[ RadSafe ] Italian Court, Soldier in Balkans and DU
Ernesto Faillace
ernesto.faillace at gmail.com
Wed Jan 21 16:07:40 CST 2009
My attempt at translation. Hope this is helpful.
Ernesto Faillace, CHP
Historic ruling of the court of Florence Recognized: causal link between
cancer and depleted uranium January 13 2009 - Stefania Divertito
A ruling that will make history has been issued by a court in Florence: the
Italian Ministry of Defense will have to compensate Gianbattista Marica with
545,061 euros. Marica was a paratrooper deployed in Somalia in the Ibis
campaign for eight months, from December 1992 to July 1993. Marica is a
former Italian paratrooper sick of cancer. The ruling is important not only
for the amount of compensation, but also because it affirms an important
principle: the causal link between the presence of depleted uranium
and the paratrooper
disease.
In court papers dated December 17 2008, (but distributed yesterday by Falco
Accame, President of Anavafaf, a group that assists victims enrolled in the
armed forces, to whom Marica himself requested assistance in 2001), shows
the opinion of an expert who maintains the existence of a causal link
between Hodgkin's disease (the paratrooper's disease, now under "permanent
remission") and exposure to depleted uranium.
The expert, appointed by the court, primarily claims that the conclusions
of the scientific inquiry of the Mandelli Commission, according to which
this link can not be found, "lack foundation for the wrong research
procedure used". Then comes the examination of responsibility: the Ministry
of Defense - argue the judges in the grounds of the ruling that since
yesterday was made public and is available on the
Internet<http://74.125.77.113/translate_c?hl=en&sl=it&tl=en&u=http://www.altalex.com/index.php%3Fidnot%3D44275&usg=ALkJrhhdfIUFrSLTK6qiuBZ3oqgQZ96vow>-
has not provided adequate protection measures for the participants in
the
mission in Somalia, despite being "in the eyes of international opinion, the
danger of that specific theater of war, and despite the adoption of other
contingencies and special preventive measures." According to the judges,
"beyond the recommendations that were or should have been known to the
ministry, the fact that the U.S. military had imposed the adoption of
special protective measures, even in the absence of further knowledge,
should have alerted the Italian authorities."
In any case there was on the part of the Ministry "an attitude not based on
the principles of caution and responsibility, which resulted in having
ignored information, in its possession since a long time, about the presence
of depleted uranium in areas covered by the mission and the dangers to the
health of soldiers linked to the use of this metal, in not having taken all
necessary measures to protect the health of its military personnel, and in
having ignored the precautions taken by other countries involved in the same
mission, despite the fact that the adoption of these preventive measures had
been repeatedly reported to the Italian military."
"Marica immediately pointed out the fact that the U.S. military in Somalia,
even at 40 degrees Celsius in the shade, operated with suits, masks, gloves
and goggles, while the Italian soldiers were in shorts and tank tops,"
Accame declared, speaking of the historic ruling and recalling that "the
Italian departments did not know of the danger until 22 November 1999, when
the rules for protection were applied to the military personnel destined to
the Balkans."
Accame poses another question: "What is the significance of the ruling on
17 December?". The very next day, minister La Russa during a press
conference announced that it had earmarked 30 million euros for the victims
of depleted uranium and nanopathologies. Is it a coincidence? Or did the
minister want to show a cooperative attitude given the ruling just
issued?"In any case - concludes Accame - "we joyfully welcome this
result".
> -----------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:45:18 -0800
> From: "Roger Helbig" <rwhelbig at gmail.com>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Italian Court, Soldier in Balkans and DU
> To: radsafe at radlab.nl
> Message-ID:
> <7f90ec870901142245x41006d4ex96189ebdbc18bc5c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Shortcut to: http://www.peacelink.it/disarmo/a/28323.html
>
> If anyone on RADSAFE can accurately translate this, I sure would
> appreciate it. It almost looks as if they have thrown in Somalia for
> good measure and there never was any DU used there. I would also
> appreciate it if one of our Italian colleagues could explain what this
> court is and whether or not this judgement is final or being appealed.
> Just from the way that it is going around the anti-DU crusader
> circuit, I suspect that some extremely faulty reasoning is behind this
> and should be over turned.
