Study Details Catastrophic Impact Of Nuclear Attack On US Cities
Pastor Dale Morgan
Study Details Catastrophic Impact Of Nuclear Attack On US Cities*
Calls For Disaster Prep By Government & Citizens
Added: Mar 21st, 2007 8:07 AM
Study Details Catastrophic Impact Of Nuclear Attack On US Cities; Calls
For Disaster Prep By Government & CitizensStudy details catastrophic
impact of nuclear attack on US cities
Athens, Ga. – A new study by researchers at the Center for Mass
Destruction Defense (CMADD) at the University of Georgia details the
catastrophic impact a nuclear attack would have on American cities.
The study, which the authors said was the most advanced and detailed
simulation published in open scientific literature, highlights the
inability of the nation's current medical system to handle casualties
from a nuclear attack. It also suggests what the authors said are much
needed yet relatively simple interventions that could save tens of
thousands of lives.
"The likelihood of a nuclear weapon attack in an American city is
steadily increasing, and the consequences will be overwhelming" said
Cham Dallas, CMADD director and professor in the UGA College of
Pharmacy. "So we need to substantially increase our preparation."
Dallas and co-author William Bell, CMADD senior research scientist and
faculty member of the UGA College of Public Health, examined four
high-profile American cities – New York, Chicago, Washington, D.C. and
Atlanta – and modeled the effects of a 20 kiloton nuclear detonation and
a 550 kiloton detonation. (For comparison, the nuclear bombs dropped on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were in the 12 to 20 kiloton range). Bell
explained that a 20 kiloton weapon could be manufactured by terrorists
and fledgling nuclear countries such as North Korea and Iran, while a
550 kiloton device is commonly found in the arsenal of the former Soviet
Union and therefore is the most likely to be stolen by terrorists.
The study, which took three years to complete and appears in the current
issue of the International Journal of Health Geographics, combines data
on the impact of the devices, prevailing weather patterns and
block-level population data from the U.S. Census Bureau to provide a
level of detail previously unavailable.
Among the study's findings:
A 20-kiloton detonation would leave debris tens of feet thick in
downtown areas with buildings 10-stories or higher. Roughly half of the
population in downtown areas would be killed, mainly from collapsing
buildings. Most of those surviving the initial blast in downtown areas
would be exposed to a fatal dose of radiation.
While the main effects from a 20-kiloton explosion would be from the
blast and the radiation it releases, a 550-kiloton explosion would
create additional and substantial casualties from burns. Such an
explosion would superheat the blast zone, causing buildings to
spontaneously combust. Mass fires would consume cities, reaching out
nearly four miles (6.3 km) in all directions from the detonation site.
A 550 kiloton detonation in New York would result in a fallout plume
extending the length of Long Island, resulting in more than 5 million
deaths.
A 550 kiloton detonation in Washington, D.C. would destroy hospitals in
the District, but its fallout plume would also incapacitate hospitals in
Baltimore, nearly 40 miles away.
The researchers note that in all four cities studied, hospitals are
concentrated in the area most likely to be destroyed. Another weak link
is the inability of the nation's hospital system to treat the burn
victims a 550-kiloton detonation would create. A 550-kiloton detonation
in Atlanta, the least densely populated of the four cities studied,
would result in nearly 300,000 serious burn victims.
"The hospital system has about 1,500 burn beds in the whole country, and
of these maybe 80 or 90 percent are full at any given time," Bell said.
"There's no way of treating the burn victims from a nuclear attack with
the existing medical system."
Dallas acknowledges that the consequences of a nuclear attack would be
grim, but stresses that there are ways that tens of thousands lives
could be saved.
"If a nuclear detonation were to occur in a downtown area, the picture
would be bleak there," Dallas said. "But in urban areas farther from the
detonation, there actually is quite a bit that we can do. In certain
areas, it may be possible to turn the death rate from 90 percent in some
burn populations to probably 20 or 30 percent – and those are very big
differences – simply by being prepared well in advance."
One intervention is to mount a public awareness campaign to teach
civilians what to do in the event of a nuclear attack. Since radioactive
plumes move downwind, a person can look up at the trees to see which way
the wind is blowing and then flee perpendicular to the wind. Because the
plumes are significantly longer than they are wide, moving as little as
one to five miles perpendicular to the plume can mean the difference
between life and death. People in areas upwind of the detonation site,
on the other hand, are safest staying where they are.
"There are certain areas where people should flee," Dallas said. "But in
most areas, it would be much safer for people to stay put."
Dallas said today's hospital burn units provide exemplary but time
consuming care to burn victims, who typically arrive sporadically and in
small numbers. A nuclear attack would bring a sudden surge of patients,
but the medical system could dramatically minimize fatalities by
training staff and equipping non-medical people to treat second-degree
burn victims in much larger numbers. Dallas said the focus must be on
cleaning the wounds to avoid fatal infections, administering painkillers
and then moving on to the next patient. And all of this must occur in
the field, since thousands of victims would not make it to a hospital.
"Under the current system and in these extraordinary conditions, they're
going to be able to treat a hundred people well and not treat 99,900
people," Dallas said. "So we've got to change those gears."
On April 19, Dallas will address the United Nations for the second time
in as many years. He will discuss options for repairing the crumbling
sarcophagus surrounding the reactor that triggered the Chernobyl
disaster in 1986. He also will discuss the consequences of a nuclear
attack and what nations can do to prepare.
"We want to try to encourage people to pay attention to this, because
it's not all the end of the world," Dallas said. "There are actually
steps that one can take to save lives. But we're running out of time."
Note to editors: The complete study is available online at
http://www.ij-healthgeographics.com/.
About the study authors
Cham Dallas, CMADD director and professor in the UGA College of
Pharmacy, has a national and international reputation in toxicology and
issues regarding weapons of mass destruction stemming from more than a
decade of research, teaching and humanitarian efforts in
Chernobyl-contaminated areas.
William Bell, CMADD senior research scientist and faculty member in the
UGA College of Public Health, is an internationally recognized
specialist in WMD modeling, mass casualty estimation and management and
care of large numbers of internally displaced persons due to civil war
or natural disasters. Bell deploys on short assignments in the early
stages of major disasters. Recent deployments have included Sudan, Ivory
Coast, Liberia and Sierra Leone.
About CMADD
The Center for Mass Destruction Defense is funded by the U.S. Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention. CMADD is one of the CDC's Centers
for Public Health Preparedness and is dedicated to reducing the
casualties and social disruption from weapons of mass destruction events
and natural disasters through engagement in planning, mitigation, risk
analysis, professional training and the development of response
capabilities and infrastructure. CMADD partner institutions include the
University of Georgia, Medical College of Georgia, the American Medical
Association and the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School.