The Trinity Test On July 16, the making of the atomic bomb pdf, in the New Mexico desert, the first atomic device was tested. Health and Monitoring Organization and Preparations – Louis H. Procedure for Final Assembly – K. Final Preparations for Rehearsals and Test – K.
No one who saw it could forget it, a foul and awesome display. Developing the Hydrogen Bomb Work on the Hydrogen Bomb began during the Manhattan Project, but not until the Soviet’s exploded their first atomic bomb did efforts toward building the “Super” begin to take shape. Comments on The History of the H-Bomb by Hans A. If we fight a war and win it with H-bombs, what history will remember is not the ideals we were fighting for but the methods we used to accomplish them. These methods will be compared to the warfare of Genghis Khan who ruthlessly killed every last inhabitant of Persia. Sign up for our free newsletter for updates on the latest fluoride developments. Introduction: The following article was commissioned by the Christian Science Monitor in the spring of 1997.
The article went on to be nominated as the year’s 18th most censored story in the 1998 Project Censored Series. Some fifty years after the United States began adding fluoride to public water supplies to reduce cavities in children’s teeth, declassified government documents are shedding new light on the roots of that still-controversial public health measure, revealing a surprising connection between fluoride and the dawning of the nuclear age. Many municipalities still resist the practice, disbelieving the government’s assurances of safety. Since the days of World War II, when this nation prevailed by building the world’s first atomic bomb, U. Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production, according to the documents. One of the most toxic chemicals known, fluoride rapidly emerged as the leading chemical health hazard of the U. The first lawsuits against the U.
Bomb program researchers played a leading role in the design and implementation of the most extensive U. Newburgh, New York from 1945 to 1956. Newburgh citizens, with the cooperation of State Health Department personnel. 1948 study published by Program F scientists in the Journal of the American Dental Association shows that evidence of adverse health effects from fluoride was censored by the U. The bomb program’s fluoride safety studies were conducted at the University of Rochester, site of one of the most notorious human radiation experiments of the Cold War, in which unsuspecting hospital patients were injected with toxic doses of radioactive plutonium.
1950’s, nor to civilian researchers and health professionals, or journalists. The declassified documents resonate with a growing body of scientific evidence, and a chorus of questions, about the health effects of fluoride in the environment. Human exposure to fluoride has mushroomed since World War II, due not only to fluoridated water and toothpaste, but to environmental pollution by major industries from aluminum to pesticides: fluoride is a critical industrial chemical. The impact can be seen, literally, in the smiles of our children. The signs are whitish flecks or spots, particularly on the front teeth, or dark spots or stripes in more severe cases. Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry at St. In recent years, pediatric bone specialists have expressed alarm about an increase in stress fractures among U.
John concludes that not dropping the bombs would have ultimately ended in many more casualties, and yet he never showed the slightest interest in following it up. We can achieve serenity, security emergency over a few lawsuits by New Jersey farmers? “Three minutes to midnight”, by the 1960s steps were taken to limit both the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries and the environmental effects of nuclear testing. Making it hard to show causation between elevated cancer rates and radioactive pollution specifically from the lake. It is the opinion of many people in the government and military then, who later became the director of Los Alamos for several decades upon Oppenheimer’s departure.
Now, researchers who have reviewed these declassified documents fear that Cold War national security considerations may have prevented objective scientific evaluation of vital public health questions concerning fluoride. Phyllis Mullenix, former head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, and now a critic of fluoridation. During her investigation, Mullenix was astonished to discover there had been virtually no previous U. Then, her application for a grant to continue her CNS research was turned down by the U. It seems most likely that the F component rather than the T is the causative factor.
Manhattan Project’s Medical Section, Colonel Stafford Warren. This is important not only to protect a given individual, but also to prevent a confused workman from injuring others by improperly performing his duties. On the same day, Colonel Warren approved the CNS research program. This was in 1944, at the height of the Second World War and the nation’s race to build the world’s first atomic bomb. For research on fluoride’s CNS effects to be approved at such a momentous time, the supporting evidence set forth in the proposal forwarded along with the memo must have been persuasive. The proposal, however, is missing from the files of the U.
Charles Reeves, chief librarian at the Atlanta branch of the U. National Archives and Records Administration, where the memos were found. Similarly, no results of the Manhattan Project’s fluoride CNS research could be found in the files. How could I be told by NIH that fluoride has no central nervous system effects when these documents were sitting there all the time? The author of the 1944 CNS research proposal was Dr. Hodge, at the time chief of fluoride toxicology studies for the University of Rochester division of the Manhattan Project. Nearly fifty years later at the Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, Dr.
By then Hodge had achieved status emeritus as a world authority on fluoride safety. CNS research since the days of the Manhattan Project is unacceptable to Mullenix, who refuses to abandon the issue. You can’t just walk away from this. Antonio Noronha, an NIH scientific review advisor familiar with Dr. Mullenix’s grant request, says her proposal was rejected by a scientific peer-review group. We strive very hard at NIH to make sure politics does not enter the picture.