>
> This Peacelink site looks very well organized - there is a page with
> about a dozen e-mail groups and two or three more links to articles
> about DU in Italian. I would like to know what they say as well.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Roger Helbig
>
> Sentenza storica del tribunale di Firenze
> Riconosciuto il nesso di causalità tra cancro e uranio impoverito
> 13 gennaio 2009 - Stefania Divertito
> Una sentenza che farà storia è stata emessa dal tribunale di Firenze:
> il ministero della Difesa italiano dovrà risarcire con 545.061 euro
> Gianbattista Marica, paracadutista impegnato in Somalia, nella
> campagna Ibis, per otto mesi, dal dicembre 1992 al luglio 93.
> Marica è un ex militare italiano malato di tumore. La sentenza è
> importante non soltanto per l'entità del risarcimento, ma perchè
> afferma un principio importante: il nesso di causalità tra la presenza
> di uranio impoverito e la patologia del militare.
>
> Nel provvedimento giudiziario, datato 17 dicembre 2008, (ma diffuso
> ieri da Falco Accame, presidente dell'Anavafaf, un'associazione che
> assiste le vittime arruolate nelle Forze armate, cui lo stesso Marica
> si era rivolto nel 2001 per rendere pubblico il suo caso), viene
> riportato il parere di un consulente tecnico che sostiene l'esistenza
> di un nesso di causalità tra il Linfoma di Hodgkin (la malattia dal
> militare, ora in fase di «remissione definitiva») e l'esposizione
> all'uranio impoverito.
>
> L'esperto, nominato dal tribunale, sostiene innanzitutto che le
> conclusioni dell'indagine scientifica della Commissione Mandelli,
> secondo cui tale nesso non può essere accertato, «sono destituite di
> fondamento per l'erronea procedura di ricerca utilizzata». Poi passa
> all'esame delle responsabilità: il ministero della Difesa - sostengono
> i giudici nella motivazione della sentenza che da ieri è pubblica e
> reperibile in internet - non ha disposto l'adozione di adeguate misure
> protettive per i partecipanti alla missione in Somalia, nonostante
> fosse «sotto gli occhi dell'opinione pubblica internazionale la
> pericolosità specifica di quel teatro di guerra, e nonostante
> l'adozione da parte di altri contingenti di misure di prevenzione
> particolari». Secondo i giudici, «al di là delle raccomandazioni che
> erano o dovevano essere note al ministero, il fatto che ai militari
> americani fosse imposta l'adozione di particolari protezioni, anche in
> mancanza di ulteriori conoscenze, doveva allertare le autorità
> italiane».
>
> In ogni caso c'è stato da parte del Ministero «un atteggiamento non
> ispirato ai principi di cautela e responsabilità da parte del
> ministero della Difesa, consistito nell'aver ignorato le informazioni
> in suo possesso, già da lungo tempo, circa la presenza di uranio
> impoverito nelle aree interessate dalla missione e i pericoli per la
> salute dei soldati collegati all'utilizzo di tale metallo; nel non
> aver impiegato tutte le misure necessarie per tutelare la salute dei
> propri militari e nell'aver ignorato le cautele adottate da altri
> Paesi impegnati nella stessa missione, nonostante l'adozione di tali
> misure di prevenzione fosse stata più volte segnalata dai militari
> italiani».
> «Marica denunciò subito il fatto che i militari Usa in Somalia, anche
> a 40 gradi all'ombra, operavano con tute, maschere, guanti e occhiali,
> mentre i soldati italiani erano in calzoncini corti e canottiera»
> afferma Accame, che parla di sentenza storica e ricorda che «i reparti
> italiani non seppero del pericolo che il 22 novembre 1999, quando
> apparvero le norme di protezione destinate ai militari nei Balcani».
>
> Accame si pone un altro quesito: «la sentenza è del 17 dicembre
> scorso. Proprio il giorno successivo il ministro La Russa in una
> conferenza stampa ha annunciato di aver stanziato 30 milioni di euro
> "per le vittime dell'uranio impoverito e delle nanopatologie". Che sia
> un caso? O il ministro ha voluto mostrare un atteggiamento
> collaborativo data la sentenza appena emessa? In ogni caso - conclude
> Accame - accogliamo con gioia questo risultato
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:13:30 +0900
> From: Ivor Surveyor <isurveyor at vianet.net.au>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Pet Food
> To: Know_Nukes at yahoogroups.com,,radsafe at radlab.nl
> Message-ID: <20090115131332.776B7441BB at poplet1.per.eftel.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> The video "Pet Food Industry In Trouble." is still on the ABC site,
> it is not easy to locate.
>
> http://www.abc.net.au/
>
>
>
> The best way to find it is from the ABC home page, click on TV ABC1.
