“A Very Pleasant Way to Die”: Radiation Effects and the Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb against Japan*

Abstract

One of the distinguishing characteristics of the atomic bombs used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki was their accompanying radiation effects. The effects of ionizing radiation on the bomb's survivors have been the subject of intense study and discussion since August 1945. This article examines a related question that has received surprisingly little scholarly attention: what did American scientists and policy makers know about radiation effects prior to the use of the bomb? In making the decision, did American leaders understand that the atomic bombs used against Japanese cities and civilians would have lingering and deadly effects in some ways analogous to chemical or biological weapons? A careful study of pre‐Hiroshima knowledge of radiation effects in the United States makes it clear that most of the immediate and long term biological effects of radiation on the victims of the bomb were, in fact, predictable at the time of the A‐bomb decision. While the pre‐Hiroshima understanding of radiation among Manhattan Project scientists was far from perfect, that the bomb would produce lingering and lethal effects was suggested as early as 1940. Extensive research carried out by Manhattan Project scientists and physicians during World War II, including both human and animal experiments, greatly expanded knowledge of the biological effects of ionizing radiation. Despite the intense wartime study of radiation effects in the United States, this knowledge played little or no role in the decision to use the atomic bomb. The policy of compartmentalization and secrecy enforced by Manhattan Project director General Leslie R. Groves, combined with the single‐minded drive at Los Alamos to build a working bomb, meant that few even inside the Manhattan Project itself were aware of, or interested in, the emerging body of knowledge on radiation effects generated during the war. The high‐level American leaders who made the final decisions about the bomb, including President Harry S. Truman, Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, and Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, were never informed that the weapon would continue to sicken and kill its victims long after use. For all of the outstanding technical successes of the Manhattan Project, the policy of wartime compartmentalization and postwar denial with respect to radiation effects ultimately served neither American leaders nor the many victims of the bomb in Japan. In addition to analyzing the evidence of pre‐Hiroshima knowledge of radiation effects in the United States, this article explores the disconnect between scientific knowledge and political decision making with respect to the atomic bomb that would continue into the Cold War.

“Radiation is Not New to Our Lives”: TheU.S.AtomicEnergyCommission, Continental Atmospheric Weapons Testing, and Discursive Hegemony in the Downwind Communities

“…Of the 29,254 words in the downwinder pamphlets “cancer” appears only four times. This is despite widespread observance by the 1950s of its occurrence due to exposure to radiation, including elevated cancer rates among the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (AEC ; Ball ; Jenkins ; LASL ; Malloy ; Schull ). Leukemia and thyroid cancer, recognized effects of radiation exposure by the 1950s (Jenkins ), are each mentioned just once.…”

The nuclear taboo, Battlestar Galactica, and the real world: Illustrations from a science-fiction universe

“…21 Early on in our nuclear history, an analogy emerged between radiation and poison gas: the bomb has been discursively linked to terrible and inhumane means of warfare, chemical and biological weapons, thereby classifying it as an unconventional weapon of mass destruction (Tannenwald, 2007: 95–105). Thus, ‘radiation effects ultimately became central to the widespread understanding of nuclear weapons as uniquely terrible and have likely contributed to the formation of a nuclear “taboo”’ (Malloy, 2012: 518).…”

“…But in contrast to countless pop-cultural productions since nuclear weapons were created, 22 viewers are curiously never exposed to the horrendous effects that radiation brings. 23 Survivors of the nuclear holocaust, for example, arrive at a rescue ship with surface wounds such as cuts and bruises from flying debris, but at no point do we learn that any of them have or develop typical symptoms such as ‘nausea, vomiting, malaise, diarrhea, epilation (loss of hair), fever, and hemorrhaging’ (Malloy, 2012: 521). 24 Neither does Caprica’s environmental system seem much affected by the massive nuclear detonations – be it contamination by fallout or nuclear winter.…”

Downwind of the Atomic State: US Continental Atmospheric Testing, Radioactive Fallout, and Organizational Deviance, 1951–1962

“…He notes the threshold concept was not widely embraced among relevant scientific associations and there existed extensive debate regarding genetic alterations due to linear dose-effect exposure to radiation. Much of this concern derived from years of animal studies within and without the AEC and observation of the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Atomic Energy Commission 1945; Ball 1986; Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory 1950; Malloy 2012; Schull 1995; Walker 2000).…”