Medicine and War
ISSN: 0748-8009 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fmcs19
Colloquia on radiation, arms race, chemical and biological warfare Theresa E. Watts MBBS MFCM & Patricia Craig BA MBBS To cite this article: Theresa E. Watts MBBS MFCM & Patricia Craig BA MBBS (1990) Colloquia on radiation, arms race, chemical and biological warfare, Medicine and War, 6:1, 12-19, DOI: 10.1080/07488009008408891 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07488009008408891
Published online: 22 Oct 2007.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fmcs20 Download by: [Universite Laval]
Date: 09 November 2015, At: 03:22
IPPNW 9TH CONGRESS: REPORT
Colloquia on Radiation, Arms Race, Chemical and Biological Warfare
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
1THERESA E. WATTS MBBS MFCM and 2PATRICIA CRAIG BA MBBS 1Community Physician, Swansea SA9 1GS; zMedical Historian, Bath BA2 9AN The 9th IPPNW Congress addressed radiation hazards and effects in several colloquia, one of which is reported here. This paper also reports on colloquia on the arms race and on chemical and biological weapons (CBW). KEYWORDS
Nuclear radiation Arms race Chemical weapons Biological weapons
Radiation hazards and effects
Nuclear weapons production: the human and health consequences To assess the health and environmental hazards of the production of nuclear weapons, all aspects need to be considered, from the mining and transporting of uranium and other radioactive materials to the associated research, production and testing of nuclear weapons, the hazards of nuclear power, and the problem of the disposal of waste. Generally, information is extremely scarce; in the UK most of these activities come under the Official Secrets Act, and without adequate information it is very difficult to ask the right questions. However, research has started to attempt mapping the location of all activities concerned with the production of radioactive materials. Moreover, the public should be encouraged to question activities in any unusual structures and to note unusual clusters of illnesses. Among various nuclear accidents and exposure of people, to radiation that were described in this colloquium was the accident at the Kyshtym factory for the production of plutonium on 29 September 1957, which was compared by Vitalii Goldanskii (Director, USSR National Research Institute of Chemical Physics) with the Chernobyl disaster. In the Kyshtym accident, 2 million curies were released into the air after the concrete lid of an 'eternal storage container' was blown off; 10,000 people were evacuated, and 15,000 sq km of land were affected which could not be brought back into use for five years. In the Chernobyl accident, 50 million curies were released and 116,000 people had to be evacuated. Joseph Rotblat (Professor Emeritus, Department of Physics, University of London) described the effects of bomb tests in 1952 in Australia and in 1957 on Christmas Island. There appears to be a significant increase in cancer and MEDICINE AND WAR, VOL.6, 12-19 (1990)
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
13
cataracts among veterans of these tests; but when compensation was agreed the number of people allegedly exposed increased by 150 per cent and the apparent statistically significant association was lost! The difficulty of long-term surveillance of populations was discussed, especially when the size and the relative exposure of the index population is not known, and people move around and have different experiences in the intervening years. There is also difficulty, because of secrecy, in the monitoring of health due to accidents in nuclear establishments such as Windscale/Sellafield. Workers with the support of their trade unions often prefer to settle out of court so that jobs are not jeopardized. A recent survey of 52 (non-random) workers at Aldermaston had showed the need for further research. The following figures give the percentage of Aldermaston workers who visited a hospital casualty department in a year and their sickness leaves per annum compared with a control group of workers: Aldermaston workers (%) Casualty visits Sickness leaves p.a.
7.9 13.4
Controls (%) 2.4 7.8
The effect of different levels of radiation is unknown, and Kenjiro Yokoro (Professor of Pathology, Hiroshima University) cited experiments in which low levels of radiation actually enhanced the immunological reactivity in mice. The importance of more precise information on the effects of low levels of radiation and on ill-health associated with the nuclear industry was emphasized. T.W.
Arms race Nuclear weapons production and development This meeting related to the problems of controlling the nuclear arms race. Professor Marek Thee (International Peace Research Institute, Oslo) outlined some of these problems. There are over one million top-level scientists working on 'improving' weapons, and with each 'improvement' counter-measures have to be researched. Secrecy works most against the populations of the nations involved. Scientists from both sides have access to the same papers and books detailing current scientific thought, and are usually researching along similar lines. Only the public is kept in ignorance so that the right questions cannot be asked. The lead time for the development of a new weapons system is about 15 years, and many of the scientists are involved in pure research, the military significance of which is only developed later, when these scientists can no longer exert control.
