TEN FOR SURVIVAL

the national broadcasting company in cooperation with the office of civil and defense mobilization and the educational television and radio center presents 10 for survival a series dedicated to man in the nuclear age today's program what do you know your host for the series nbc's distinguished commentator chad huntley welcome to program number six in the series 10 for survival in our past programs we've seen dramatic proof that man has survived down through the ages by the acquisition and the use of knowledge and it's our contention that in the event of nuclear war survival is still possible if we have and it will use knowledge if our contention is true it seems imperative that we find out therefore just how much we know about nuclear weapons and their effects how much of our information is erroneous how ignorant are we about events we read of daily in our newspapers how useful is the information we have well to answer these and other questions we'll show you the findings of a survey conducted by the international research associates a firm which specializes in the measurement of public opinion this survey was not national in scope but was conducted in areas near new york city including new jersey and westchester county among the hundreds of persons interviewed in our survey were mr and mrs robert cicero of 51 tillman street staten island new york and to help us illustrate some of the findings of our survey mr and mrs cicero consented to go through the questions again and repeat the answers they gave when we first interviewed them we shall also be talking with dr calvin s dreyer psychiatric consultant office of research and development ocdm and alberto castillos castelo vice president of international research associates mr and mrs cicero i'm going to ask you some of the same questions our survey team asked and then we shall see how your answers compare with the majority recorded in our survey and i hope our viewers at home will answer these questions as we go along and determine the extent of their knowledge and in effect keep what we might call a running score first question the things the way things look right now do you think that an attack on the united states is very likely not very likely or completely unlikely not very likely not very likely you say and there you appear to be in agreement with the majority of uh those people we talked to 21 said it's very likely 49 said along with you not very likely 18 said completely unlikely 12 had no opinion now if the united states were to be attacked do you think that it would be attacked with nuclear weapons that is atomic or hydrogen bombs or do you think that nuclear weapons would not be used mrs cicero i don't think they would be used you think they would not be used what about you i i think the same way i don't think they'd ever be used well now in our survey 76 said they thought it would be a nuclear attack and only 15 percent were in agreement with you people in saying that they thought it would be a non-nuclear attack all right to continue in the event of an atomic attack on the united states do you think that this area would be affected or not oh definitely you think this immediate area would be hit in one way or another and you agree yes i agree and indeed uh in our survey 86 said yes this area would be affected do you think that we that is you and i and our families should start learning how to protect ourselves against atomic attack now or do you feel that this is something that probably can wait i believe we should learn it right now and i believe so too and ninety percent of those we talked to in the study agreed with you 90 said we should do something now all right if the united states were to be attacked do you think it would be a surprise attack or do you think there would be enough advance warning for the public to take cover mr cicero i think we would have sufficient warning we have plenty of advance warning i don't you don't oh fine we have a disagreement here and we certainly have one with the majority of the people in uh our survey because 463 percent of those we talked to said they thought it would be a surprise attack 29 appeared to agree with you mr cicero and said we would have enough warning but what do you think you would do now if you heard a warning that there would be an atomic attack on the united states within 15 minutes well if i was near my home at the time i'd more than likely try to locate my children and try to get to a shelter in the immediate area you in other words you would try to evacuate well in our survey 48 percent said they would seek shelter a negligent negligible percent said they would remain at home and store supplies and listen to the radio for directions 34 percent however had no accurate information at all in response to this question well now if instead of 15 minutes suppose you had two hours to prepare would that make a difference what would you do in that event i would try to do the same thing locate a public shelter uh i wouldn't what would you do i try to get out of new york you try to get completely out of the out of the whole area well of the people interviewed 18 said they would evacuate the whole area incidentally do you people happen to uh to know the civil defense warning signals yes i don't you both know them well when uh the people who made this survey went around and uh asked the people in in this area about that they first asked do you do you know the alert signal twenty percent could correctly identify it but eighty percent did not know it and then they asked if they knew that take cover signal and again seven percent only seven percent were correct on this question but ninety 93 were totally ignorant about it you two are to be congratulated for everybody's in information by the way while we're on the subject the alert signal is a steady blast of three to five minutes and this means that an attack is going to take place the take cover signal is a whaling tone or short blasts for three minutes and this means an attack is taking place and you should take cover immediately in the best shelter available well in any event what