Daily Star, on UK Politics, 7 November 2026

7.3out of 10Serious

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.4 findings

A veteran was . Captain Terry Hughes was among approximately 22,000 servicemen dispatched to Australia and the South Pacific as part of the UK's nuclear testing programme during the 1950s and 1960s. The 87-year-old has endured a catalogue of health issues ever since, while his ex-wife suffered multiple miscarriages and his own son has been left unable to have children.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article never says what the DNA claim rests on. Hughes told the Express that a DNA test in America found mutations which the testers said were caused by radiation. Without this, a reader believes the Star has independently established the DNA damage, not that it is the veteran's account of a test result.

How we know

Just 19-years-old at the time, Captain Hughes was deployed to Christmas Island in the Pacific for Operation Grapple in 1958, where the UK detonated its largest-ever thermonuclear weapon - a hydrogen bomb (H-bomb) - firmly establishing itself as a global nuclear power. He was serving with the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, which provides support to the Royal Navy . Captain Hughes, from Lydney in Gloucestershire, told the Daily Express: "When we arrived, we didn't know what was going to happen."

"They then told us they were going to explode a H-bomb." The bomb, codenamed Grapple Y, was dropped near Christmas Island on April 28 and remains the largest and most powerful nuclear weapon ever tested by Britain. It carried an explosive yield of approximately three megatonnes of TNT, making it roughly 200 times more destructive than the bomb that obliterated Hiroshima in 1945, reports the Express . Captain Hughes, who was serving as a junior navigating officer at the time, he said: "We were quite unhappy and the crew was mumbling a bit but the Naval officer came out and said 'oh don't worry, we've done all of this before'.

"But, of course they hadn't done it before. It was the first time they had done a H-bomb." According to the veteran, the mood on the vessel was "tense" ahead of the bomb's detonation. He described how the crew were provided with no protective clothing whatsoever, which only heightened their unease. He added: "I'd experienced bombs in World War Two but that's a very different story." He added: "This H-bomb was 200 times more powerful than they let off in Japan.

So my first thought was: 'If they've done this in Japan, why are we doing this here? They must know the effects.' "Before the detonation, we were given certain positions on the ship. I was told to go and help the crew down below in the ship in the engine room. None of us knew what was going to happen so I was sent down there in case of an emergency. "We were all very apprehensive and we were given a countdown before the bomb exploded. We were between about 15 to 20 miles away when it happened."

Captain Hughes was dispatched immediately to Scotland, before heading to Iceland and eventually returning to Britain. He said: "Like everyone else, we didn't talk about it. We didn't talk about the radiation." He added: "That was until around the mid-80s when the court case emerged." In 1985, nuclear test veteran Melvyn Pearce launched a damages claim against the Ministry of Defence.

Having developed lymphoma in 1978, he alleged the condition was directly linked to his exposure during the nuclear testing programme of the 1950s. He secured a significant victory when it was ruled that the MoD could not rely on Crown immunity to prevent servicemen from taking legal action against the government. However, he was ultimately forced to drop his claim after legal and medical experts were unable to establish that radiation exposure was the direct cause of his cancer .

It was the court battle that prompted veterans such as Captain Hughes to speak out and acknowledge the catastrophic consequences of radiation exposure. He is now a member of LABRATs, a campaign group that has launched an offensive against the MoD, alleging that the government concealed the blood and urine test records of servicemen deployed to testing sites including Christmas Island. LABRATS contends that the documentation demonstrates that veterans were deliberately used as guinea pigs to examine the long-term effects of radiation on the human body.

This is firmly denied by the MoD. His son, now in his 50s, has endured a range of health problems, including multiple thrombosis, which has "affected him very badly". Meanwhile, his ex-wife, who passed away from a brain tumour a couple of years ago, experienced miscarriages thought to be caused by the radiation. Captain Hughes, who also suspects his skin cancer is connected to radiation exposure, is now pushing for education about the nuclear testing and an apology from the government.

He is demanding an independent tribunal and compensation for those impacted. Hughes said: "Before Andy Burnham became an MP, he was one of our very strong campaigners." The captain added: "He said any future Prime Minister should stand up and give an apology. He also said there should be an independent inquiry into all of this. But, since he's become Prime Minister, he's been very quiet." To commemorate the anniversary, there will be an All Tests Reunion (ATR), a gathering organised for British nuclear test veterans and their families, which Captain Hughes described as "special".