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
14
T.E. WATTS AND P. CRAIG
In Britain research establishments are controlled by the civil service, who have limited understanding of the technology of the work being undertaken. Their political masters may come and go every five years or so, and inherit well-advanced research which has already cost enormous amounts of money. They are even less informed than the civil service, and Parliament has no 'right to know' so that appropriate questions cannot be asked. Permission for research to test various hypotheses, or to clarify a problem, is often given retrospectively when the scientist realizes the difficulty in explaining a complex technical point to a bureaucrat. Military research and development in NATO is controlled by approximately 650 unelected people. The elected representatives of the peoples have no say in these activities. Scilla Elworthy (Director, Oxford Research Group) spelt out the implications of this secrecy, and the tremendous difficulty in halting or reversing the arms race under current political constraints. She gave many examples of how Parliament and the public in Britain were kept in ignorance of development of different weapons research for many years. T.W. Confronting the moral and ethical dilemmas of 'the bomb' Yasuaki Nara (Professor of Buddhistic Philosophy, Komazawa University) explained two facets of Buddhist teaching which should result in opposition to the nuclear arms race. First, there is a powerful sense of individual responsibility for social and institutional action. People should feel that if someone in their family or country, or indeed any human, does wrong then they are partly responsible. Use of nuclear weapons is a case in which we are all responsible. Second, there is awareness of the interconnectedness of all nature which is incompatible with the idea of making or using an instrument of mass destruction. Putting these beliefs into action, we must live together and fight only against the destruction of the world. Lisbeth Palme (Chairperson, Swedish UNICEF Committee) argued a powerful humanistic objection to war, particularly nuclear, because of its effect on children. Owing largely to wars, in which children are the greatest sufferers, one-sixth of the world's population is now retreating from prosperity. Allowed to think such problems through, ordinary people can conclude that such a state of affairs is wrong. Uniquely, there was a public debate in Sweden as to whether the country should become a nuclear-weapon power; the people decided against it. Leonard Beerman (Rabbi, Founder of the Interfaith Center to Reverse the Arms Race) proved the efficacy of the story as an educational tool. After the debate everyone was repeating his parable which I shall summarize. There is another world similar to ours with the important difference that all public money is spent on health, education, housing and the arts. Some citizens are conscious of a scandalous inattention to defence. They labour mightily through coffee mornings, car-boot sales and street campaigning
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
15
to raise money for missiles. They march to protest the lack of military manpower. They do not manage to provide enough 'defence' resources to be really destructive. Thomas Gumbleton (Auxiliary Bishop of Detroit) started with an apology for the US government action in dropping 'the bomb' and then discussed the Church's response to the moral dilemma 'the bomb' represents. The Pope had condemned nuclear weapons; this has not been heeded. In allowing that the policy of nuclear deterrence is morally acceptable, official Church leaders have practised realpolitik. As an institution the Church has not proclaimed that even the intention to use 'the bomb' is morally corrupt. The Church, again as an institution, has not engaged fully in the search to find non-violent alternatives for solving international disputes. In opening the general discussion, the Moderator, Gwendoline Konie (former Zambian Ambassador to the United Nations) asked whether we would discover any development in 'thinking' since the similar discussion which she had moderated in Moscow two years previously. The questioning by the audience showed that they had not detected any 'new thinking' and were even more disturbed by the lack of action by religious bodies. A strong feeling emerged, especially in discussions subsequently over the next few days, that those members of IPPNW affiliates who belong to religious societies should put pressure on their leaders to speak out. A number of participants referred to the links between military spending and the evils of poverty, hunger, preventable disease and social injustice. P.C. Chemical and biological weapons
There has been concern among many members of IPPNW affiliates that a ban on chemical and biological weapons (CBW) should be included in the aims of IPPNW along with the removal of nuclear weapons. In this colloquium, chaired by Dr Mary Wynne Ashford, Victor Sidel (Distinguished Professor of Social Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine) discussed the implications and effects of CBW and gave his reasons why they should be included: (1) because they are also weapons of mass indiscriminate destruction, where civilians are the target rather than the military; (2) these weapons are the cheap option for non-nuclear states; (3) the use of these weapons could cause rapid escalation to nuclear war. Prof. Sidel described the history of the use of CBW from the burning of pitch and the use of plague victims as missiles to their use this century in the two World Wars, Vietnam, and the Iran/Iraq conflict. He also outlined the terms of the Geneva Convention of 1925 outlawing the use in war of CBW,
