[ RadSafe ] FW: [NukeNet] Children And Young People Show ElevatedLeukaemia RatesNear Nuclear Facilities

Thu Jul 19 12:39:42 CDT 2007

This information is inconsistent with information available from the
National Cancer Institute.  I have copied the article below: 

No Excess Mortality Risk Found in Counties with Nuclear Facilities

A National Cancer Institute (NCI) survey published in the Journal of the
American Medical Association, March 20, 1991, showed no general
increased risk of death from cancer for people living in 107 U.S.
counties containing or closely adjacent to 62 nuclear facilities. The
facilities in the survey had all begun operation before 1982. Included
were 52 commercial nuclear power plants, 9 Department of Energy research
and weapons plants, and 1 commercial fuel reprocessing plant. The survey
examined deaths from 16 types of cancer, including leukemia. In the
counties with nuclear facilities, cancer death rates before and after
the startup of the facilities were compared with cancer rates in 292
similar counties without nuclear facilities (control counties).

The NCI survey showed that, in comparison with the control counties,
some of the study counties had higher rates of certain cancers and some
had lower rates, either before or after the facilities came into
service. None of the differences that were observed could be linked with
the presence of nuclear facilities. "From the data at hand, there was no
convincing evidence of any increased risk of death from any of the
cancers we surveyed due to living near nuclear facilities," said John
Boice, Sc.D., who was chief of NCI's Radiation Epidemiology Branch at
the time of the survey.

He cautioned, however, that the counties may be too large to detect
risks present only in limited areas around the plants. "No study can
prove the absence of an effect," said Dr. Boice, "but if any excess
cancer risk due to radiation pollution is present in counties with
nuclear facilities, the risk is too small to be detected by the methods
used."

The survey, conducted by Seymour Jabon, Zdenek Hrubec, Sc.D., B.J.
Stone, Ph.D., and Dr. Boice, was begun in 1987 for scientific purposes
in response to American public health concerns, and after a British
survey of cancer mortality in areas around nuclear installations in the
United Kingdom showed an excess of childhood leukemia deaths near some
facilities.* No increases in total cancer mortality were found in the
British study, and other smaller surveys of cancer deaths around nuclear
facilities in the United States and the United Kingdom have yielded
conflicting results.

The NCI scientists studied more than 900,000 cancer deaths in the study
counties using county mortality records collected from 1950 to 1984. The
researchers evaluated changes in mortality rates for 16 types of cancer
in these counties from 1950 until each facility began operation and from
the start of operation until 1984. For four facilities in two states
(Iowa and Connecticut), cancer incidence data were also available. Data
on cancer incidence in these counties resembled the county's mortality
data patterns.

For each of the 107 study counties, three counties that had populations
similar in income, education, and other socioeconomic factors, but did
not have or were not near nuclear facilities, were chosen for
comparison. The study and control counties were within the same
geographic region and usually within the same state. Over 1.8 million
cancer deaths were studied in the control counties.

The numbers of cancer deaths in the study counties and in the control
counties were analyzed and compared to determine the relative risk (RR)
of dying of cancer for persons living near a nuclear facility. A
relative risk of 1.00 means that the risk of dying of cancer was the
same in the study and control counties; any number below 1.00 indicates
that the overall risk was lower in the study county than in the control
county; and any number greater than 1.00 indicates a higher risk in the
study county. For example, an RR of 1.04 would indicate that there was a
4-percent higher risk of cancer death in the study county. Conversely,
an RR of 0.93 would indicate a 7-percent lower risk in the study county.

For childhood leukemia in children from birth through age 9 years, the
overall RR comparing study and control counties before the startup of
the nuclear facilities was 1.08; after startup the RR was 1.03. These
data indicate that the risk of childhood leukemia in the study counties
was slightly greater before startup of the nuclear facilities than
after. The risk of dying of childhood cancers other than leukemia
increased slightly from an RR of 0.94 before the plants began operation
to an RR of 0.99 after the plants began operating.

For leukemia at all ages, the RRs were 1.02 before startup and 0.98
after startup. For other cancer at all ages, the RRs were essentially
the same: 1.00 before startup and 1.01 after startup. These results
provide no evidence that the presence of nuclear facilities influenced
cancer death rates in the study counties.

