Atomic Heritage Foundation, The Uranium Committee.
http://www.atomicheritage.org)
[6] Source: Atomic Heritage Foundation, The Uranium Committee.

http://www.atomicheritage.org,
[7] Source: Atomic Heritage Foundation, The Uranium Committee.

http://www.atomicheritage.org,
[9] Smyth, 3.6
[10] Atomic Heritage Foundation, The Uranium Committee,

http://www.atomicheritage.org
See also
! 115
Smyth Report, 3.6
[11] Smyth Report, 4 .7
Interactive History: Early Uranium Research 1939 – 1941”,
www.cfo.doe.gov.me70/manhattan/uranium_research.htm
[14] Smyth Report, 2.32 & 2.37
Interactive History: Reorganisation and Acceleration, 1940-1941”,
www.cfo.doe.gov.me70/manhattan/reorganisation.htm
See also:
The National Academy of Sciences The first Hundred Years, 1863 - 1963,Raymond C.
Cochrane, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1978. ISBN 0-309-02518-
4, pp 419-421.
[19] Smyth Report, 4.24 to 4.28
Interactive History: Reorganisation and Acceleration, 1940-1941”,
www.cfo.doe.gov.me70/manhattan/reorganisation.htm
See also:
The National Academy of Sciences The first Hundred Years, 1863 - 1963, Raymond C.
Cochrane, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1978. ISBN 0-309-02518-
4, pp 419-421.
See also:
Smyth Report, 4.48
[22] Source: Smyth Report, 3.14
! 116
[25] Smyth Report, 3.16; 4.46 and 4.49
[26] Smyth Report, 3.18 and 3.22
[28] Smyth Report 5.3
[30] Smyth Report, 6.1, 6.2
[33] Smyth Report, 6.4, 6.5
[39] Smyth Report, 7. 41 - 7.43; 8.63 - 8.70
[42] Smyth Report, 5.15, 5.16
[44] Smyth Report, verbatim, 5.21
[45] Smyth Report, 5. 23
[47] Smyth Report, 5.25 and 5.26
! 117
[48] Smyth Report, 5.27 – 5.29
[49] Smyth Report, 6.29-6.31
[51] Partial reproductions of Leo Szilard’s patents and description of his insight into the
chain reaction and the potential of the neutron to release nuclear energy is found on pages
5 – 8 of Nhu-Tarnawska Hoa Kim-Ngan 1 & Imre Pazsit 2, in “The Discovery of Nuclear
Fission – Women Scientists in Highlight”, Chalmers Reproservice, Goteborg, Sweden,
2007, (1 Institute of Physics. Pedagogical University, PL-30 084 Krakow, Poland. 2
Department of Nuclear Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96
Goteborg, Sweden.)
[52] Brucer, M., “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine”, ISNB0-9625674-0-X, Heritage

Publications In St Louis. Brucer describes Rutherford’s observation of the transmutation
of nitrogen into hydrogen via high energy alpha particle collision. Rutherford published
the first paper on the transmutation in April 1919. [pp. 157] The creation of the first
artificial radioisotope via transmutation, induced by alpha bombardment was achieved by
the Joliot-Curies on New Year’s Eve 1933-1934. [pp. 213]
[53] Lise Meitner, L., Frisch, O. R., “Products of the Fission of Uranium Nucleus.”
“Nature” 143, 471-472, 1939, March 18
[54] See references for the papers of Pecher, Erf, Lawrence and Hamilton in the Chapter
“Medicine and the Bomb.”
[55] “The idea has been to give as much strontium as possible without producing any
serious damage to the marrow..” : Dr Charles Pecher. Pecher, C., “Biological
Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use
of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from
the Radiation Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley University of
California Publications in Pharmacology. Editor: C.D. Leake, G.A. Alles, T.C. Daniels,
M.H. Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text. Submitted by
Editors July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley,
Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.), pp
136 – 138
[56] ibid.
[57] Erf, L.A., Pecher, C.,Proc. “Secretion of Radio-Strontium in Milk of Two Cows
Following Intravenous Administration”, Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 45, Oct-Dec 1940,
11825P, pp. 762-764.
[58] ACHRE Report, Chapter 11 “What We Know Now” “Radiological Warfare” US