>
> Then try program website and scroll down to find programs A_Z.
>
> Click on A_Z, then on to 0-9. This should lead you to the 7:30
> report. Finally you will find it is a "Vodcast" dated 12-Jan-09.
>
> To clear up one other matter; as a tax payer I am concerned that a
> public broadcaster founded by my money is able to publish such drivel.
>
>
>
> Ivor Surveyor
> [ isurveyor at vianet.net.au ]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:49:45 -0500
> From: "Ross Beveridge" <rgb at rrbev.co.uk>
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] FW: All terrain Vehicle Installation og HPGe
> PortableGamma Spectrometer
> To: '??? ???' <MosheK at sviva.gov.il>, <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Message-ID: <139080E498F94AEF992E20017E2B4D73 at RGBPC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255"
>
> Contains details of a bespoke system used in specific application in the
> UK.
>
>
>
>
> http://www.sellafieldsites.com/UserFiles/File/publications/Beach%20monitorin
> g/Nuvia%20Report%200708.pdf<http://www.sellafieldsites.com/UserFiles/File/publications/Beach%20monitoring/Nuvia%20Report%200708.pdf>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
> Behalf
> Of ??? ???
> Sent: 13 January 2009 04:32
> To: radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] FW: All terrain Vehicle Installation og HPGe
> PortableGamma Spectrometer
>
> Oops: terrain, not train....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ��ä ��ï
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 10:35 AM
> To: radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: All train Vehicle Installation og HPGe Portable Gamma Spectrometer
>
>
>
> Hello RadSafe Group,
>
> We intend to install our portable HPGe Gamma Spectrometer on 4X4 all
> terrain
> pickup. We wonder if there is relevant experience in installing Canberra's
> "Falcon" or Ortec's "Detective" that members would like to share with us.
>
> Best regards
> Moshe Keren, M.Occ.H.,
> Head of Ionizing Inspection Unit
> Noise and Radiation Abatement Department
> Ministry of Environmental Protection
> Israel
> 5 Kanfei Nesharim St.,Jerusalem 95464, Israel
> Tel:972-2-6495840
> Fax:972-2-6516632
> Cell:972-50-6233109
> e-mail:moshek at sviva.gov.il <e-mail%3Amoshek at sviva.gov.il>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit:
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.6/1889 - Release Date: 12/01/2009
> 8:18 PM
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 02:37:53 -0800
> From: "Roger Helbig" <rhelbig at california.com>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Babelfish -Auto Translation of Italian Judgement
> to Engish
> To: "Radsafe" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Message-ID: <00f401c977c6$96be8cb0$c43ba610$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Here is the Babelfish translation of the web page that I posted to RADSAFE
> yesterday - it does seem that the soldier who was given the judgement
> served
> in Somalia, where there was no use of DU - there were no enemy tanks in
> Somalia. Are there any standards for evidence in Italy; can one claim that
> the claimant has defrauded the government and receive damages like they can
> with the American False Claims Act?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Roger Helbig
>
>
>
> Historical sentence of the court of Florence
>
>
> Recognized the nexus of causality between impoverito cancer and uranio
>
>
> 13 January 2009 - Amused Stefania
>
> A sentence that will make history has been emitted from the court of
> Florence: the Italian Defense Ministry will have to risarcire with 545.061
> euros Gianbattista Marica, parachutist engaged in Somalia, the Ibis
> campaign, for eight months, from December 1992 to July 93.
> Marica is a former sick Italian soldier of tumor. The sentence is important
> not only for the entity of the compensation, but because it asserts an
> important principle: the nexus of causality between the presence of uranio
> impoverito and pathology of the soldier.
>
> In the judicial provision, dated 17 Decembers 2008, (but diffused yesterday
> from Accame Hawk, president of the Anavafaf, an association that assists
> the
> victims enlisted in the Armed Forces, which the same Marica had addressed
> in
> 2001 in order to render public its case), comes brought back the opinion of
> a technical adviser who supports the existence of a nexus of causality
> between the Lymphoma of Hodgkin (the disease the soldier, now in phase of
> "definitive remission") and the impoverito exposure to the uranio.