do you think should be done so that more people may survive in case of an atomic attack i believe that they should uh go all out and try to learn what they can about it the people should be made aware of the situation in other words we should have more knowledge that's right well the respondents in our survey answered in this order forty five percent asked for more public education or knowledge the next highest figure was twenty four percent who didn't know what should be done and this was followed by seventeen percent who felt we should build public shelters nine percent said nothing could be done and five percent stated that chances for survival were better if home shelters were prepared all right to continue do you think that children should be given practice drills in the schools so that they will know what to do in case of atomic attack or do you think that this would not be a very good idea they should definitely be drilled in such a an instance i assume you would agree yes and you two are in agreement with the vast majority in our study because 94 said children should be drilled well now in russia they have compulsory civil defense training for all citizens do you think we should have the same thing in this country or don't you think so well i think we should but being americans we more or less tend to uh fall away from being compelled to do anything i definitely think we should be we should have compulsory training you say but it would be pretty pretty difficult you make a qualification well in our study 64 agreed with you and said yes indeed we should 29 probably the 29 percent you were talking about said no we should not all right how do you feel about civil defense do you think it's a good thing or would you say it's a waste of time oh i think it's a good thing you agree and 92 of those interviewed in this study agreed that it is a good thing now as you may have heard or read there is quite a bit of discussion about the effects of nuclear weapons as far as you know what would you say would cause most of the deaths in an atomic bomb attack i believe the radiation effects you say radiation would be be the principal killer do you agree no well yes i do but i also feel panic would be another one you think panic would be a killer well in this survey 42 percent felt the greatest number of deaths would indeed come from radiation as you said mr cicero and that is absolutely correct thirty percent expect most deaths to be caused by panic and fright fourteen percent thought most deaths would be caused by blast concussion and shock the remainder didn't know now when an atomic bomb hits all the people in the area are exposed to radiation from fallout so far as you two know is there anything people can do in an atomic attack to protect themselves from radiation or do you think there is nothing they can do about it well if they wash themselves with soap and water try to stay away from food that hasn't been put in a metal container and in other words anything that would be open that would be intended or should have a tendency to be contaminated any open food should be disposed of well you are saying in effect then that yes something can be done and you sir are absolutely right and 59 of the people in this study said yes something can be done but 20 percent said no nothing can be done at all how would you describe uh fallout mr cicero well that's dust particles that arise from the explosion from the force of the explosion and the radiation that comes from the bomb radioactive uh causes this dust to be radioactive contaminates these particles huh fine but when we asked this question in this study 31 were correct in their answers but a whopping 69 did not know uh now i'd like to explain at this point that in our next three programs we're going to explore all the facts concerning the effects of nuclear weapons which of course includes fallout and radiation so we can't very well go into these problems in any detail here this evening or a present however for the moment we'll contend ourselves with the briefest of explanations dr dreyer with whom we'll be talking later in the program is primarily a psychiatrist but he has background and radiation dr dreyer would you give us give us a brief definition of fallout mr cicero's definition is essentially correct one of the great problems however that arises with fallout is the spread by prevailing winds so that areas quite far from the original explosion may become contaminated by settling out of radioactive particles which make those areas uninhabitable for variable periods of time mr cicero was not far off then not at all all right to continue with our questions if you were approached by someone who had received a large dose of radiation what would you do and what do you think would happen to you mrs cicero well i don't believe anything would happen to me i'd try to help them but um would you do the same mr scissor ultimately well 50 of the people interviewed in this study said that they thought they would be contaminated that radiation was contagious and that they therefore would avoid contact with the radiated person now dr dreyer what are the facts well this is a serious misconception and it curiously enough denies the actual experience all of us have had at one time or another in civilian life people have x-rays and this is radiation yet if a person sits next to you at dinner and tells you that they had a chest plate that afternoon you do not get up and leave the room you know that he is not contagious because he's had some radiation it is true of course that if the radiated person has been subjected to fallout some of that dust could rub off but the exposure from that just by rubbing off from a contaminated person would not be too serious thank you now if you knew that you yourself had been exposed to radiation and there were no doctors or hospitals around anywhere what would you do to reduce the effects of the radiation rather than wash myself with soap and water i don't know anything else i could do you would add anything too well 73 in our study didn't know what could be done had no idea now dr dreyer what would