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
16
T.E. WATTS AND P. CRAIG
but not their production or possession. One hundred nations were party to this agreement, which was signed by the USSR in 1928, the UK in 1930, Japan in 1970 and the USA in 1975. The right to respond is reserved. Chemical weapons can be categorized into 6 groups: incapacitating agents such as tear gas, blister gases (nitrogen mustard, etc.), choking agents (phosgene, chlorine, chloropicrin, etc.), blood agents (hydrogen cyanide, etc.), nerve gases (organophosphates, etc.) and toxic agents such as enterotoxins, saxitoxins and botulinum toxin. Nearly all these agents can be manufactured legitimately as insecticides, anti-neoplastic agents, or as intermediate products. Trials of the dispersion of these agents have been made using simulants. Dispersion is on average about 24 square miles and the main effect would be on civilians who would have no protective clothing. These trials have caused some deaths and illness in people already sick or frail. Current research on chemical weapons has increased since 1983, and the USA has now developed binary chemical weapons which only mix on impact. Meanwhile the outmoded unitary weapons are being destroyed with some publicity, although there is considerable difficulty in the safe removal and destruction of these toxic substances. Research into biological weapons is also continuing - mainly on plague, anthrax, salmonella and Q fever. Dr Elizabeth Smith (Family Physician, Calgary) described some of the different techniques now being used, such as genetic probes, recombinant DNA, liposome technology, etc. A chemical and biological weapons factory near Calgary in Canada has already become a focus for disquiet. A disturbing account of the result of the use of defoliants and herbicides in Vietnam was given by a photographer, Yoshino Ohishi. She described how over 19,000 tons of tetrachlorodibenzo-dioxin were used over a period of 10 years by the USA, affecting 2.1 million hectares of land and 2 million people. Forty per cent of the forests were destroyed and have not recovered, and the animal life has not returned. Most worrying was the report that fathers who were exposed to dioxins had more deformed children after their return to their families, indicating a possible genetic effect. An increase in cancer rates among workers in the production of chemical weapons such as Yperite and phosgene has already been documented after a follow-up of workers on Okinojima Island in the 1930s. The meeting was also told of the likelihood of further use of defoliants and herbicides in the current 'war' against cocaine and other illegal drug cultivation. The colloquium recommended that the Research Committee of IPPNW should investigate the possible illnesses resulting from the production and use of chemical and biological weapons. T.W.
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
17
Appendix In the run-up to the Congress the arguments for and against 'Chemical and Biological Weapons: An IPPNW Issue?' were published in IPPNW's newsletter Vital Signs Vol.2 No.2 (October 1989). This debate is reprinted here with the permission of its editors.
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
FOR: VICTOR W. SIDEL MD Past President of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) and Deputy IPPNW Councillor; Chair, Working Group on Chemical and Biological Weapons, PSR/ Physicians for Human Rights
IPPNW clearly is, and should remain, an organization with a single primary focus — the prevention of nuclear war. Indeed, PSR has since its founding in 1961 consistently supported the importance of a single focus. But the boundaries of that focus have always been flexible enough to encompass a broad range of work, not only on the potential medical consequences of nuclear war but also on the consequences of preparation for it, on the factors that increase the risk of its occurrence, and on actions that would reduce the risk. For example, by demonstrating that the diversion of resources into the arms race causes destruction before detonation, we in PSR have been able to capture the attention of people who previously considered prevention of nuclear war irrelevant to their concerns. PSR has also included in its agenda opposition to outdated ideas of national security that in our view increase the risk of nuclear war, and has advocated specific political actions to reduce the risk. In December 1988, the Board of Directors of PSR decided that the risk of chemical and biological (CB) war and its prevention are closely related to the risk and prevention of nuclear war. The Board therefore approved adopting this issue into PSR's agenda for the following reasons: (1) Representatives of at least one nation have implied that if CB arms are used against it, it will respond with nuclear weapons. Representatives of other nations have enunciated a moral and military equivalence between these weapons, as in the statement that CB weapons are 'the poor nations' nuclear arms'. In short, PSR believes development, stockpiling or use of CB arms helps maintain the nuclear arms race and makes nuclear war harder to prevent. (2) PSR believes that existing and future arms control agreements on CB weapons can serve as models for negotiation of effective nuclear arms control agreements.