>
> The expert, name from the court, supports in the first place that the
> conclusions of scientific surveying of the Mandelli Commission, second
> which
> such nexus cannot be assessed, "are dismissed of foundation for the
> erroneous procedure of used search". Then he passes to the examination of
> the responsibilities: the Defense Ministry - the judges in the motivation
> of
> the sentence support whom they give yesterday is public and reperibile
> <
> http://66.163.168.225/babelfish/translate_url_content?.intl=us&lp=it_en&tru
> rl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.altalex.com%2findex.php%3fidnot%3d44275<http://66.163.168.225/babelfish/translate_url_content?.intl=us&lp=it_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.altalex.com%2findex.php%3fidnot%3d44275>>
> in Internet -
> has not arranged the adoption of adapted protecting measures for the
> participants to the mission in Somalia, although were "under the eyes of
> international the public opinion the specific dangerousness of that theatre
> of war, and in spite of the adoption from other contingents of prevention
> measures details". According to the judges, "to beyond the recommendations
> that were or had to be notes to the ministry, the fact that to the soldiers
> Americans was sets up the adoption of details protections, also in lack of
> ulterior acquaintances, had to allertare the Italian authorities".
>
> In any case it has been from the Ministry "an attitude inspired to the
> principles of does not secure and responsibilities from the Defense
> Ministry, consistito in having ignored the information in its possession,
> already give along time, approximately the impoverito presence of uranio in
> the areas interested from the mission and the health hazards of the
> soldiers
> connected I use to it of such metal; in not having employed all the
> measures
> necessary in order to protect the health of own soldiers and in having
> ignored the cautions adopted from other Countries engaged in the same
> mission, in spite of the adoption of such measures of prevention had been
> many times over marked the Italian soldiers".
> "Marica denounced the fact that the USA soldiers in Somalia, also to 40
> degrees to the shadow, operated with coverallses, masks, gloves and glance
> at them, while quickly the Italian soldiers were in short shortses and
> canottiera" Accame asserts, that it speaks about historical sentence and it
> remembers that "the Italian units did not know of the 22 danger that
> November 1999, when you appeared the destined norms of protection to the
> soldiers in the Balkans".
>
> Accame places an other question: "the sentence is of 17 past December. Own
> the successive day the minister the Russian in a press conference has
> announced to have allocated 30 million euro "for the victims of the uranio
> impoverito and the nanopatologie". That or a case? Or the minister has
> intentional to show a collaborativo attitude date the sentence as soon as
> emitted? In any case - Accame concludes - we receive with joy this result".
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 19:08:21 -0000
> From: "Fred Dawson" <fred-dawson at blueyonder.co.uk>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] HPA News - Mortality and Cancer Risks for
> Radiation Workers
> To: <srp-uk at yahoogroups.com>, "'radsafelist'" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Message-ID: <001e01c978d6$f70e3e10$e52aba30$@co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> HPS New release
>
>
> Mortality and Cancer Risks for Radiation Workers
>
>
> 7 January 2009
>
> The risk of developing cancer among radiation workers increases with the
> dose of ionising radiation they are exposed to, according to a study by the
> Health Protection Agency published today in the British Journal of Cancer
> *.
> The observed cancer risks are consistent with the international scientific
> consensus on radiation protection.
>
> http://www.hpa.org.uk/webw/HPAweb
> <
> http://www.hpa.org.uk/webw/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1231252392462?p=1
> 231252394302> &HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1231252392462?p=1231252394302
>
> The study also shows that overall mortality in the UK's 175,000 radiation
> workers is lower than that in the general population. This "healthy worker
> effect" has been observed in studies of many other occupational groups.
>
> Dr Colin Muirhead from the Health Protection Agency said: "This is a
> continuation of a study started in 1976 and it provides reliable
> information
> on the health of people working with ionising radiation. The results
> confirm
> the cancer risk estimates observed in other studies even though, overall,
> radiation workers have lower cancer risks than the general population."
>
> This study provides the most precise estimates to date of mortality and
> cancer risks following occupational radiation exposure and strengthens the
> scientific evidence for raised risks from these exposures. The cancer risk
> estimates are consistent with international radiation protection standards,
> both for leukaemia and for all other cancers combined.
>
> Continued follow-up of these workers will be valuable in determining
> whether
> radiation-associated risks vary over time or by age, and enables the study
> of specific cancers and causes of death in more detail. The research will
> also make a useful contribution to wider national and international studies
> on the effects of occupational exposures to ionising radiation.
>
> In a separate paper** published at the same time, researchers at the
> Childhood Cancer Research Group at the University of Oxford and the Health
> Protection Agency have studied cancer in the children of female radiation
> workers. This study does not support an earlier finding of a raised risk
> of
> cancer. In a subgroup of women who worked with radiation during pregnancy,
> a weak statistical association was found between maternal radiation work
> and
> childhood cancer, but the evidence is limited by the small numbers involved
> and the result may be due to chance.