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Norm Cohen
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:32 AM
To: Know_Nukes at yahoogroups.com; Radsafe
Subject: [ RadSafe ] FW: [NukeNet] Children And Young People Show
ElevatedLeukaemia RatesNear Nuclear Facilities

Fyi

Norm

Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave,
Linwood; NJ; 08221; 609-601-8583; Cell Phone - 609-335-8176; MySpace
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile
<http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friend
id=6
0500355> &friendid=60500355

websites: www.coalitionforpeaceandjustice.org

               www.unplugsalem.org

  _____  

From: nukenet-bounces at energyjustice.net
[mailto:nukenet-bounces at energyjustice.net] On Behalf Of MoJo
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:30 AM
To: HD-Local; HD-Global
Subject: [NukeNet] Children And Young People Show Elevated Leukaemia
RatesNear Nuclear Facilities

There is a least one study being done on childhood cancer clusters here
in
SLO County that I know of.  There may be more.  If anyone has any info
about
that study I sure would like to learn more about it.

Radiation and radionuclides (Cesium, Strontium, Plutonium) are
invisible!
They are especially harmful to the unborn, the newly born and children.
They are released by Diablo Canyon.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070718113939.htm

Children And Young People Show Elevated Leukaemia Rates Near Nuclear
Facilities

 <http://www.sciencedaily.com/> Science Daily  Leukaemia rates in
children
and young people are elevated near nuclear facilities, but no clear
explanation exists to explain the rise, according to a research review
published in the European Journal of Cancer Care. 

Researchers at the Medical University of South Carolina carried out a
sophisticated meta-analysis of 17 research papers covering 136 nuclear
sites
in the UK, Canada, France, the USA, Germany, Japan and Spain.

They found that death rates for children up to the age of nine were
elevated
by between five and 24 per cent, depending on their proximity to nuclear
facilities, and by two to 18 per cent in children and young people up to
the
age of 25.

Incidence rates were increased by 14 to 21 per cent in zero to nine year
olds and seven to ten percent in zero to 25 year-olds. 

"Childhood leukaemia is a rare disease and nuclear sites are commonly
found
in rural areas, which means that sample sizes tend to be small" says
lead
author Dr Peter J Baker. 

"The advantage of carrying out a meta-analysis is that it enables us to
draw
together a number of studies that have employed common methods and draw
wider conclusions."

Eight separate analyses were performed -- including unadjusted, random
and
fixed effect models -- and the figures they produced showed considerable
consistency.

But the authors point out that dose-response studies they looked at -
which
describe how an organism is affected by different levels of exposure -
did
not show excess rates near nuclear facilities.

"Several difficulties arise when conducting dose-response studies in an
epidemiological setting as they rely on a wide range of factors that are
often hard to quantify" explains Dr Baker. "It is also possible that
there
are environmental issues involved that we don't yet understand. 

"If the amount of exposure were too low to cause the excess risk, we
would
expect leukaemia rates to remain consistent before and after the
start-up of
a nuclear facility. However, our meta-analysis, consistently showed
elevated
illness and death rates for children and young people living near
nuclear
facilities." 

The research review looked at studies carried out between 1984 and 1999,
focusing on research that provided statistics for individual sites on
children and young people aged from zero to 25.

Four studies covered the UK, with a further three covering just
Scotland.
Three covered France, two looked at Canada and there was one study each
from
the USA, Japan, Spain, the former East Germany and the former West
Germany. 

"Although our meta-analysis found consistently elevated rates of
leukaemia
near nuclear facilities, it is important to note that there are still
many
questions to be answered, not least about why these rates increase"
concludes Dr Baker. 

"Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain the excess of
childhood
leukaemia in the vicinity of nuclear facilities, including environmental
exposure and parental exposure. Professor Kinlen from Oxford University
has
also put forward a hypothesis that viral transmission, caused by mixing
populations in a new rural location, could be responsible. 

"It is clear that further research is needed into this important
subject." 

Reference: Meta-analysis of standardized incidence and mortality rates
of
childhood leukaemia in proximity to nuclear facilities. Baker PJ and
Hoel D.
European Journal of Cancer Care. 16, pages 355-363. July 2007.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by
Blackwell
Publishing Ltd..

Copyright <http://www.sciencedaily.com/copyright.htm>  ) 1995-2007
ScienceDaily LLC    All rights reserved    Contact:
<http://www.sciencedaily.com/contact/> editor at removeme.sciencedaily.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

"Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have
acted;
the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of
the
voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for
evil
to triumph": Haile Selassie 

"The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who
are
evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." -
Albert
Einstein 

"There is no week nor day nor hour when tyranny may not enter upon this
country - if the people lose their confidence in themselves - and lose
their
roughness and spirit of defiance." - Walt Whitman

  _____  

Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48253/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXI
C>
in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 