18
T.E. WATTS AND P. CRAIG
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
(3) The bases for the world's abhorrence of CB weapons and nuclear weapons are similar: (i) their capacity for causing indiscriminate injury, morbidity and mortality; (ii) their potential for use in a first-strike attack that attempts to so weaken or demoralize an adversary that no effective response is possible; and (iii) their potential for world-wide, long-lasting, perhaps even genocidal devastation. PSR believes its most important strength and that of IPPNW is our moral position as physicians. If we as physicians are ethically required to speak out against nuclear weapons, are we any less required as physicians to speak out against chemical and particularly biological weapons? Since PSR's efforts on banning CB weapons began in early 1989, our work has been well received by the US medical profession and has gained the attention of the US media and the US government. We believe this work has strengthened, not weakened, PSR's efforts for the prevention of nuclear war. We believe that similar work by IPPNW and by its other affiliates would be equally well received and would strengthen, not weaken, IPPNW efforts for the prevention of nuclear war.
AGAINST: URBAN WALDENSTROM MD International Councillor, Swedish Physicians against Nuclear Weapons
Throughout the years, IPPNW has focused exclusively on the nuclear weapons issue, despite numerous proposals to address other topics. PSR now proposes that IPPNW add biological and chemical weapons to our agenda. This topic is of great importance and relevant to our primary goal: to prevent a nuclear war. The question is: Which of today's big problems is not important and relevant to us? And yet, we cannot cover them all effectively. Whenever an amendment is proposed that would expand our agenda, the most relevant questions to be discussed are: (i) is this the most important issue for IPPNW to address? (ii) does the expansion of IPPNW's agenda enhance the federation's effectiveness, or does it divert our attention so much that the net effect is negative? (iii) is IPPNW the appropriate and best-suited body for the topic in mind? (iv) what positive and negative effects will expanding the agenda have on our members? (v) will our impact on public opinion, politicians, and militaries be strengthened or weakened by expanding our agenda? These questions are more important than whether the proposed new issue bears a close or distant relationship to nuclear war. I would propose an alternate way of handling the many important and relevant issues vying for our concern and attention. It has been tested and
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
19
found effective for seven years. We can educate and spread information about issues without formally making them a part of our working agenda. The Swedish affiliate is well-known for strictly keeping to the issue of nuclear war and the medical aspects thereof. Some think - and some even say — that we are rigid and over-cautious. But these people are surprised when they attend a symposium arranged by us. We physicians cover only the medical aspects of nuclear war, but we invite others to address military, psychological, technical, social, ethical, and religious aspects of the issue. Often the symposia are co-sponsored by many professional groups that oppose nuclear weapons. Thus, if we find a special topic worth pursuing, but outside our expertise, we ask others to help us. Of course this is done all over the world, by every affiliate. I am sure this is the best way to address the many important problems we face! We do not have to take on all issues ourselves. The advantages of concentrating our efforts on a single issue are many. To prevent nuclear war is vast and exciting enough. There is much more work that needs to be done. We must be efficient to succeed!
Bibliography Sidel VW, Goldwyn RM. Chemical and biologic weapons. N Engl J Med 1966; 274:21-27. The Lancet. Editorial: Chemical and bacteriological weapons in the 1980s. Lancet 1984; ii:141-43. Report of the British Medical Association's Board of Science and Education. The Medical Implications of Chemical and Biological Warfare. London: BMA, 1987. Humphrey JH. Biological weapons — Banned, but gone forever? At: Conference of Medical Association for Prevention of War 'Chemical and Biological Weapons - A Matter of Medical Concern'. Med War 1987; 3:23-30. Ferner RE, Rawlins MD. Editorial: Chemical weapons — Easy to make, hard to destroy. Br Med J 1989; 298:767-68. Journal of the American Medical Association. Issue on chemical and biological warfare, 4 August 1989, Volume 262, Number 5.