Department of Energy references the May 1941 National Academy of Science’s option of
dispersing fission products over enemy territory. The report further states: “J. Robert
Oppenheimer discussed with physicist Enrico Fermi the possibility of using fission
products, particularly strontium, to poison the German food supply.” Hamilton’s reported
the idea in detail to Stone, Groves and Oppenheimer, also specifically referencing radio
! 118
strontium. It seems to me the 29 year half life Sr90 would be unsuitable for this purpose,
while the 51 day half life Sr89, with its much greater radioactivity per gram, would
enable occupation of enemy territory without victorious occupiers waiting for a
generation to take and hold. Also, Hamilton’s reports to Stone and Groves of 1943.
[59] “We may assume that an amount of radiation equivalent to 200 to 600 r is given to
the bony tissues when 1 millicurie of Sr89 is intravenously injected in an adult. This
rough calculation is only interesting as an indication of the order of the magnitude of the
dose of radio-strontium that should be necessary to obtain a therapeutic effect on bone
tumors.” : “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and Strontium,
of California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge Press London, England. (Prefatory note by C.D.
Leake, editor.), pp 136 – 138.
[60] Albert Einstein, letter to President Roosevelt, August 2, 1939. A scanned copy of
the letter is available at the Argonne National Laboratory Website at:
www.anl.gov/Science_and_Technology/History/Anniversary_Frontiers/aetofdr.Html
Einstein wrote “A single bomb of this type....exploded in a port, might very well destroy
the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory. However, such bombs
might very well prove to be too heavy for transportation by air.” No one is ever totally
right. At issue is military precision, appropriate targeting and the rules of war. Ports are
usually adjacent to cities. This “surrounding territory” seems to be the concern of
Einstein here, not the valid military target chosen.
[61] The entire ACHRE process and the Openness Executive Order issued by Clinton
would have been pointless if records of significant public interest had not been still sealed
in 1994. How can one learn from history if one cannot know it?
[62] See “The Franck Report, June 11, 1945”, “Report of the Committee on Political and
Social Problems Manhattan Project "Metallurgical Laboratory" University of Chicago,
June 11, 1945 (The Franck Report)” Members of the Committee: James Franck
(Chairman), Donald J. Hughes, J. J. Nickson. Eugene Rabinowitch, Glenn T. Seaborg, J.
C. Stearns and Leo Szilard at http://www.dannen.com/decision/franck.html
See also :
Szilard Petition, First Version, July 3, 1945” at

