Premier Debate 2016 September/October ld brief

AFF—Psychoanalysis Aff

Clinging to nukes is a form of narcissistic attachment to technology

Kokubun 13

Address delivered at Asian Frontiers Forum: “Questions Concerning Life and Technology after 311”, National Taiwan University, May 30th, 2013. [Premier]

The concepts that Nakazawa provides in his analysis of nuclear technology will help us to answer these questions. As mentioned above, giveness and mediation have been the two traits characterising energy use by humankind up to the rise of nuclear technology. The latter aimed at overcoming these two conditions imposed on humankind. This means that nuclear technology tries to achieve a life without giveness. This technology dreams of living without being given, which means being fully independent, totally autonomous and standing alone. Is it not this “nuclear dream” that goes on fascinating some people and making them attached to this technology? In order to imagine how powerfully this dream attracts or seduces people, it is helpful to understand what nuclear power was expected to realise. A Japanese filmmaker, Noriaki Tsuchimoto (1928–2008), filmed a very interesting movie in this respect: Genpatsu Kirinuki-Cho [Tsuchimoto Noriaki's Nuclear Scrapbook] (1982, Japan), which is a kind of experimental movie consisting solely of images of newspaper clippings. There, we see some articles from the 1950s discussing the future that nuclear technology would bring about. For example, all the buildings have their own nuclear reactors, so they need no energy supply. In addition, all the vehicles, including airplanes, are equipped with nuclear reactors, which allow people to move so freely that intercultural marriage increases and the world becomes peaceful (I am not joking! In that period, people really talked like this!) The gist of these expectations is simple: if we have this small box (that is, the nuclear reactor) and if we keep on cooling the nuclear fuel inside, we no longer have to depend on anything; we become totally independent and acquire a life without giveness. Psychoanalysis is competent in analysing such a desire promoted by nuclear technology. This desire seems susceptible to being translated into a psychoanalytic term: omnipotence, which defines primary narcissism. As we know, Freud considered the child to live in a sort of megalomania, which it abandons in the next stage of its struggle with reality. However, it is so painful to abandon this original God-like feeling of omnipotence that it recurs in the individual’s adult life, which defines secondary narcissism. It is probable that the nuclear belief mentioned above is deeply rooted in secondary narcissism. This accounts for the fact that this belief is so firm and strong. Perhaps humankind believed that nuclear power would allow individuals to retrieve their original God-like feeling of omnipotence, which is, of course, deceiving. If this psychoanalytic reading of nuclear power is well-grounded, the movement for abandoning nuclear power generation (Datsu-Genpatsu) would require great effort due to secondary narcissism usually being very strong. Also, since this narcissism entails regression to the illusionary feeling of omnipotence in early childhood, abandoning nuclear power would mean some kind of maturity of humankind. This seems very difficult, but perhaps we should not forget that Freud did not give up his expectations for the maturity of humankind.

AFF—Radiation

Just the normal operation of nuclear power plants can lead to health defects

Perrow 13 [Charles Perrow, emeritus professor of sociology at Yale University and visiting professor at Stanford University, “Nuclear denial: From Hiroshima to Fukushima,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 2013] [Premier]

Even the normal operation of a nuclear power plant is expected to release some radiation. While most studies have concluded there is no risk to human health, some see radiation damages. A study published in 2002 looked at the health effects on children in the two years following the closing of eight US nuclear plants in 1987. Strontium-90 levels in local milk declined sharply, as did death rates of infants who lived downwind and within 40 miles of the plants, suggesting a link between low-dose radiation from gases emitted by the plants and early deaths (Mangano et al., 2002). The research task is daunting. Children are the most vulnerable population, and the biggest risk is childhood leukemia, so most studies focus on this. But since the disease is rare among children, a doubling of the tiny number of expected deaths is still so small it is hard to detect. In 2007, a German study found increased rates of childhood leukemia in the vicinity of all 16 nuclear power plants in Germany. Children who lived less than 5 kilometers (about 3 miles) from a plant were more than twice as likely to develop leukemia as children who lived more than 5 kilometers away. It should not surprise us that, despite their findings of leukemia, the study’s authors said they could not determine the cause (Federal Office for Radiation Protection, 2009). It could not be radiation because the levels were too low! A French study, for the years 2002 to 2007, found a clear correlation between the frequency of acute childhood leukemia and proximity to 19 nuclear power stations. The study reported a doubling of childhood leukemia incidence under the age of five, but the researchers concluded that there was only a “possible” excess risk for this cancer, and are explicit that it cannot be attributed to gaseous discharges because the radiation is so low. They called for more studies (Sermage-Faure et al., 2012). A metastudy of 136 reactor sites in seven countries, extended to include children up to age nine, found childhood leukemia increases of 14 percent to 21 percent (Baker and Hoel, 2007).