ISSN: 0748-8009 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fmcs19
Colloquia on radiation, arms race, chemical and biological warfare Theresa E. Watts MBBS MFCM & Patricia Craig BA MBBS To cite this article: Theresa E. Watts MBBS MFCM & Patricia Craig BA MBBS (1990) Colloquia on radiation, arms race, chemical and biological warfare, Medicine and War, 6:1, 12-19, DOI: 10.1080/07488009008408891 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07488009008408891
Published online: 22 Oct 2007.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fmcs20 Download by: [Universite Laval]
Date: 09 November 2015, At: 03:22
IPPNW 9TH CONGRESS: REPORT
Colloquia on Radiation, Arms Race, Chemical and Biological Warfare
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
1THERESA E. WATTS MBBS MFCM and 2PATRICIA CRAIG BA MBBS 1Community Physician, Swansea SA9 1GS; zMedical Historian, Bath BA2 9AN The 9th IPPNW Congress addressed radiation hazards and effects in several colloquia, one of which is reported here. This paper also reports on colloquia on the arms race and on chemical and biological weapons (CBW). KEYWORDS
Nuclear radiation Arms race Chemical weapons Biological weapons
Radiation hazards and effects
Nuclear weapons production: the human and health consequences To assess the health and environmental hazards of the production of nuclear weapons, all aspects need to be considered, from the mining and transporting of uranium and other radioactive materials to the associated research, production and testing of nuclear weapons, the hazards of nuclear power, and the problem of the disposal of waste. Generally, information is extremely scarce; in the UK most of these activities come under the Official Secrets Act, and without adequate information it is very difficult to ask the right questions. However, research has started to attempt mapping the location of all activities concerned with the production of radioactive materials. Moreover, the public should be encouraged to question activities in any unusual structures and to note unusual clusters of illnesses. Among various nuclear accidents and exposure of people, to radiation that were described in this colloquium was the accident at the Kyshtym factory for the production of plutonium on 29 September 1957, which was compared by Vitalii Goldanskii (Director, USSR National Research Institute of Chemical Physics) with the Chernobyl disaster. In the Kyshtym accident, 2 million curies were released into the air after the concrete lid of an 'eternal storage container' was blown off; 10,000 people were evacuated, and 15,000 sq km of land were affected which could not be brought back into use for five years. In the Chernobyl accident, 50 million curies were released and 116,000 people had to be evacuated. Joseph Rotblat (Professor Emeritus, Department of Physics, University of London) described the effects of bomb tests in 1952 in Australia and in 1957 on Christmas Island. There appears to be a significant increase in cancer and MEDICINE AND WAR, VOL.6, 12-19 (1990)
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
13
cataracts among veterans of these tests; but when compensation was agreed the number of people allegedly exposed increased by 150 per cent and the apparent statistically significant association was lost! The difficulty of long-term surveillance of populations was discussed, especially when the size and the relative exposure of the index population is not known, and people move around and have different experiences in the intervening years. There is also difficulty, because of secrecy, in the monitoring of health due to accidents in nuclear establishments such as Windscale/Sellafield. Workers with the support of their trade unions often prefer to settle out of court so that jobs are not jeopardized. A recent survey of 52 (non-random) workers at Aldermaston had showed the need for further research. The following figures give the percentage of Aldermaston workers who visited a hospital casualty department in a year and their sickness leaves per annum compared with a control group of workers: Aldermaston workers (%) Casualty visits Sickness leaves p.a.
7.9 13.4
Controls (%) 2.4 7.8
The effect of different levels of radiation is unknown, and Kenjiro Yokoro (Professor of Pathology, Hiroshima University) cited experiments in which low levels of radiation actually enhanced the immunological reactivity in mice. The importance of more precise information on the effects of low levels of radiation and on ill-health associated with the nuclear industry was emphasized. T.W.
Arms race Nuclear weapons production and development This meeting related to the problems of controlling the nuclear arms race. Professor Marek Thee (International Peace Research Institute, Oslo) outlined some of these problems. There are over one million top-level scientists working on 'improving' weapons, and with each 'improvement' counter-measures have to be researched. Secrecy works most against the populations of the nations involved. Scientists from both sides have access to the same papers and books detailing current scientific thought, and are usually researching along similar lines. Only the public is kept in ignorance so that the right questions cannot be asked. The lead time for the development of a new weapons system is about 15 years, and many of the scientists are involved in pure research, the military significance of which is only developed later, when these scientists can no longer exert control.