http://www.dannen.com/decision/45-07-03.html
See also:
Szilard petition, cover letter, July 4, 1945 at
See also:
! 119
A PETITION TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES at
and Groves Seeks Evidence Against Szilard, July 4, 1945 at
http://www.dannen.com/decision/lrg-fal.html
! 120
Chapter 17 Summary and Conclusions
The published work of Charles Pecher establishes that a crucial knowledge base relating
to nutrition and medicine in regard to the fission isotopes of strontium pre-existed the use
of nuclear weapons.
The same is true for the Iodine 131, neutron ray therapy and the neutron activation
product, Phosphorous 32. J. Hamilton (I131), J. Lawrence, L. A. Erf, (P32), and R.
Stone, (Neutron ray therapy) all survived beyond 1941 and gained employment within the
atomic bomb project. The missing member of the pre-war Lawrence Rad Lab nuclear
medicine cohort is Charles Pecher, the Sr89 researcher. Pecher died in August 1941.
Could it be that his work had to remain in secret written form precisely because he died?
Hamilton, Lawrence, Erf and Stone call recall the early days. The days prior to the
handover of their findings to the US military.
In 1925 disease and death caused by the incorporation of Radium into bone was
described by medicine. The delivery of radioactive substances of biochemical activity to
target populations by military means was conceptualized by 1941.
It seems to have been foreseen by Einstein in his 1939 letter to Roosevelt. I conclude that
prior to Dr Firusian, Charles Pecher was assigned to obscurity by secrecy imposed by the
advent of nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons.
His work became obscure outside of the military and industrial nuclear complex. Charles
Pecher found strontium uptake is related to calcium in the diet. This forewarned
authorities.
I conclude this knowledge was seen as a strategic advantage by the Western Alliance in
relation to “enemy” cultures such as Germany, Japan the Soviet Union at the relevant
times in history.
The concept of the biological assimilation of the fission product Radio Strontium via its
transport through the calcium pathways is predicted by Dr. Pecher’s findings. The
military application is a perversion of the purpose which originally motivated the
research. Had Charles Pecher not possessed his strontium knowledge in August 1941, the
scientific, political, international and moral binds which caused his death may not have
existed.
Charles Pecher’s discovery of the role of vitamin D in the uptake and mineralization of
calcium – and strontium -appears to be have inspired the later naming of the US
strontium fallout, deposition and uptake targeting survey – Project Sunshine. The name
seems to be a perverse wink and nod. Knowledge existed which forewarned of
differential uptake of radio strontium according to dietary variables and therefore
differing cultures.
The health effects of atomic weapons testing would not be uniform across nations
comprised of multiple cultures and therefore multiple diets. The differences between the
Anglo Saxon and Soviet diets may have enabled a crude targeting by way of enhanced
harms inflicted upon the enemy of the day. The vulnerable diet is the calcium dilute diet.
! 121
This expressed as the Ca/Sr ratio. Such was used by Libby, Hamilton and others in the
AEC. The diet used as the baseline for strontium uptake studies, and the diet most subject
to calcium boosting during the era of atmospheric atomic testing was that diet described
in 1954 as the “American” diet. It excluded Native Americans. The same core diet is
described as the “English” diet by Comar (1962). In the test era Australia boosted the
calcium content of the culturally dominant diet. It did this by way of the school milk
program. This program was designed prior to the decision to test nuclear weapons in
Australia.
It is pointless to blame the food, any food, when the blame for food contamination lies
with nuclear test authorities and the dispersal device which caused the contamination was
the atomic bomb.
Specific acts against the Indigenous diet can be identified in the historical record. One
such act was the reduction of land access permitted to Aboriginal people concurrent with
the atomic tests. Another was the refusal by the Federal Government to provide money
for the purposes of reducing Aboriginal malnutrition evident in the Western Australian
Central Aboriginal Reserve. (Letter, W. L, Grayden to Minister of Supply, Beale, and
reply, 1957).
Trials of Charles Pecher’s Strontium 89 palliative cancer treatment continued after his
death. The trials took place in a loaded political and research environment. Public debate
and public disclosure of information relating to radio strontium was controlled. The
widespread use of Sr89 as a radio - pharmaceutical would have resulted in widespread
publication of the radio-biological nature of the fission fallout radionuclide. This would
have made the knowledge available to ordinary voters.
People were denied a palliative pain relief treatment and the truth of the effects of atomic
testing, purportedly to “protect democracy”.
The ACHRE Report fails to address this specifically in relation to the retardation of the
development and use of Dr Pecher’s Sr89 medical treatment. Medical data specifically
relating to the Sr89 medical treatment was classified secret in 1954 and possibly earlier.
Lawrence and Wasserman, both AEC employees, in 1950 reported that Sr89 was unlikely
to be of value as a treatment. Reports since 1974 disagree with the 1950 AEC assessment.
The post 1974 papers report that Sr89 is less damaging to marrow than Phosphorous 32.
Lawrence and Wasserman had reported the opposite in 1950. The modern papers agree
with the 1941 findings of Charles Pecher and Ernest O. Lawrence in these matters. The
delay in the use of Sr89 either resulted from multiple errors and inadequacies on the part
of AEC medical researchers, including John Lawrence, or from political pressures present
within the AEC in 1950, or both.
At the time the AEC was the sole supplier of radioisotopes for medicine in the United
States. It controlled production by using nuclear reactors for the production of radio -
pharmaceuticals in preference to the pre war method of cyclotron production.
Medicine was used to promote nuclear reactors at the expense of Dr Pecher’s treatment.
More people died in greater pain from secondary bone cancer in the period to 1993 as a
result of the actions of the AEC than would otherwise have been the case. The AEC
! 122
retarded the progress of nuclear medicine. The ACHRE report ignores this fact and finds
in the opposite. This is an obvious oversight.
The AEC spent millions of dollars undertaking Strontium 90 injection studies of Beagles
and Chimps throughout the period of Project Sunshine and announced that the results
showed the public was safe at the doses the typical American received from bomb fallout.
It did not publish the Sr89 results. This was left to the current General Electric data sheet
quoted above. 33 out 40 healthy rats were apparently very unlucky in the 9 month
window when injected with Sr89. The medical and patient data -sheets for Strontium 89
did not exist until 1993. They should have existed from 1949 at the latest, allowing for a
ten year research period.
A confluence of events occurred in the period Charles Pecher conducted strontium