> The two papers are published in the British Journal of Cancer and radiation
> workers and their representatives were informed of the results before
> publication.
> Press enquiries: contact the HPA Press Office at the Centre for Radiation,
> Chemical and Environmental Hazards on 01235 822744/5 or 822876; e-mails to
> chilton.pressoffice at hpa.org.uk
>
> References * Muirhead CR, O'Hagan JA, Haylock RGE, Phillipson MA, Willcock
> T, Berridge GLC, Zhang W (2009) Mortality and cancer incidence following
> occupational radiation exposure: 3rd analysis of the National Registry for
> Radiation Workers. British Journal of Cancer (2009), Volume 100, Issue 1,
> pages 206-212.
> ** Bunch KJ, Muirhead CR, Draper GJ, Hunter N, Kendall GM, O'Hagan JA,
> Phillipson MA, Vincent TJ, Zhang W. Cancer in the offspring of female
> radiation workers: a record linkage study. British Journal of Cancer
> (2009), Volume 100, Issue 1, pages 213-218.
>
> Notes for Editors
>
> 1. The National Registry for Radiation Workers (NRRW) analysis* was funded
> by the Health and Safety Executive. Further details of the analysis will
> be
> published in due course in an HPA report available on the Agency's website.
> The authors and HPA particularly wish to thank all of the organisations and
> individuals participating in the NRRW for their cooperation.
>
> 2. Estimates of the long-term health risks from ionising radiation are
> based
> largely on epidemiological studies of the survivors of the atomic bombings
> in Japan and of groups exposed for medical reasons. The desirability of
> obtaining data on the risks from protracted or low dose radiation exposures
> has long been apparent. Consequently, the National Registry for Radiation
> Workers (NRRW) was set up in 1976 by the National Radiological Protection
> Board, which is now the Radiation Protection Division of the Health
> Protection Agency (HPA).
> 3. The organisations that participate in the NRRW are in the nuclear,
> research and industrial sectors. Two earlier analyses of mortality in the
> NRRW found some evidence of an association between workers' radiation dose
> and leukaemia, after excluding chronic lymphatic leukaemia (CLL) which does
> not appear to be radiation-inducible. However, the estimates of radiation
> risks derived from these analyses and from a study of nuclear workers in 15
> countries, for which NRRW formed the UK component, were imprecise. To
> obtain more precise information on the risks of occupational radiation
> exposure, the NRRW cohort has now been expanded to include about another
> 50,000 workers compared to the previous analysis and the period of
> follow-up
> has been extended by nine years, to the end of 2001. Data on cancer
> registrations have also been included in the NRRW for the first time,
> together with mortality data.
> 4. As in previous NRRW analyses, there was a strong healthy worker effect
> (HWE); overall mortality was 81% of that expected for the general
> population
> of England and Wales, having allowed for the effects of age and gender.
> Total cancer mortality was also reduced, being 84% of that in the general
> population. The HWE has been seen in many studies of workers, not only
> radiation workers, and is likely to reflect factors associated with the
> recruitment and retention of persons in work.
> 5. To study the possible impact of radiation exposure on health whilst
> minimising the impact of the HWE, rates of mortality and cancer incidence
> within the NRRW were analysed according to workers' radiation dose, which
> was assessed through personal monitoring. Mortality and incidence from
> both
> leukaemia excluding CLL and the grouping of all cancers excluding leukaemia
> increased to a statistically significant extent with increasing radiation
> dose. Estimates of the trend in risk with dose were similar to those for
> the Japanese atomic bomb survivors, with confidence ranges that excluded
> risks more than 2-3 times greater than the A-bomb values and also excluded
> the possibility of no raised risk. There was some evidence of an
> increasing
> trend with dose in mortality from all circulatory diseases combined; for
> these diseases, other studies of radiation workers have yielded mixed
> results and the NRRW finding may, at least partly, be due to confounding by
> smoking. In contrast, both for mortality and incidence, the trend with
> radiation dose in cancers other than leukaemia was maintained after
> excluding lung cancer, so indicating that this trend is not an artefact due
> to smoking.
> 6. This analysis provides the most precise estimates to date of mortality
> and cancer risks following occupational radiation exposure and strengthens
> the evidence for raised risks from these exposures. The cancer risk
> estimates are consistent with values used to set radiation protection
> standards and - both for leukaemia and for all other cancers combined -
> exclude the possibility of radiation risks being more than a few times
> higher than existing estimates.
