The statement supported the concept of citizen diplomacy initiatives, 102 a massive reduction in arms spending, and international co-operation with peace initiatives.
There had always been disagreement about casualty figures between the Home Office Scientific Research and Development Branch (SRDB) and professional peace movement groups such as MCANW and Scientists Against Nuclear Arms (SANA). SANA adapted figures from the US Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), which were more realistic and truthful in their estimation of post-nuclear attack damage. As a result government CD planners underestimated casualty numbers, the magnitude of the damage and the post-attack condition of society, and therefore underestimated the medical requirements which would be needed. Sepping felt that CD:
... is concerned with allaying fears about the aftermath of thermonuclear war by implying the return of Western-style medicine and also by ignoring the environmental sequelae of thermonuclear exchange. 103
Recently (1989) the SRDB has revised its figures 104 so that they are nearer to those of SANN°5 and the OT A. 106 Holdstock noted:
... a widespread impression that SRDB estimates of the effects of a nuclear attack attempt to minimise casualty rates in order to make CD for a nuclear war, and hence current military strategies, seem credible.107