Editing Nuclear fallout (section)

===Long term===
{{See also|Project GABRIEL|Bellesrad|Enewetak Atoll#History|Bikini Atoll#Current habitable state|Project 4.1}}
[[File:Caesium europe.webp|thumb|[[Caesium]]-137 in Western European soil, from the [[Chernobyl disaster]] and its deposition through the weather]]
[[File:Plutionium europe.webp|thumb|[[Plutonium]]-239 and -240 in soil, from [[nuclear weapons test]]s and its deposition through the weather]]
[[Image:Zuni.gif|right|thumb|Comparison of predicted fallout "hotline" with test results in the 3.53&nbsp;Mt 15% fission ''Zuni'' test at Bikini in 1956. The predictions were made under simulated tactical nuclear war conditions aboard ship by Edward A. Schuert]]
[[File:Checking Radiation Exposure Levels (FDA 190) (8227384650).jpg|thumb|right|Following the detonation of the first atomic bomb, [[Low-background steel|pre-war steel]] and post-war steel which is manufactured without atmospheric air, became a valuable commodity for scientists wishing to make extremely precise instruments that detect radioactive emissions, since these two types of steel are the only steels that do not contain trace amounts of fallout.]]

Late or delayed effects of radiation occur following a wide range of doses and dose rates. Delayed effects may appear months to years after [[irradiation]] and include a wide variety of effects involving almost all tissues or organs. Some of the ''possible'' delayed consequences of radiation injury, with the rates above the background prevalence, depending on the absorbed dose, include [[carcinogenesis]], [[cataract]] formation, chronic [[radiodermatitis]], decreased [[fertility]], and [[genetic mutation]]s.<ref name="Simon">{{citation |title=Fallout from Nuclear Weapons Tests and Cancer Risks |publisher=American Scientist |first1=Steven L. |last1=Simon |first2=André |last2=Bouville |first3=Charles E. |last3=Land |volume=94 |issue=1 |pages=48–57 |year=2006 |url=https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/Fallout-PDF |access-date=2018-06-16 |archive-date=2017-02-01 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170201125713/https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/Fallout-PDF |url-status=live }}</ref>{{better source needed|date=October 2016}}

Presently, the only [[teratological]] effect observed in humans following nuclear attacks on highly populated areas is [[microcephaly]] which is the only proven malformation, or congenital abnormality, found in the [[Uterus|in utero]] developing human fetuses present during the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. Of all the pregnant women who were close enough to be exposed to the ''prompt'' burst of intense neutron and gamma doses in the two cities, the total number of children born with [[microcephaly]] was below 50.<ref name="books.google.ie">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DykKlVU0V-oC&q=microcephaly+hiroshima&pg=PA21|title=Teratology in the Twentieth Century Plus Ten|first=Harold|last=Kalter|date=July 28, 2010|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|via=Google Books|isbn=9789048188208|access-date=October 19, 2020|archive-date=December 21, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211221000552/https://books.google.com/books?id=DykKlVU0V-oC&q=microcephaly+hiroshima&pg=PA21|url-status=live}}</ref> No statistically demonstrable increase of congenital malformations was found among the ''later conceived children'' born to survivors of the nuclear detonations at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.<ref name="books.google.ie"/><ref>{{Cite journal|title=The Children of Atomic Bomb Survivors: A Genetic Study|first=Clark W.|last=Heath|date=August 5, 1992|journal=JAMA|volume=268|issue=5|pages=661–662|doi=10.1001/jama.1992.03490050109039|bibcode=1992RadR..131..229A}}</ref><ref>[http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v88/n3/full/6600748a.html "Sex ratio among offspring of childhood cancer survivors treated with radiotherapy"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927161530/http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v88/n3/full/6600748a.html |date=2013-09-27 }}. ''British Journal of Cancer''.</ref> The surviving women of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who could conceive and were exposed to substantial amounts of radiation went on and had children with no higher incidence of abnormalities than the Japanese average.<ref>[http://www.rerf.jp/radefx/genetics_e/birthdef.html "Birth defects among the children of atomic-bomb survivors (1948–1954)"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180520224831/http://www.rerf.jp/radefx/genetics_e/birthdef.html |date=2018-05-20 }}. Radiation Effects Research Foundation</ref><ref>[http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2011/04/11/1 "Nuclear Crises: Hiroshima and Nagasaki cast long shadows over radiation science] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120405235042/http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2011/04/11/1 |date=2012-04-05 }}. April 11, 2011. www.eenews.net</ref>

The [[Baby Tooth Survey]] founded by the husband and wife team of physicians Eric Reiss and [[Louise Reiss]], was a research effort focused on detecting the presence of [[strontium-90]], a [[carcinogenic|cancer-causing]] radioactive isotope created by the more than 400 atomic tests conducted above ground that is absorbed from water and dairy products into the bones and teeth given its chemical similarity to [[calcium]]. The team sent collection forms to schools in the [[St. Louis, Missouri]] area, hoping to gather 50,000 teeth each year. Ultimately, the project collected over 300,000 teeth from children of various ages before the project was ended in 1970.<ref>Staff. [https://www.nytimes.com/1959/03/19/archives/teeth-to-measure-fallout.html "Teeth to Measure Fall-Out"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180722191254/https://www.nytimes.com/1959/03/19/archives/teeth-to-measure-fallout.html |date=2018-07-22 }}, ''[[The New York Times]]'', March 18, 1969.</ref>

