---

※ 引述《nokcp3 (華盛頓之心-阿聯)》之銘言：
: 澳洲反核醫師：台灣逃命圈太小
: 作者： 記者劉盈慧、鄭朝陽╱台北報導 | 聯合新聞網 – 2013年7月10日
: 曾在美國哈佛大學醫學院任教的海倫‧寇蒂卡（Helen Caldicott）表示，全球都以為核
: 電是最乾淨、便宜的發電方式，但其實只要有一磅的放射性物質鈽，就可讓全球的人染上
: 肺癌。
: 她說，隨著癌症與遺傳性疾病發病率的提高，每個人在使用核電前都該先想想，「我們會
: 留下什麼環境災害給下一代。」
: 「媽媽監督核電廠聯盟」昨天陪同曾創辦數個反核組織的澳洲小兒科醫師海倫．寇蒂卡到
: 新北市政府拜會副市長侯友宜。寇蒂卡說，國外核電廠緊急應變計畫區（俗稱逃命圈）範
: 圍為四十公里，台灣僅八公里，實在太小了，令人十分擔憂。
: 寇蒂卡表示，住在離核電廠越近，罹患白血症及癌症的機率越高，日本福島核災已造成廿
: 七名兒童罹患甲狀腺癌。她指台灣核四廠周圍八公里的逃命圈太小，應擴大到四十公里；
: 她並說，核四廠最好不運作，否則將造成台灣大災難。
: 侯友宜及新北市消防局長黃德清表示，市府已向行政院原能會建議「擴大到十五公里以上
: 」，但原能會仍在研究。
: http://ppt.cc/RQXR
: ----------------------------------------
: 爆炸就大家一起死吧!!!

這海倫‧寇蒂卡（Helen Caldicott）其實是有很多八卦可以說的


第一. 台灣反核人士說她是諾貝爾和平獎得主http://0rz.tw/HE54A 但這根本是說謊

我去GOOGLE諾貝爾和平獎歷屆得主 http://0rz.tw/OnAwn 這裡面根本沒有她

唯一有相關的是1985年的得主是"國際防止核戰醫生組織"
（International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War，縮寫IPPNW）

而IPPNW的創辦人名單如下:
「Drs. Bernard Lown, Jim Muller, Eric Chivian and Herb Abrams of the US and
Drs. Evgueni Chazov, Mikhail Kuzin and Leonid Ilyin of the Soviet Union」

這IPPNW的創辦人名單中也沒有Helen Caldicott

究~竟~ 台灣反核人士說她是諾貝爾和平獎得主 是哪個平行世界裡呢?


第二. 這海倫‧寇蒂卡已經被國外環保人士自家人打臉打得超慘的了

http://0rz.tw/6juHo  我節錄重點翻譯一下

標題:The unpalatable truth is that the anti-nuclear lobby has misled us all
     ( 一個令人不爽的事實-反核團體欺騙了我們 )

I began to see the extent of the problem after a debate last week with Helen
Caldicott. Dr Caldicott is the world's foremost anti-nuclear campaigner.
(我在上禮拜和Helen Caldicott辯論後，才了解到問題的嚴重性。
Helen Caldicott博士可是全世界首屈一指的反核人士耶)

In the debate she made some striking statements about the dangers of
radiation. So I did what anyone faced with questionable scientific claims
should do: I asked for the sources. Caldicott's response has profoundly
shaken me.
(在辯論的時候，在於輻射線危害的問題上，發表了一些驚人的言論。接著我就和所有聽到
有問題的科學論述的人一樣，問她是從哪裡找到的資料。她的回答令我大感震驚。)

First she sent me nine documents: newspaper articles, press releases and an
advertisement. None were scientific publications; none contained sources for
the claims she had made. But one of the press releases referred to a report
by the US National Academy of Sciences, which she urged me to read. I have
now done so – all 423 pages. It supports none of the statements I
questioned; in fact it strongly contradicts her claims about the health
effects of radiation.


I pressed her further and she gave me a series of answers that made my heart
sink – in most cases they referred to publications which had little or no
scientific standing, which did not support her claims or which contradicted
them. (I have posted our correspondence, and my sources, on my website.) I
have just read her book Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer. The scarcity of
references to scientific papers and the abundance of unsourced claims it
contains amaze me.


For the last 25 years anti-nuclear campaigners have been racking up the
figures for deaths and diseases caused by the Chernobyl disaster, and
parading deformed babies like a medieval circus. They now claim 985,000
people have been killed by Chernobyl, and that it will continue to slaughter
people for generations to come. These claims are false.
(過去25年來，反核人士不斷把車諾比核災的死亡人數和罹病人數往上加，並且把畸形嬰兒
當成中古時代的馬戲班子，向世人展現他們的缺陷。他們現在宣稱有985,000人死於車諾
比核災，而且未來還有更多人會因此喪命。但這些都是不實的說法。)

The UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (Unscear) is
the equivalent of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Like the
IPCC, it calls on the world's leading scientists to assess thousands of
papers and produce an overview. Here is what it says about the impacts of
Chernobyl.
(聯合國輻射效應科委會(Unscear)是核能界的跨政府氣候變化委員會(IPCC, )。
就像跨政府氣候變化委員會一樣，聯合國輻射效應科委會會要求世界頂尖的科學家
評估數千份報告，並提出整體的評估報告。以下就是這個組織對於車諾比核災的說法。)

Of the workers who tried to contain the emergency at Chernobyl, 134 suffered
acute radiation syndrome; 28 died soon afterwards. Nineteen others died
later, but generally not from diseases associated with radiation. The
remaining 87 have suffered other complications, including four cases of solid
cancer and two of leukaemia.