> 7. The separate study** of cancer in the offspring of female radiation
> workers was conducted by the Cancer Research UK - funded Childhood Cancer
> Research Group (CCRG) at the University of Oxford and HPA. The study was
> funded by the Department of Health and follows on from an earlier study
> (Draper et al, British Medical Journal, 315, 1181-88, 1997) that examined
> whether the offspring of radiation workers were at raised risk of childhood
> cancer. This earlier study did not find an association between childhood
> cancer and paternal preconception radiation exposure. However, there was
> some suggestion of a raised risk of cancer in the offspring of female
> radiation workers, although based on small numbers of cases. Consequently,
> CCRG and HPA have examined the latter topic further, using more recent
> data.
> Analysis of the new data did not show an association between childhood
> cancer and maternal preconception radiation work and does not support the
> earlier finding of a raised risk in the offspring of female radiation
> workers. However, when the original and new data were combined, a weak
> association was found between maternal radiation work during pregnancy and
> childhood cancer in offspring, although the evidence was limited by the
> small numbers of cases and controls that were linked to the NRRW.
> 8. The British Journal of Cancer (BJC)
> The BJC is owned by Cancer Research UK. Its mission is to encourage
> communication of the very best cancer research from laboratories and
> clinics
> in all countries. Broad coverage, its editorial independence and consistent
> high standards have made the BJC one of the world's premier general cancer
> journals. www.bjcancer.com <http://www.bjcancer.com/>
>
> -------------------------------
>
>
>
> Fred Dawson
>
> Fwp-dawson at hotmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:26:17 -0700
> From: "Carl A. Willis" <willis.219 at osu.edu>
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Help with Canberra ICB NIM modules
> To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Message-ID: <5ABE806E567E40138A9858D43789AB59 at Carl1>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Dear RADSAFErs,
>
> I'm looking for some help with using Canberra's ICB NIM modules for
> radiation spectroscopy, and maybe people here are familiar with the ICB
> system. I was recently handed a NIM bin containing, among other things,
> the
> following two modules:
>
> Canberra 9635 ADC
> Canberra 556 AIM
>
> My understanding is that these modules, linked together via their data and
> ICB ports on the back, effectively constitute a pulse-height analysis
> system
> that can be controlled via the front-panel Ethernet connection on the 556.
> What I am interested in figuring out with your help is the CHEAPEST route
> toward the goal of using these modules to acquire basic pulse height
> spectra
> (at its simplest, two arrays of data--channel number and counts). I
> suspect
> Canberra would tell me that I need to purchase their Genie software,
> sacking
> my wallet for thousands of dollars to use two NIMs I got for free and
> forcing lots of bells and whistles (spectrum libraries, etc.) down my
> throat. No offense to them, but that is just how business is done these
> days. What I would love to hear is that some enterprising soul has written
> a freeware control program that handles whatever Ethernet protocol these
> things use and can tell the ADC to do things like "acquire" and "stop" and
> "send data to file named X." Or maybe with a little literacy of the
> protocol, I can do this manually myself with HyperTerminal or LabView?
>
> I'm also willing to pay a reasonable amount of money for non-freeware that
> does the above. Reasonable means $100 or less (this is hobby activity).
> To
> give an idea of my current MCA situation, I use a Tracor-Northern 1705 and
> RS-232 data output via LabView (and I'm still indebted to RADSAFEr Kendrick
> Chin for providing a manual and instructions on how to overclock the UART
> on
> that thing). The ICB system would be a big step up for me.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? I can be reached at willis.219 at osu.edu or
> 505-412-3277.
>
> -Carl Willis
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 00:49:19 +0000
> From: HOWARD.LONG at comcast.net
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] HPA News - Mortality and Cancer Risks for
> Radiation Workers
> To: "Fred Dawson" <fred-dawson at blueyonder.co.uk>,
> <srp-uk at yahoogroups.com>, "'radsafelist'" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Message-ID:
> <
> 011820090049.10311.49727C8F000ABF28000028472215568884B9B2B1B4D2BBADBEA9B1B8 at comcast.net
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> More time "exposed" (20years?)
> also means older, cancer risk much higher from AGE.
>
> I did not find enough data to exclude age, not total radiation,
> as the factor more importantly associated with cancer. Controls?
>
> Their conclusions are not consistent with Cohen's radon study, the Taiwan
> apartment study and every other exposure study I have seen, all associating
> lower mortality and cancer rates with MORE radiation.