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
14
T.E. WATTS AND P. CRAIG
In Britain research establishments are controlled by the civil service, who have limited understanding of the technology of the work being undertaken. Their political masters may come and go every five years or so, and inherit well-advanced research which has already cost enormous amounts of money. They are even less informed than the civil service, and Parliament has no 'right to know' so that appropriate questions cannot be asked. Permission for research to test various hypotheses, or to clarify a problem, is often given retrospectively when the scientist realizes the difficulty in explaining a complex technical point to a bureaucrat. Military research and development in NATO is controlled by approximately 650 unelected people. The elected representatives of the peoples have no say in these activities. Scilla Elworthy (Director, Oxford Research Group) spelt out the implications of this secrecy, and the tremendous difficulty in halting or reversing the arms race under current political constraints. She gave many examples of how Parliament and the public in Britain were kept in ignorance of development of different weapons research for many years. T.W. Confronting the moral and ethical dilemmas of 'the bomb' Yasuaki Nara (Professor of Buddhistic Philosophy, Komazawa University) explained two facets of Buddhist teaching which should result in opposition to the nuclear arms race. First, there is a powerful sense of individual responsibility for social and institutional action. People should feel that if someone in their family or country, or indeed any human, does wrong then they are partly responsible. Use of nuclear weapons is a case in which we are all responsible. Second, there is awareness of the interconnectedness of all nature which is incompatible with the idea of making or using an instrument of mass destruction. Putting these beliefs into action, we must live together and fight only against the destruction of the world. Lisbeth Palme (Chairperson, Swedish UNICEF Committee) argued a powerful humanistic objection to war, particularly nuclear, because of its effect on children. Owing largely to wars, in which children are the greatest sufferers, one-sixth of the world's population is now retreating from prosperity. Allowed to think such problems through, ordinary people can conclude that such a state of affairs is wrong. Uniquely, there was a public debate in Sweden as to whether the country should become a nuclear-weapon power; the people decided against it. Leonard Beerman (Rabbi, Founder of the Interfaith Center to Reverse the Arms Race) proved the efficacy of the story as an educational tool. After the debate everyone was repeating his parable which I shall summarize. There is another world similar to ours with the important difference that all public money is spent on health, education, housing and the arts. Some citizens are conscious of a scandalous inattention to defence. They labour mightily through coffee mornings, car-boot sales and street campaigning
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
15
to raise money for missiles. They march to protest the lack of military manpower. They do not manage to provide enough 'defence' resources to be really destructive. Thomas Gumbleton (Auxiliary Bishop of Detroit) started with an apology for the US government action in dropping 'the bomb' and then discussed the Church's response to the moral dilemma 'the bomb' represents. The Pope had condemned nuclear weapons; this has not been heeded. In allowing that the policy of nuclear deterrence is morally acceptable, official Church leaders have practised realpolitik. As an institution the Church has not proclaimed that even the intention to use 'the bomb' is morally corrupt. The Church, again as an institution, has not engaged fully in the search to find non-violent alternatives for solving international disputes. In opening the general discussion, the Moderator, Gwendoline Konie (former Zambian Ambassador to the United Nations) asked whether we would discover any development in 'thinking' since the similar discussion which she had moderated in Moscow two years previously. The questioning by the audience showed that they had not detected any 'new thinking' and were even more disturbed by the lack of action by religious bodies. A strong feeling emerged, especially in discussions subsequently over the next few days, that those members of IPPNW affiliates who belong to religious societies should put pressure on their leaders to speak out. A number of participants referred to the links between military spending and the evils of poverty, hunger, preventable disease and social injustice. P.C. Chemical and biological weapons
There has been concern among many members of IPPNW affiliates that a ban on chemical and biological weapons (CBW) should be included in the aims of IPPNW along with the removal of nuclear weapons. In this colloquium, chaired by Dr Mary Wynne Ashford, Victor Sidel (Distinguished Professor of Social Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine) discussed the implications and effects of CBW and gave his reasons why they should be included: (1) because they are also weapons of mass indiscriminate destruction, where civilians are the target rather than the military; (2) these weapons are the cheap option for non-nuclear states; (3) the use of these weapons could cause rapid escalation to nuclear war. Prof. Sidel described the history of the use of CBW from the burning of pitch and the use of plague victims as missiles to their use this century in the two World Wars, Vietnam, and the Iran/Iraq conflict. He also outlined the terms of the Geneva Convention of 1925 outlawing the use in war of CBW,