you do to reduce the effects of radiation the procedure that has been described is by far the best and in a sense perhaps the only one that is useful this does not change the tissue damage it does prevent further damage from radioactive particles uh which might be allowed to remain on the body otherwise now we have here uh a list of some of the things that the civil defense people would like you to do now in preparation for a possible atomic attack i want you mr and mrs cicero to tell me which of these things you have done have you kept a two-week supply of food and water no no have you prepared a family shelter no no have you learned the civil defense warning signals have you learned about the protection from radioactive fallout yes and have you learned about your community plan for emergency action no no but it is obvious you have done something now let's see what the survey showed what people have done to prepare themselves this question 23 percent said yes they have kept a two-week supply of food and water percent said they have prepared a family shelter only three percent mind you have learned the civil defense warning signals only three percent have learned about the protection from radioactive fallout and only two percent have learned about their community plan for emergency action and look at this 69 have done absolutely nothing well now one last question mr mrs cicero now that you have gone through this survey how do you feel about it well i thought i knew quite a bit about it until the survey i found out how little i know about it and does it give you a feeling that you should would like or you think you should learn more about it oh we all should exactly thank you very much now for an evaluation of just what we've learned from our survey i should like to introduce the gentleman who supervised the undertaking mr alberto castelli vice president of the international research associates thank you mr huntley although the study quoted by mr huntley was conducted only in four boroughs of the city of new york and in some of the surrounding suburbs i am certain that the answers given by mr and mr cicero reflect the views of many people throughout the country the study shows that the majority of the people were not actively concerned with the danger of an attack on the united states the study shows also that most people were aware of the possibility that should an attack occur nuclear weapons would be used among those who did not think that nuclear weapons would be used about one half admitted that this feeling was more an expression of hope than a statement of belief the study shows a remarkable absence of self self-deception in the sense that few people seem to indulge in the attitude that it can't happen here most of our respondents felt that in the event of a nuclear attack their area would be affected and that an attack on the u.s would be a surprise attack in the area of preparedness our study shows that at least on a purely rational level most people are receptive to the idea of preparedness a great majority agrees that the idea of civil defense is a good thing and that now is the time to learn how to protect ourselves more than 60 percent go so far as to think that we should have a compulsory civil defense training program for all citizens such as the russians have and there's practically no disagreement in the idea that children should be given practice practice drills in the schools further on this question of survival through learning more people ask for information than ask for any other measures including public shelters and to stress the need as well as the demand for information the study shows a group representing about 10 percent of the population who feel that nothing can be done to survive a nuclear nuclear attack in the area of public information the study shows an appalling ignorance of one of the most elementary forms of protection the warning signals and the nature and the effects of radiation and fallout remain largely unknown and misunderstood in the area of protection the study shows that even with two hours time between warning signal and attack more people who tend to remain within their immediate surroundings that would tend to evacuate this pattern of behavior strongly suggests the need for protective devices in homes and places of work or in the most immediate vicinity of both in the area of accomplishment the picture is less encouraging in terms of the specific measures recommended by the civil defense administration the study shows that very few people have done anything about them only slightly over 20 percent keep the required two-week supply of food and water in their homes this figure may be inflated by the fact that it includes some people who estimate that their normal supply of food may last them for two weeks in any case ten percent claim to have prepared a family shelter here again the real figure may be substantially lower if we deduct those people who regard their sellers as adequate shelter without any further addition or improvements only 33 percent have learned the warning signals and or have fought information as to how to protect themselves from radioactive fallout and only 2 percent have made an effort to learn their community's plan for emergency action thank you mr castelli now having found out exactly how much or how little we know we want to turn our attention next to the reasons for the presence or the absence of knowledge in the area of nuclear weapons an expert in this field is our guest dr calvin drayer psychiatric consultant to the office of defense and civilian mobilization dr drayer what are your impressions first of all of this poll the results are very much in line with those of other somewhat more extensive polls it is quite obvious of course that far too many americans know far too little about the danger and what could be done about it would you say that there is uh just general widespread apathy on the part of the american public toward the sort of information we are dealing with here this is a term which is often used it is not an accurate term it is also misleading because it implies that