>
> Spike this rumor! More nuclear power depends on it.
>
> Howard Long MD MPH, Epidemiology
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "Fred Dawson" <fred-dawson at blueyonder.co.uk>
>
> > HPS New release
> >
> >
> > Mortality and Cancer Risks for Radiation Workers
> >
> >
> > 7 January 2009
> >
> > The risk of developing cancer among radiation workers increases with the
> > dose of ionising radiation they are exposed to, according to a study by
> the
> > Health Protection Agency published today in the British Journal of Cancer
> *.
> > The observed cancer risks are consistent with the international
> scientific
> > consensus on radiation protection.
> >
> > http://www.hpa.org.uk/webw/HPAweb
> > > 231252394302> &HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1231252392462?p=1231252394302
> >
> > The study also shows that overall mortality in the UK's 175,000 radiation
> > workers is lower than that in the general population. This "healthy
> worker
> > effect" has been observed in studies of many other occupational groups.
> >
> > Dr Colin Muirhead from the Health Protection Agency said: "This is a
> > continuation of a study started in 1976 and it provides reliable
> information
> > on the health of people working with ionising radiation. The results
> confirm
> > the cancer risk estimates observed in other studies even though, overall,
> > radiation workers have lower cancer risks than the general population."
> >
> > This study provides the most precise estimates to date of mortality and
> > cancer risks following occupational radiation exposure and strengthens
> the
> > scientific evidence for raised risks from these exposures. The cancer
> risk
> > estimates are consistent with international radiation protection
> standards,
> > both for leukaemia and for all other cancers combined.
> >
> > Continued follow-up of these workers will be valuable in determining
> whether
> > radiation-associated risks vary over time or by age, and enables the
> study
> > of specific cancers and causes of death in more detail. The research will
> > also make a useful contribution to wider national and international
> studies
> > on the effects of occupational exposures to ionising radiation.
> >
> > In a separate paper** published at the same time, researchers at the
> > Childhood Cancer Research Group at the University of Oxford and the
> Health
> > Protection Agency have studied cancer in the children of female radiation
> > workers. This study does not support an earlier finding of a raised risk
> of
> > cancer. In a subgroup of women who worked with radiation during
> pregnancy,
> > a weak statistical association was found between maternal radiation work
> and
> > childhood cancer, but the evidence is limited by the small numbers
> involved
> > and the result may be due to chance.
> > The two papers are published in the British Journal of Cancer and
> radiation
> > workers and their representatives were informed of the results before
> > publication.
> > Press enquiries: contact the HPA Press Office at the Centre for
> Radiation,
> > Chemical and Environmental Hazards on 01235 822744/5 or 822876; e-mails
> to
> > chilton.pressoffice at hpa.org.uk
> >
> > References * Muirhead CR, O'Hagan JA, Haylock RGE, Phillipson MA,
> Willcock
> > T, Berridge GLC, Zhang W (2009) Mortality and cancer incidence following
> > occupational radiation exposure: 3rd analysis of the National Registry
> for
> > Radiation Workers. British Journal of Cancer (2009), Volume 100, Issue 1,
> > pages 206-212.
> > ** Bunch KJ, Muirhead CR, Draper GJ, Hunter N, Kendall GM, O'Hagan JA,
> > Phillipson MA, Vincent TJ, Zhang W. Cancer in the offspring of female
> > radiation workers: a record linkage study. British Journal of Cancer
> > (2009), Volume 100, Issue 1, pages 213-218.
> >
> > Notes for Editors
> >
> > 1. The National Registry for Radiation Workers (NRRW) analysis* was
> funded
> > by the Health and Safety Executive. Further details of the analysis will
> be
> > published in due course in an HPA report available on the Agency's
> website.
> > The authors and HPA particularly wish to thank all of the organisations
> and
> > individuals participating in the NRRW for their cooperation.
> >
> > 2. Estimates of the long-term health risks from ionising radiation are
> based
> > largely on epidemiological studies of the survivors of the atomic
> bombings
> > in Japan and of groups exposed for medical reasons. The desirability of
> > obtaining data on the risks from protracted or low dose radiation
> exposures
> > has long been apparent. Consequently, the National Registry for Radiation
> > Workers (NRRW) was set up in 1976 by the National Radiological Protection
> > Board, which is now the Radiation Protection Division of the Health
> > Protection Agency (HPA).