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
16
T.E. WATTS AND P. CRAIG
but not their production or possession. One hundred nations were party to this agreement, which was signed by the USSR in 1928, the UK in 1930, Japan in 1970 and the USA in 1975. The right to respond is reserved. Chemical weapons can be categorized into 6 groups: incapacitating agents such as tear gas, blister gases (nitrogen mustard, etc.), choking agents (phosgene, chlorine, chloropicrin, etc.), blood agents (hydrogen cyanide, etc.), nerve gases (organophosphates, etc.) and toxic agents such as enterotoxins, saxitoxins and botulinum toxin. Nearly all these agents can be manufactured legitimately as insecticides, anti-neoplastic agents, or as intermediate products. Trials of the dispersion of these agents have been made using simulants. Dispersion is on average about 24 square miles and the main effect would be on civilians who would have no protective clothing. These trials have caused some deaths and illness in people already sick or frail. Current research on chemical weapons has increased since 1983, and the USA has now developed binary chemical weapons which only mix on impact. Meanwhile the outmoded unitary weapons are being destroyed with some publicity, although there is considerable difficulty in the safe removal and destruction of these toxic substances. Research into biological weapons is also continuing - mainly on plague, anthrax, salmonella and Q fever. Dr Elizabeth Smith (Family Physician, Calgary) described some of the different techniques now being used, such as genetic probes, recombinant DNA, liposome technology, etc. A chemical and biological weapons factory near Calgary in Canada has already become a focus for disquiet. A disturbing account of the result of the use of defoliants and herbicides in Vietnam was given by a photographer, Yoshino Ohishi. She described how over 19,000 tons of tetrachlorodibenzo-dioxin were used over a period of 10 years by the USA, affecting 2.1 million hectares of land and 2 million people. Forty per cent of the forests were destroyed and have not recovered, and the animal life has not returned. Most worrying was the report that fathers who were exposed to dioxins had more deformed children after their return to their families, indicating a possible genetic effect. An increase in cancer rates among workers in the production of chemical weapons such as Yperite and phosgene has already been documented after a follow-up of workers on Okinojima Island in the 1930s. The meeting was also told of the likelihood of further use of defoliants and herbicides in the current 'war' against cocaine and other illegal drug cultivation. The colloquium recommended that the Research Committee of IPPNW should investigate the possible illnesses resulting from the production and use of chemical and biological weapons. T.W.
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
17
Appendix In the run-up to the Congress the arguments for and against 'Chemical and Biological Weapons: An IPPNW Issue?' were published in IPPNW's newsletter Vital Signs Vol.2 No.2 (October 1989). This debate is reprinted here with the permission of its editors.
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
FOR: VICTOR W. SIDEL MD Past President of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) and Deputy IPPNW Councillor; Chair, Working Group on Chemical and Biological Weapons, PSR/ Physicians for Human Rights
IPPNW clearly is, and should remain, an organization with a single primary focus — the prevention of nuclear war. Indeed, PSR has since its founding in 1961 consistently supported the importance of a single focus. But the boundaries of that focus have always been flexible enough to encompass a broad range of work, not only on the potential medical consequences of nuclear war but also on the consequences of preparation for it, on the factors that increase the risk of its occurrence, and on actions that would reduce the risk. For example, by demonstrating that the diversion of resources into the arms race causes destruction before detonation, we in PSR have been able to capture the attention of people who previously considered prevention of nuclear war irrelevant to their concerns. PSR has also included in its agenda opposition to outdated ideas of national security that in our view increase the risk of nuclear war, and has advocated specific political actions to reduce the risk. In December 1988, the Board of Directors of PSR decided that the risk of chemical and biological (CB) war and its prevention are closely related to the risk and prevention of nuclear war. The Board therefore approved adopting this issue into PSR's agenda for the following reasons: (1) Representatives of at least one nation have implied that if CB arms are used against it, it will respond with nuclear weapons. Representatives of other nations have enunciated a moral and military equivalence between these weapons, as in the statement that CB weapons are 'the poor nations' nuclear arms'. In short, PSR believes development, stockpiling or use of CB arms helps maintain the nuclear arms race and makes nuclear war harder to prevent. (2) PSR believes that existing and future arms control agreements on CB weapons can serve as models for negotiation of effective nuclear arms control agreements.