The veteran said: "We are a family and we look after each other. That's very important and something they can never take away." To donate to the Nuclear Tests Veterans Annual Reunion 2027, click here . A Government spokesperson said: "We recognise the significant contribution that nuclear test veterans have made, and continue to make, to our national security. "The Government remains committed to engaging openly with the community, including through a recent meeting between the Prime Minister, the Defence Secretary and LABRATS.

"As this work progresses, our focus will be on transparency, accountability and building confidence among veterans and their families."

Read the original article on dailystar.co.uk (opens in a new tab)
What we found (4)

The Daily Star states as its own fact that a veteran's DNA was scrambled by a 1958 UK nuclear test and that this left him unable to have healthy children. Elsewhere the article itself only attributes radiation as a suspected cause. The headline puts 'scrambled' in quotation marks although nobody in the article says it, and the article never tells the reader that the DNA claim rests on a test the veteran says he had in America.

  1. Headline goes beyond the article

    Serious

    “Man's DNA 'scrambled' after being 15 miles from UK nuclear bomb test”

    Why this matters
    The headline puts 'scrambled' in quotation marks as if someone said it, and ties the damage directly to being 15 miles from the test.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes Captain Hughes or an expert described his DNA as scrambled, and that the test is established as the cause.
    The context
    Nobody quoted in the article uses the word 'scrambled'. The Express interview the Star draws on has Hughes saying a DNA test found mutations that the testers said were caused by radiation. The Star's own body treats radiation as a suspected cause elsewhere.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Nuclear test veteran says DNA test found radiation mutations after he was 15 miles from 1958 H-bomb blast

  2. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “after his DNA was scrambled in a UK nuclear bomb test”

    Why this matters
    The opening sentence states in the Star's own voice that the test scrambled the veteran's DNA, with no attribution to him or to any test.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes the DNA damage and its cause are established fact.
    The context
    The claim comes from Hughes, who told the Express a DNA test in America found mutations attributed to radiation. The Star never reports that test. Its own account of the Pearce case says experts could not establish radiation as the direct cause of a veteran's cancer.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “left with serious health issues and unable to have healthy children”

    Why this matters
    These words present the veteran's health problems and his family's childbearing problems as a proven result of the test.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes the link between the test and his children's health is settled.
    The context
    Later the Star itself only says the miscarriages were 'thought to be caused' by radiation and that Hughes 'suspects' a link to his skin cancer. The causal link is his belief, not an established finding.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“miscarriages thought to be caused by the radiation”
    • Elsewhere in the article“who also suspects his skin cancer is connected to radiation exposure”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Captain Terry Hughes, a veteran of a 1958 UK H-bomb test, says a DNA test found mutations caused by radiation, and he believes the exposure explains his health problems and his family's.

  3. States one side's claim as fact

    Minor

    “The men were subsequently redeployed without undergoing any medical checks whatsoever.”

    Why this matters
    The Star states in its own voice that the men had no medical checks of any kind, without attributing this to Hughes.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes it is established that no medical tests were done on the servicemen.
    The context
    The same article reports that LABRATs alleges the government concealed blood and urine test records of servicemen at the test sites. That suggests at least some testing took place, so the flat claim needs attribution.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“concealed the blood and urine test records of servicemen”

    Show it in the article

  4. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never says what the DNA claim rests on. Hughes told the Express that a DNA test in America found mutations which the testers said were caused by radiation. Without this, a reader believes the Star has independently established the DNA damage, not that it is the veteran's account of a test result.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Daily Star

  1. 7 NovBBC viewers praise host Clive Myrie as Festival of Remembrance leaves them crying0.0
  2. 7 Nov'Every single Brit' must prepare for WW3 conscription as major warning issued6.0
  3. 7 NovUK 'would run out of ammo in days' if WW3 kicks off as conscription demand made3.0
  4. 6 NovThree in 10 Brits can't afford essential furniture in hidden crisis6.0
  5. 6 NovInside Downing Street's battle with Russell Brand after ex-PM branded him 'completely wrong'3.0

Everything we scored from Daily Star