research at the Lawrence Crocker Laboratory at Berkeley. Under the pressure of war in
Europe, the United States examined the possibilities of radiological warfare. In 1941 the
National Academy of Science recommended that radiological weapons utilizing
radioactive strontium be given a higher a priority than the atomic bomb. Charles Pecher
killed himself in August of that year.
The knowledge base Pecher created was later used in conjunction with fresh experiments
conducted by Hamilton and Cole under the Manhattan Project and later under the AEC.
This gave foresight to authorities in respect to the subject of their studies: the effects of a
major fission product dispersed over populations by the detonation of nuclear weapons
and by any fission process that vents fission products into the biosphere. The authorities
therefore knew what they were doing, and proceeded with it regardless. Had secrecy not
been imposed on the civilian medical treatment devised by Charles Pecher, the nuclear
era would have been intensely examined with insight by the American public and by the
people of the world.
It is time an official history of the strontium knowledge was released by the United
States. It is my opinion that throughout the period 1945 to 1978, Strontium 89 was
undeclared "disappearing bullet" which contributed to immediate dose to a very great
degree, which then rapidly decayed to stability. The rat Sr89 injection study quoted by
General Electric shows the hazard presented by Sr89 if released into the biosphere.
! 123
Acknowledgements
I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the Atomic ExServicemen's Association. The

National Secretary of the Association, Mr Terry Toon has been a constant source of
information and inspiration. I joined the Association in 1994 and my research has been
greatly aided by the Association's periodic magazine since that time. The Association
accepts as members people who have been exposed to nuclear radiation in the course of
their military duty. Civilian workers exposed in the same way are accepted.
Ric Johnstone, the President of the Australian Nuclear Veterans Association, over the
years provided me with much information and help. Ric passed away late in 2011.
During the course of my research I was contacted by the relatives of the late Dr Charles
Pecher who are living in the USA. Janine Pecher-Webbles and Carla Webbles and I
soon established a regular email correspondence and we undertook an intense research
program. I received a great deal of information from Janine and Carla, for which I am
grateful. Later on, Evelyne Cerf-Pecher, the daughter of Dr. Charles Pecher, contacted
and a further two way flow of information developed.
Professor A.A. (Bert) Verveen, Emeritus Professor Physiology, University of Leiden,

after being alerted by Carla, also contacted and provided assistance. I am particularly
grateful to Bert for his research into the work undertaken by Dr Pecher in Belgium. Dr
Pecher's findings relating to the role of calcium ions in the nervous system sparked his
interest in radio-strontium.
I did try to keep a record of each person's findings. In the end this proved
impossible. We assisted each other greatly. I am very grateful.
Michele Madigan has helped inform me of the suffering experienced by Australia’s

Aboriginal people. The reality of this has been officially ignored and denied since the
1950s.
I am grateful to Michele and to the Elder Women of Coober Pedy, especially