18
T.E. WATTS AND P. CRAIG
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
(3) The bases for the world's abhorrence of CB weapons and nuclear weapons are similar: (i) their capacity for causing indiscriminate injury, morbidity and mortality; (ii) their potential for use in a first-strike attack that attempts to so weaken or demoralize an adversary that no effective response is possible; and (iii) their potential for world-wide, long-lasting, perhaps even genocidal devastation. PSR believes its most important strength and that of IPPNW is our moral position as physicians. If we as physicians are ethically required to speak out against nuclear weapons, are we any less required as physicians to speak out against chemical and particularly biological weapons? Since PSR's efforts on banning CB weapons began in early 1989, our work has been well received by the US medical profession and has gained the attention of the US media and the US government. We believe this work has strengthened, not weakened, PSR's efforts for the prevention of nuclear war. We believe that similar work by IPPNW and by its other affiliates would be equally well received and would strengthen, not weaken, IPPNW efforts for the prevention of nuclear war.
AGAINST: URBAN WALDENSTROM MD International Councillor, Swedish Physicians against Nuclear Weapons
Throughout the years, IPPNW has focused exclusively on the nuclear weapons issue, despite numerous proposals to address other topics. PSR now proposes that IPPNW add biological and chemical weapons to our agenda. This topic is of great importance and relevant to our primary goal: to prevent a nuclear war. The question is: Which of today's big problems is not important and relevant to us? And yet, we cannot cover them all effectively. Whenever an amendment is proposed that would expand our agenda, the most relevant questions to be discussed are: (i) is this the most important issue for IPPNW to address? (ii) does the expansion of IPPNW's agenda enhance the federation's effectiveness, or does it divert our attention so much that the net effect is negative? (iii) is IPPNW the appropriate and best-suited body for the topic in mind? (iv) what positive and negative effects will expanding the agenda have on our members? (v) will our impact on public opinion, politicians, and militaries be strengthened or weakened by expanding our agenda? These questions are more important than whether the proposed new issue bears a close or distant relationship to nuclear war. I would propose an alternate way of handling the many important and relevant issues vying for our concern and attention. It has been tested and
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 03:22 09 November 2015
RADIATION, ARMS RACE, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
19
found effective for seven years. We can educate and spread information about issues without formally making them a part of our working agenda. The Swedish affiliate is well-known for strictly keeping to the issue of nuclear war and the medical aspects thereof. Some think - and some even say — that we are rigid and over-cautious. But these people are surprised when they attend a symposium arranged by us. We physicians cover only the medical aspects of nuclear war, but we invite others to address military, psychological, technical, social, ethical, and religious aspects of the issue. Often the symposia are co-sponsored by many professional groups that oppose nuclear weapons. Thus, if we find a special topic worth pursuing, but outside our expertise, we ask others to help us. Of course this is done all over the world, by every affiliate. I am sure this is the best way to address the many important problems we face! We do not have to take on all issues ourselves. The advantages of concentrating our efforts on a single issue are many. To prevent nuclear war is vast and exciting enough. There is much more work that needs to be done. We must be efficient to succeed!
Bibliography Sidel VW, Goldwyn RM. Chemical and biologic weapons. N Engl J Med 1966; 274:21-27. The Lancet. Editorial: Chemical and bacteriological weapons in the 1980s. Lancet 1984; ii:141-43. Report of the British Medical Association's Board of Science and Education. The Medical Implications of Chemical and Biological Warfare. London: BMA, 1987. Humphrey JH. Biological weapons — Banned, but gone forever? At: Conference of Medical Association for Prevention of War 'Chemical and Biological Weapons - A Matter of Medical Concern'. Med War 1987; 3:23-30. Ferner RE, Rawlins MD. Editorial: Chemical weapons — Easy to make, hard to destroy. Br Med J 1989; 298:767-68. Journal of the American Medical Association. Issue on chemical and biological warfare, 4 August 1989, Volume 262, Number 5.
