Reasonable Doubt: childhood leukaemia near nuclear installations.

[Guest guest]

Reasonable Doubt childhood leukaemia near nuclear installations!

http://henriquecortez.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/a-energia-nuclear-ganha-novo-fole\

go-mas-as-criticas-e-duvidas-permanecem/

Among the many environmental concerns surrounding nuclear power plants,

there is one that provokes public anxiety like no other: the fear that

children living near nuclear facilities face an increased risk of cancer.

Though a link has long been suspected, it has never been proven. Now that

seems likely to change.

Studies in the 1980s revealed increased incidences of childhood leukaemia

near nuclear installations at Windscale (now Sellafield), Burghfield and

Dounreay in the UK. Later studies near German nuclear facilities found a

similar effect. The official response was that the radiation doses from the

nearby plants were too low to explain the increased leukaemia. The Committee

on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment, which is responsible for

advising the UK government, finally concluded that the explanation remained

unknown but was not likely to be radiation.

There the issue rested, until a recent flurry of epidemiological studies

appeared. Last year, researchers at the Medical University of South Carolina

in ton carried out a meta-analysis of 17 research papers covering 136

nuclear sites in the UK, Canada, France, the US, Germany, Japan and Spain.

The incidence of leukaemia in children under 9 living close to the sites

showed an increase of 14 to 21 per cent, while death rates from the disease

were raised by 5 to 24 per cent, depending on their proximity to the nuclear

facilities (European Journal of Cancer Care, vol 16, p 355).

This was followed by a German study which found 14 cases of leukaemia

compared to an expected four cases between 1990 and 2005 in children living

within 5 kilometres of the Krummel nuclear plant near Hamburg, making it the

largest leukaemia cluster near a nuclear power plant anywhere in the world

(Environmental Health Perspectives, vol 115, p 941).

This was upstaged by the yet more surprising KiKK studies (a German acronym

for Childhood Cancer in the Vicinity of Nuclear Power Plants), whose results

were published this year in the International Journal of Cancer (vol 122, p

721) and the European Journal of Cancer (vol 44, p 275). These found higher

incidences of cancers and a stronger association with nuclear installations

than all previous reports. The main findings were a 60 per cent increase in

solid cancers and a 117 per cent increase in leukaemia among young children

living near all 16 large German nuclear facilities between 1980 and 2003.

The most striking finding was that those who developed cancer lived closer

to nuclear power plants than randomly selected controls. Children living

within 5 kilometres of the plants were more than twice as likely to contract

cancer as those living further away, a finding that has been accepted by the

German government.

Though the KiKK studies received scant attention elsewhere, there was a

public outcry and vocal media debate in Germany. No one is sure of the cause

(or causes) of the extra cancers. Coincidence has been ruled out, as has the

" Kinlen hypothesis " , which theorises that childhood leukaemia is caused by

an unknown infectious agent introduced as a result of an influx of new

people to the area concerned. Surprisingly, the most obvious explanation for

this increased risk — radioactive discharges from the nearby nuclear

installations — was also ruled out by the KiKK researchers, who asserted

that the radiation doses from such sources were too low, although the

evidence they base this on is not clear.

Anyone who followed the argument in the 1980s and 1990s concerning the UK

leukaemia clusters will have a sense of deja vu. A report in 2004 by the

Committee Examining Radiation Risks of Internal Emitters (2 Mbyte PDF), set

up by the UK government (and for which I was a member of the secretariat)

points out that the models used to estimate radiation doses from sources

emitted from nuclear facilities are riddled with uncertainty. For example,

assumptions about how radioactive material is transported through the

environment or taken up and retained by local residents may be faulty.

If radiation is indeed the cause of the cancers, how might local residents

have been exposed? Most of the reactors in the KiKK study were pressurised

water designs notable for their high emissions of tritium, the radioactive

isotope of hydrogen. Last year, the UK government published a report on

tritium which concluded that its hazard risk should be doubled. Tritium is

most commonly found incorporated into water molecules, a factor not fully

taken into account in the report, so this could make it even more hazardous.

As we begin to pin down the likely causes, the new evidence of an

association between increased cancers and proximity to nuclear facilities

raises difficult questions. Should pregnant women and young children be

advised to move away from them? Should local residents eat vegetables from

their gardens? And, crucially, shouldn't those governments around the world

who are planning to build more reactors think again?

Ian Fairlie is a London-based consultant on radiation in the environment

[EcoDebate, 08/12/2008]

--

Doyon

TESOL Professional

Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, Thailand

MAT (TESOL), School for International Training

MA Advanced Japanese Studies, University of Sheffield

BA Psychology, University of California

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Island/5165/paulcv6.html

" The greatest challenge to the development of knowledge is the comfort of

dogmatism - the security provided by unquestioned confidence in a statement

of truth, or in a method of achieving truth - or even the shadow dogmatism

of utter skepticism (for to be utterly skeptical is to dogmatically affirm

that nothing can be known)... " C. Kolb, Experiential Learning

ARTICLE 19 UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

" Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right

includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive

and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of

frontiers. "