Preliminary results of the Baby Tooth Survey were published in the 24 November 1961, edition of the journal ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'', and showed that levels of [[strontium-90]] had risen steadily in children born in the 1950s, with those born later showing the most pronounced increases.<ref>Sullivan, Walter. [https://www.nytimes.com/1961/11/25/archives/babies-surveyed-for-strontium-90-ratio-to-calcium-in-bones-is.html "Babies Surveyed for Strontium 90; Ratio to Calcium in Bones Is Discovered to Be Low A survey has shown that pregnant mothers and their unborn children absorb radioactive strontium, as a substitute for calcium, only about 10 per cent of the time"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180722190129/https://www.nytimes.com/1961/11/25/archives/babies-surveyed-for-strontium-90-ratio-to-calcium-in-bones-is.html |date=2018-07-22 }}, ''[[The New York Times]]'', November 25, 1961.</ref> The results of a more comprehensive study of the elements found in the teeth collected showed that children born after 1963 had levels of strontium-90 in their baby teeth that was 50 times higher than that found in children born before large-scale atomic testing began. The findings helped convince U.S. President [[John F. Kennedy]] to sign the [[Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty]] with the [[United Kingdom]] and [[Soviet Union]], which ended the above-ground [[nuclear weapons testing]] that created the greatest amounts of atmospheric nuclear fallout.<ref name=Reiss>Hevesi, Dennis. [https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/science/10reiss.html "Dr. Louise Reiss, Who Helped Ban Atomic Testing, Dies at 90"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190419195654/https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/science/10reiss.html |date=2019-04-19 }}, ''[[The New York Times]]'', January 10, 2011.</ref>

Some considered the baby tooth survey a "campaign [that] effectively employed a variety of media advocacy strategies" to alarm the public and "galvanized" support against atmospheric nuclear testing,{{citation needed|reason='http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/messages/downloadsexceeded.html' isn't a reliable source|date=September 2023}}, and putting an end to such testing was commonly viewed as a positive outcome for a myriad of reasons. The survey could not show at the time, nor in the decades that have elapsed, that the levels of global strontium-90 or fallout in general, were life-threatening, primarily because "50 times the strontium-90 from ''before'' nuclear testing" is a minuscule number, and multiplication of minuscule numbers results in only a slightly larger minuscule number. Moreover, the [[Radiation and Public Health Project]] that currently retains the teeth has had their stance and publications criticized: a 2003 article in ''[[The New York Times]]'' states that many scientists consider the group's work controversial, with little credibility with the scientific establishment, while some scientists consider it "good, careful work".<ref name=NYT>{{cite news
  |url=https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9403E7D81E39F932A25752C1A9659C8B63&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=all
  |title=In Baby Teeth, a Test of Fallout; A Long-Shot Search for Nuclear Peril in Molars and Cuspids
  |newspaper=[[The New York Times]]
  |author=Andy Newman
  |date=2003-11-11
  |access-date=2008-12-31
  |archive-date=2022-01-25
  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220125090737/https://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/11/nyregion/baby-teeth-test-fallout-long-shot-search-for-nuclear-peril-molars-cuspids.html
  |url-status=live
  }}</ref> In an April 2014 article in ''Popular Science'', Sarah Fecht argues that the group's work, specifically the widely discussed case of [[cherry-picking]] data to suggest that fallout from the [[Radiation and Public Health Project#Fukushima|2011 Fukushima accident caused infant deaths]] in America, is "[[junk science]]", as despite their papers being peer-reviewed, independent attempts to corroborate their results return findings that are not in agreement with what the organization suggests.<ref>{{cite magazine|url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/what-can-we-do-about-junk-science-16674140|title=What Can We Do About Junk Science|date=2014-04-08|magazine=Popular Science|author=Sarah Fecht|access-date=2014-05-21|archive-date=2014-05-20|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140520060329/http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/what-can-we-do-about-junk-science-16674140|url-status=live}}</ref> The organization had earlier suggested the same thing occurred after the [[Ernest J. Sternglass#Three Mile Island|1979 Three Mile Island]] accident, though the Atomic Energy Commission argued this was unfounded.<ref>{{Cite journal  | title = Scientists challenge baby deaths at Three Mile Island  | journal = [[New Scientist]]  | volume = 86  | issue = 1204  | page = 180  | location = London  | date = 24 April 1980  | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=59-_mdEJoRkC&q=sternglass+westinghouse&pg=PA198  | last1 = Information  | first1 = Reed Business  | access-date = 19 October 2020  | archive-date = 25 January 2022  | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220125090736/https://books.google.com/books?id=59-_mdEJoRkC&q=sternglass+westinghouse&pg=PA198  | url-status = live  }}</ref> The tooth survey, and the organization's new target of pushing for test bans with US nuclear electric power stations, is detailed and critically labelled as the "[[Tooth Fairy]] issue" by the [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]].<ref name="NRC">{{cite web|url=https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/tooth-fairy.html|title=Backgrounder on Radiation Protection and the "Tooth Fairy" Issue|publisher=U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission|date=2010-02-17|access-date=2010-11-07|archive-date=2017-07-20|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170720060330/https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/tooth-fairy.html|url-status=live}}</ref>