> > 3. The organisations that participate in the NRRW are in the nuclear,
> > research and industrial sectors. Two earlier analyses of mortality in the
> > NRRW found some evidence of an association between workers' radiation
> dose
> > and leukaemia, after excluding chronic lymphatic leukaemia (CLL) which
> does
> > not appear to be radiation-inducible. However, the estimates of radiation
> > risks derived from these analyses and from a study of nuclear workers in
> 15
> > countries, for which NRRW formed the UK component, were imprecise. To
> > obtain more precise information on the risks of occupational radiation
> > exposure, the NRRW cohort has now been expanded to include about another
> > 50,000 workers compared to the previous analysis and the period of
> follow-up
> > has been extended by nine years, to the end of 2001. Data on cancer
> > registrations have also been included in the NRRW for the first time,
> > together with mortality data.
> > 4. As in previous NRRW analyses, there was a strong healthy worker effect
> > (HWE); overall mortality was 81% of that expected for the general
> population
> > of England and Wales, having allowed for the effects of age and gender.
> > Total cancer mortality was also reduced, being 84% of that in the general
> > population. The HWE has been seen in many studies of workers, not only
> > radiation workers, and is likely to reflect factors associated with the
> > recruitment and retention of persons in work.
> > 5. To study the possible impact of radiation exposure on health whilst
> > minimising the impact of the HWE, rates of mortality and cancer incidence
> > within the NRRW were analysed according to workers' radiation dose, which
> > was assessed through personal monitoring. Mortality and incidence from
> both
> > leukaemia excluding CLL and the grouping of all cancers excluding
> leukaemia
> > increased to a statistically significant extent with increasing radiation
> > dose. Estimates of the trend in risk with dose were similar to those for
> > the Japanese atomic bomb survivors, with confidence ranges that excluded
> > risks more than 2-3 times greater than the A-bomb values and also
> excluded
> > the possibility of no raised risk. There was some evidence of an
> increasing
> > trend with dose in mortality from all circulatory diseases combined; for
> > these diseases, other studies of radiation workers have yielded mixed
> > results and the NRRW finding may, at least partly, be due to confounding
> by
> > smoking. In contrast, both for mortality and incidence, the trend with
> > radiation dose in cancers other than leukaemia was maintained after
> > excluding lung cancer, so indicating that this trend is not an artefact
> due
> > to smoking.
> > 6. This analysis provides the most precise estimates to date of mortality
> > and cancer risks following occupational radiation exposure and
> strengthens
> > the evidence for raised risks from these exposures. The cancer risk
> > estimates are consistent with values used to set radiation protection
> > standards and - both for leukaemia and for all other cancers combined -
> > exclude the possibility of radiation risks being more than a few times
> > higher than existing estimates.
> > 7. The separate study** of cancer in the offspring of female radiation
> > workers was conducted by the Cancer Research UK - funded Childhood Cancer
> > Research Group (CCRG) at the University of Oxford and HPA. The study was
> > funded by the Department of Health and follows on from an earlier study
> > (Draper et al, British Medical Journal, 315, 1181-88, 1997) that examined
> > whether the offspring of radiation workers were at raised risk of
> childhood
> > cancer. This earlier study did not find an association between childhood
> > cancer and paternal preconception radiation exposure. However, there was
> > some suggestion of a raised risk of cancer in the offspring of female
> > radiation workers, although based on small numbers of cases.
> Consequently,
> > CCRG and HPA have examined the latter topic further, using more recent
> data.
> > Analysis of the new data did not show an association between childhood
> > cancer and maternal preconception radiation work and does not support the
> > earlier finding of a raised risk in the offspring of female radiation
> > workers. However, when the original and new data were combined, a weak
> > association was found between maternal radiation work during pregnancy
> and
> > childhood cancer in offspring, although the evidence was limited by the
> > small numbers of cases and controls that were linked to the NRRW.
> > 8. The British Journal of Cancer (BJC)
> > The BJC is owned by Cancer Research UK. Its mission is to encourage
> > communication of the very best cancer research from laboratories and
> clinics
> > in all countries. Broad coverage, its editorial independence and
> consistent
> > high standards have made the BJC one of the world's premier general
> cancer
> > journals. www.bjcancer.com
> >
> > -------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > Fred Dawson
> >
> > Fwp-dawson at hotmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >
> > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the
> > RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
> >
> > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit:
> > http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> radsafe mailing list
> radsafe at radlab.nl
> http://lists.radlab.nl/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
>
>
> End of radsafe Digest, Vol 180, Issue 4
> ***************************************
>
--
Ernesto Faillace
ernesto.faillace at gmail.com
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list