there is lack of concern disinterest laziness even stupidity none of which really exist people are concerned as a matter of fact they're quite frightened a much better term is a somewhat technical one denial this is a common psychological mechanism in which a person who finds an idea frightening or repulsive tries unconsciously to deny that the idea has any basis in fact for example if a inexperienced soldier goes into battle he may feel quite understandably that it is shameful to be afraid he will deny the probability of his being afraid he enters some battle situation the fear inevitably develops finally reaches a level which overcomes the protective denial and he cannot deal with it he would have been much better prepared if he had been trained to expect fear and know what to do about this happens in relation to civil defense if people would accept it as something around which much horror will exist but learn what to do about it we would be much better off now what interested you most about this uh survey the figures are interesting as always of course 92 percent of those questions favor civil defense 90 indicate that they feel they should begin learning what to do right now but when they are asked about specific measures percent talk about more education and building public shelters only five percent talk about providing home shelters or stocking food in other words they would like to be led or protected when they are asked about their preference for educational procedures fifty one percent prefer television twenty eight percent mention radio only eight percent seem to feel that going to courses after hours would be worth considering it's interesting of course that 94 of them thought their children should be drilled the figure of 64 percent who favor compulsory training may be misleading as mr cicero indicated when he was asked the question this does not fit with our national tradition it would be difficult there is no indication that such compulsory training is contemplated therefore one can wonder whether these people rather mention this as an alibi as long as there is nothing required do not expect us to do anything about it well now do you think dr dreyer that people are relying on the idea that the horror of a nuclear war is just going to prevent one from occurring this question was not asked on this survey there is certainly a widespread hope that that is true without any real historical basis in war or in developments leading to war people seem to forget what is humane and what is not i've had several letters since this series started by the way and uh they were rather gently and politely accusing us of uh spreading the idea or planting the idea that nuclear war is feasible or acceptable simply because we talk about it and what to do we can readily agree that it is undesirable but we certainly would not be involved in such a defense program if we thought we could rely on everybody remaining aware of its inhumanity thirty percent i noticed in this survey said they thought panic would be a killer in the event of a nuclear attack do you agree with that no the evidence we have seems to speak against that as probable it is a widely uh spread belief but actual disasters insofar as we know them do not seem to produce panic unless there is a restriction of space or limitation of exit this would not in general apply uh to community destruction they're much rubble and whatnot but there are places to go and panic does not seem to develop as readily in those situations well that's certainly in agreement with what we have discovered on the study of other disasters in in the preceding programs panic it turns out at least in the way it's usually defined and thought of is not is not a killer at all i think the point uh was made on one of your previous programs which might well be repeated that leaving a scene of disaster as rapidly as possible is not panic this is just good sense that's right now knowledge uh about what to do in the event of nuclear attack knowledge about disaster how to conduct oneself precautions you might take all that is rather free it's certainly easy to get but what about bomb shelters uh what would a good bomb shelter cost well that depends on how good you want to make it uh a certain amount of ingenuity would provide reasonably good shelter and the civil defense authorities have plans which are easily available on request and i also recall i think a total of 79 percent said they would prefer to get their information about what to do in the event of nuclear attack by radio and television do you think they mean it they would like to have themselves spoon fed it is very difficult to teach this way successfully in difficult subjects although it does alert people to the need as we are attempting to do now in other words this implies that it's easier to receive it by radio or television than it would be to read it someplace precisely well as those of you who have watched our program from week to week know the premise of this series is that knowledge is survival and we've seen a sobering lack of knowledge on the part of the general public in relation to the questions in our survey a discovery that might well jolt each of us into a determination to inform ourselves fully and accurately on nuclear weapons and their effects and you will have such an opportunity on this series when we begin next week the first of three programs devoted to the hard facts about nuclear explosions i sincerely hope and i equally i sincerely recommend that you be with us then executive producer for 10 for survival malcolm mcgregor produced by joel o'brien directed by linwood king written by earl hamner our guests today were alberto castelli vice president of international research associates dr calvin s dreyer psychiatric consultant office of research and development of the office of civil and defense mobilization and mr and mrs robert cicero of staten island new york ten for survival was produced for the office of civil and defense mobilization and the educational television and radio center this has been an nbc production this is national educational television you