Food Poisoning

Radioactive isotopes can enter the food supply

Christodouleas et al 11 [John P. Christodouleas, M.D., M.P.H.,“Short-Term and Long-Term Health Risks of Nuclear-Power-Plant Accidents,” New England Journal of Medicine, June 16, 2011] [Premier]

Reactor accidents can release a variety of radioisotopes into the environment. Table 1TABLE 1 Estimated Releases of Isotopes during the Chernobyl Accident. lists the radioisotopes that were released during the Chernobyl accident.8 The health threat from each radioisotope depends on an assortment of factors. Radioisotopes with a very short half-life (e.g., 67 hours for molybdenum-99) or a very long half-life (e.g., 24,400 years for plutonium-239), those that are gaseous (e.g., xenon-133), and those that are not released in substantial quantities (e.g., plutonium-238) do not cause substantial internal or external contamination in reactor accidents. In contrast, iodine-131 can be an important source of morbidity because of its prevalence in reactor discharges and its tendency to settle on the ground. When iodine-131 is released, it can be inhaled or consumed after it enters the food chain, primarily through contaminated fruits, vegetables, milk, and groundwater. Once it enters the body, iodine-131 rapidly accumulates in the thyroid gland, where it can be a source of substantial doses of beta radiation. The release of radioactive water into the sea at the Fukushima plant has resulted in an additional route whereby the food chain may be affected, through contaminated seafood. Although the radioactivity in seawater close to the plant may be transiently higher than usual by several orders of magnitude, it diffuses rapidly with distance and decays over time, according to half-life, both before and after ingestion by marine life.

Cancer

Reactor meltdowns increase risk of cancer

Christodouleas et al 11 [John P. Christodouleas, M.D., M.P.H.,“Short-Term and Long-Term Health Risks of Nuclear-Power-Plant Accidents,” New England Journal of Medicine, June 16, 2011] [Premier]

In the region around Chernobyl, more than 5 million people may have been exposed to excess radiation, mainly through contamination by iodine-131 and cesium isotopes.7 Although exposure to nuclear-reactor fallout does not cause acute illness, it may elevate long-term cancer risks. Studies of the Japanese atomic-bomb survivors showed clearly elevated rates of leukemia and solid cancers, even at relatively low total body doses.28,29 However, there are important differences between the type of radiation and dose rate associated with atomic-bomb exposure and those associated with a reactor accident. These differences may explain why studies evaluating leukemia30-36 and nonthyroid solid cancers37-40 have not shown consistently elevated risks in the regions around Chernobyl. Alternatively, small increases in the risks of leukemia and nonthyroid solid cancers may become more apparent with improved cancer registries or longer follow-up. In the population around Three Mile Island, there was a notable temporary increase in cancer diagnoses in the years immediately after the accident, but this increase may have been the result of intensified cancer screening in the area. Long-term follow-up has shown no increases in cancer mortality.4 However, there is strong evidence of an increased rate of secondary thyroid cancers among children who have ingested iodine-131. Careful studies of children living near the Chernobyl plant (which included estimates of the thyroid radiation dose) suggest that the risk of thyroid cancer increased by a factor of 2 to 5 per 1 Gy of thyroid dose.41-43 Although this relative increase in incidence is large, the baseline incidence of thyroid cancer in children is low (<1 case per 100,000 children). Factors that increase the carcinogenic effect of iodine-131 include a young age and iodine deficiency at the time of exposure. Among children in regions with endemic iodine deficiency, the risk of thyroid cancer per 1 Gy of thyroid dose was two to three times that among children in regions in which iodine intake was normal.44,45 Moreover, the risk of thyroid cancer among children who were given stable iodine after the Chernobyl accident was one third that among children who did not receive iodine.45 Studies of the effect of thyroid exposure to radiation in utero46,47 and in adulthood48-50 have been inconclusive. In accidents in which iodine-131 is released, persons in affected areas should attempt to minimize their consumption of locally grown produce and groundwater. However, since the half-life of iodine-131 is only 8 days, these local resources should not contain substantial amounts of iodine-131 after 2 to 3 months. On the advice of public health officials, area residents may take potassium iodide to block the uptake of iodine-131 in the thyroid. To be most effective, prophylactic administration of potassium iodide should occur before or within a few hours after iodine-131 exposure. The administration of the drug more than a day after exposure probably has limited effect, unless additional or continuing exposure is expected.51 Although potassium iodide can have toxic effects, the Polish experience with en masse administration of the drug after Chernobyl was reassuring. More than 10 million children and adolescents in Poland were given a single dose of prophylactic potassium iodide, with very limited morbidity.52 The Food and Drug Administration has issued guidelines for the administration of potassium iodide according to age and expected radiation exposure.53