Eileen Crombie, who educate us and share their priceless insights.
Lallie Lennon of Port Augusta, who was caught in the Black Mist of October
1953, allowed me to investigate the circumstances her exposure. Lallie allowed Michele
Madigan to interview her on successive occasions over a period of years. The resulting
oral history, in conjunction with other material relating to Lallie's experiences, provide
detailed study of the Black Mist incident. I am very grateful to Lallie and Michele for
this. The full story - the Oral History of Lallie Lennon as taken by Michele is the subject
of another book in which I provide a commentary based on historical events.
The courage of many indigenous Australians have inspired me to continue my

research. Lallie Lennon and her story challenges us to seek and hold the truth.
I thank most sincerely Mr. Geoff Wild of England for sending me a copy of Marshall
Brucer’s classic, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine”.
! 124
I thank Ms Rita Hohenbrink, OpenNet Product Manager, US Department of Energy,
Office of Scientific and Technical Information, Oak Ridge, TN, USA, for ensuring that I
received the 1950 Lawrence - Wasserman paper, “MULTIPLE MYELOMA: A STUDY
OF 24 PATIENTS TREATED WITH RADIOACTIVE ISOTOPES (PHOSPHORUS
AND STRONTIUM)".
I am grateful to Paul Frame of the Oak Ridge Associated Universities Museum for
answering my emails and for discussing issues with me in a professional and cheerful
manner.
Dr. Yoshiya Furusawa, Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Radiation Reseach, National Institute

of Radiological Sciences, Chiba, Japan, granted me permission to reprint the Black Rain
map by Jun Takada et. al., taken from their paper "Uranium Isotopes in Hiroshima "Black
Rain" Soil", and published in Journal of Radiation Research, Vol. 24, No. 3 (1983), pp.
229 - 236.
I am grateful to the people who maintain websites relating to nuclear weapons, such as
“atomic archive” and dannen.com. These remain critically important resources.
This work could not have been carried out without the unfailing and constant support of
my wife, Diana. The work would have been impossible without her constancy and love.
In these matters my thoughts are constantly with the victims of nuclear activity, such as
veterans and vulnerable Indigenous people and the people and organizations who have
advocated for them over many years.
I have spent a number of years researching a matter of importance to me personally. I

sincerely hope you find it interesting and stimulating. I hope you can overlook my
failures of expression for the sake of the information I have found in the public, mainly
US, record.
This book was first published in 2009.
! 125
About This Book
Phosphorous 32, Strontium 89 and Iodine 131 were first synthesized in the 1930s at the
E.O. Lawrence Crocker Radiation Laboratory, University of California. The substances
were used in nuclear medicine by the Crocker researchers. These substances were later
found to be created by the fission process. Neutron radiation was used medically by Dr
Robert Stone in 1937, also at the Lawrence facility.
The United States entered World War 2 possessing detailed medical and biological
knowledge related to these radioactive substances, some of which would become
infamous among the peoples afflicted by the atomic bomb.
This book looks at the findings of the early researchers at the Lawrence "Rad Lab" and
places these findings together with the discoveries relating to uranium fission and the
fission products. The militarization of civilian medical and biological data commenced
some years before the formation of the Manhattan Project. The book discusses this
process and follows the progress of the knowledge, which was classified secret.
Japanese, South Pacific and Australian Indigenous victim experiences are examined in
the light of knowledge held since the 1930s by nuclear authorities.
The biological, radiological and medical data relating to strontium 89 was developed by
Dr Charles Pecher, who died tragically in 1941. His work was classified secret and
formed a major component of the secret studies into the effects of nuclear fallout. The
secret dangers of Strontium 89 and the suppression of Dr Pecher's medical treatment are
examined in this book.
The work is a unique, extensively referenced, study of the development of the

radiological predictive capability possessed by the Western Allies from 1942,
through the era of atmospheric nuclear testing.
"The information is superb and very understandable for someone with minimal
physics / medical background – and excellent referencing. It is a fine reference and
resource work -and your bringing together the early nuclear medicine research and
subsequent knowledge of this within the atomic bomb project is a first." - Dr. David
Palmer, American Studies, Flinders University of South Australia.
"Dear Paul, I read your book. It is fantastic. It is an extraordinary inquiry. I think