Caldicott told me that Unscear's work on Chernobyl is "a total cover-up".
Though I have pressed her to explain, she has yet to produce a shred of
evidence for this contention.
(她告訴我聯合國輻射效應科委會「根本就是在掩蓋真相。」
我要她解釋她為什麼會這麼說，但她至今提不出一絲證據來支持她的觀點。)

Its publication seems to have arisen from a confusion about whether Annals
was a book publisher or a scientific journal. The academy has given me this
statement: "In no sense did Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences or the
New York Academy of Sciences commission this work; nor by its publication do
we intend to independently validate the claims made in the translation or in
the original publications cited in the work. The translated volume has not
been peer reviewed by the New York Academy of Sciences, or by anyone else."


Failing to provide sources, refuting data with anecdote, cherry-picking
studies, scorning the scientific consensus, invoking a cover-up to explain
it: all this is horribly familiar. These are the habits of climate-change
deniers, against which the green movement has struggled valiantly, calling
science to its aid. It is distressing to discover that when the facts don't
suit them, members of this movement resort to the follies they have denounced.


We have a duty to base our judgments on the best available information. This
is not only because we owe it to other people to represent the issues fairly,
but also because we owe it to ourselves not to squander our lives on
fairytales. A great wrong has been done by this movement. We must put it
right.



看完上面的文章有沒有覺得Helen Caldicott跟台灣某些反核人士的作為很像

1.資料來源--報紙、新聞稿和廣告。
  科學根據是什麼? 又不能嚇人，不採用。

2.不管聯合國的報告，把福島和車諾比核災的死亡人數和罹病人數往上亂加一通
  說聯合國輻射效應科委會是在掩蓋真相，但是要拿出證據時，不管啦，我說了算!

3.出書後亂引用來源，搞得好像有紐約科學院的背書一樣。

難怪台灣反核人士會請她來台呀


另外我也找到其他國外打她臉的文章 有興趣的人可以看一看

http://0rz.tw/FW5BO  Answering Helen Caldicott

Caldicott blithely ignores the work of the National Academy of Sciences in
its BEIR VII report which includes a panel of world class scientists from a
dozen or more different disciplines. The BEIR VII panel expertise falls in
the following areas. * Epidemiology & public health, medicine * Radiation
oncology * Molecular biology * Radiation measurement, radiation physics *
Biostatistics, mathematical statistics * Genetic effects of radiation
exposures * Biophysics, bionucleonics * Risk assessment & risk management *
Chemistry and toxicology.

*流行病學, 公眾健康和醫科 *放射腫瘤科 *分子生物學 *輻射測量, 輻射物理
*生物統計學, 數理統計 *輻射照射的遺傳效應 *生物物理, 生物核子
*風險評估, 風險管理 *化學, 毒理學)

It looks like there are a lot more than just physicians and physicists at
work in this area. Sorry Helen, but your claim to exclusive rights to assess
radiation health effects is a misguided effort.
(看起來這不僅僅是醫生和物理學家在這方面的工作。對不起Helen，妳獨家評估輻射
對健康的影響是一個誤入歧途的努力.)

--

本文歡迎記者來抄 不怕你來抄 只怕你不敢抄

--
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.160.160.233

人家可是醫師耶 又號稱是諾貝爾獎得主~~~
說跟那個性愛作家同等級 會不會太汙辱她
※ 編輯: bahamutuh       來自: 118.160.160.233      (07/10 16:06)

諾貝爾獎得主也可以誤植喔
說她是重要成員之一 可是我在IPPNW的網頁裡面根本沒看到她耶


你怎麼把不能說的秘密說出來了呢
※ 編輯: bahamutuh       來自: 118.160.160.233      (07/10 16:18)

對不起 這部分沒完全翻出來 聯合國的報告是說車諾比核災的死亡人數是9000多人
這跟WHO的報告中死亡人數為一萬人出頭差不多

而為甚麼跟反核人士說的近百萬人差這麼多!?
因為反核人士的報告是把附近XX公里內所有死於癌症的人都算在車諾比頭上
聯合國和WHO的報告都是用死於癌症的人再乘上"癌症增加率"
我個人是同意聯合國和WHO報告中的算法


你在下面po的連接第14頁不就有說了:低劑量輻射在某些方面可能有助益或刺激的效果


有聽過這說法 例如:泡某放射性溫泉有療養效果
但是個人覺得這是個很笨的支持說法

※ 編輯: bahamutuh       來自: 118.160.160.233      (07/10 17:30)
※ 編輯: bahamutuh       來自: 118.160.160.233      (07/10 18:00)

致命性的輻射!? 福島還沒有人因為輻射而死喔

※ 編輯: bahamutuh       來自: 118.160.160.233      (07/10 23:13)

--