your book is unique: that no comparable analysis has ever been done. It could become
a "classic", as you qualify the book of Brucer. We sometimes qualify as "bible" the
reference books that contain a huge quantity of informations! So is your book!" -
Evelyne Cerf-Pecher, daughter of Dr Charles Pecher.
! 126
About Paul Langley
I was born in July 1953 in Havant, England. My family and I arrived in Australia in 1959.
I attended Urrbrae Agricultural High School, where I enjoyed Agricultural Science,
Biology and Science in particular.
After a year working at farming supply company, I joined the Australian Army in 1971. I
was posted to the Radiac Calibration Centre, in the corps of RAEME, at 4 Base
Workshop, Bandiana, Victoria. The Radiac Centre repaired and calibrated military
radiation detectors and helped with the monitoring and identification of nuclear fallout.
At the time French nuclear tests in the Pacific was producing nuclear fallout, some of
which was deposited in Australia.
I received basic training relevant to the Radiac Centre during my time there. In 1973 I left
the Army with a knowledge that the radioactive substances are a primary concern. An X
ray machine or CT Scanner can be turned off. Exposures can be controlled and are
consented to by the individual exposed. This is not the case with radioactive material
randomly released into the environment.
Location: Port Willunga, South Australia.
! 127

Medicine and The Bomb Deceptions From TR PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Medicine and The Bomb Deceptions From TR PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Cover Photograph :

Medicine and the Bomb: Deceptions from Trinity to Maralinga

2 Medicine and the Bomb 24

5 The Cold War – Secret Witness 66

7 The Marshall Islands 73

10 Insight Fosters Resistance 82

11 The Blessing as a Curse 86

12 Culture, Diet and Targeted Radio Strontium Uptake 87

13 The Left Hand of Darkness 90

14 A Medical Rediscovery but a Military Constant 97

15 The Breach in the History of Medicine 100

16 Progress Toward the First Reactor 103

17 Summary and Conclusions 121

About This Book 126

Strontium 89 is like a machine gun compared to the Radium musket.

A Search for Scientific Foresight

“I. Scope of the Health Division Responsibility ….4. Evaluation of Effectiveness of

The Pre-War Knowledge and the Atomic Weapons Test Era

Synopsis of Relevant Findings Relating to Nuclear Medicine, Fission Research, and

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

D. W. Stewart , J. L. Lawson, and J. M. Cork, Department of Physics and Chemistry,

First synthesis of Strontium 89 “by the bombardment of metallic strontium with 1

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Commencement of Neutron Ray Therapy at Lawrence Berkeley cyclotron. Treatment

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

J. J. Livingood, Radiation Laboratory, Physics Department, University of California, and

O. Hahn, F. Strassmann, Berlin, Germany, “Concerning the Existence of Alkaline Earth

Heritage: Journal Naturwissenschaften Publisher Springer Berlin / Heidelberg ISSN

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Lise Meinter, German refugee in Sweden, O.R. Frisch, Sweden, “Disintegration of

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Philip Abelson, Radiation Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California,

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Tukutaro Hagiwara, Japan, “Liberation of Neutrons in the Nuclear Explosion of Uranium

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Segre, E., Wu, C.S., Radiation Laboratory, Department of Physics, University of

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

G. N. Glasoe, Columbia University, New York, New York.

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

McMillan and Abelson Radiation Laboratory UC Berkeley USA Isolation of Element 93

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Glen T. Seaborg, University of California, Berkeley.

“..research by Glenn T. Seaborg revealed that an isotope of neptunium decayed to yet

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Finds silver and cadmium radio isotopes as fission products.

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Weapon application of fission product knowledge based on an expectation of harmful

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

Manhattan District Engineers ("Manhattan Project"), Memos: Hamilton to Stone, Groves

Author, Country, Publication, Date :

A method of Radiological protection is reported to the Manhattan Project chain of

(Sr* denotes “any isotope of Strontium” and is Hamilton’s convention.)

The Synopsis also shows that:

Nuclear weapons are thus shown to be chemical weapons as well.

This then was the state of knowledge in the USA in 1941.

[3] a. O. Hahn, F. Strassmann, Berlin, Germany “Concerning the Existence of Alkaline

[9] Brucer, Marshall, “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, 1600 – 1989”, 1990,Heritage

[10] a. P32, I131: A HISTORIAN'S VIEW OF THE LAWRENCE YEARS ( LBLNEWS

[11] History of Neutron Therapy, Fermilab Neutron

[12] O. Hahn, F. Strassmann, Berlin, Germany “Concerning the Existence ofAlkaline

[15] “Evaluation of Radioactive Fallout” , Armed Forces Special Weapons Project,