[ RadSafe ] " Planned study on cancer risk faces challenges, science panel told "

[Brennan, Mike (DOH)]

No study that can be done for 4 or 5 million dollars will approach definitive, and whichever sides don't like the results will be able to point at flaws that might or might not change the outcome.  

The best way for a study like this to be accomplished is to make sure a research component is written into the centralized electronic health records that will eventually be established.  I agree with the people on both the political Right and Left that such a system will (if done right, a non-trivial "if") save society far more than the system will cost, though the costs will be borne by different parties.  If in addition to the better service for the patients and decreased costs of maintaining the records, the system is structured so Public Health questions can be researched, we as a nation will be much the better for it.  



-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Franta, Jaroslav
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 7:55 AM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: [ RadSafe ] " Planned study on cancer risk faces challenges,science panel told "

UNRESTRICTED | ILLIMITÉ

NUCLEONICS WEEK APRIL 29, 2010

Planned study on cancer risk faces challenges, science panel told


A planned study of cancer risk for people living near
nuclear power plants faces significant challenges, scientists
told a National Academy of Sciences panel April 26.
To have the best chance of getting defensible results, the
study should focus on a small number of plants and consid-
er the effect of radiation on children. they said.
The NRC has asked NAS to conduct a two-stage study of
cancer risk for people who live near nuclear facilities. The
study would update a 1990 report that found there was no
link between cancer and plant locations; that study has been
criticized by lawmakers, scientists and anti-nuclear groups as
inadequate.
Arjun Makhijani, president of the anti-nuclear Institute
for Energy and Environmental Research, said the study must
take a closer look at a small cross-section of nuclear power
plants to be able to identify links between living near the
plants and cancer.
Many contributing factors, such as pesticide exposure
and industrial chemical releases, could affect results, he said.
"Unless you study specific plants, you're not going to be
able to come up with a defensible conclusion," Makhijani said.
NRC will pay the costs for the study, expected to be $4
million to $5 million, according to Brian Sheron, director of
the NRC's Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
The study will be conducted in two parts, the first focusing
on reviewing the types of data available and designing
the methodology for the research. The second part will
include the actual analysis of information, Sheron said.
The first part will begin this summer and conclude in
summer 2011, Sheron said. The second part would take two
or three additional years, he said.
The scope of the study will be decided by a committee
approved by the heads of the national academies (which
include sciences, engineering and medicine) and NRC is
willing to allow the group latitude in the study's design,
Sheron said. "We don't want to be accused of influencing
the study," he said in an interview following his presentation.
The NAS Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board will review
information presented at the meeting and will help the
academies select the committee and plan the implementation
of the study, board chairman Richard Meserve said.
Meserve is a former NRC chairman.
Steven Wing, an associate professor of epidemiology at
the University of North Carolina, said the study should
focus on children because previous studies have indicated
they might be more vulnerable to effects of radiation.
It is also easier to determine where children have lived
and when they moved, making it simpler to determine
where their likely exposure occurred, Wing said.
Ralph Andersen, senior director of the radiation safety
unit of the Nuclear Energy Institute, said one of the difficulties
in conducting the study is calculating the migration of
populations being studied as well as other factors that could
cause cancer rates to rise.
Coal plants can contribute more radiation to the environment
from the natural uranium in coal ash than nuclear
units do from normal operations, he said.
The type of epidemiological study being proposed "cannot
even imply causality," he said, because there are so
many contributing factors. The study should take into consideration
the voluminous data maintained by NRC on
radioactive releases by nuclear power plants, he said.
A study of the effects of ionizing radiation in 2006 by the
National Research Council of the National Academies recommended
that studies of populations with risks of exposure
to low levels of radiation from environmental sources
not be carried out. The study said it is hard to follow up on
such large populations and there is no information about individuals.
The new study must correct shortcomings in the 1990
study, said Michal Freedhoff, policy director for
Representative Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat
who chairs the House Subcommittee on Energy and
Environment. That study's focus on mortality, because incidence
data were not widely available, was flawed because
people don't always die where they were exposed, she said.
Markey on April 7 praised the NRC for selecting NAS for the
study, which he said was "long-overdue."
To be useful, the study should review cancer incidence in
areas where a reactor has shut down, and compare the areas
around reactors with different safety records for indications
of a link, Freedhoff said.
"A comprehensive and independent look is the only way
to move forward," she said.
-William Freebairn, Washington























CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION NOTICE

This e-mail, and any attachments, may contain information that
is confidential, subject to copyright, or exempt from disclosure.
Any unauthorized review, disclosure, retransmission, 
dissemination or other use of or reliance on this information 
may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited.  

AVIS D'INFORMATION CONFIDENTIELLE ET PRIVILÉGIÉE

Le présent courriel, et toute pièce jointe, peut contenir de 
l'information qui est confidentielle, régie par les droits 
d'auteur, ou interdite de divulgation. Tout examen, 
divulgation, retransmission, diffusion ou autres utilisations 
non autorisées de l'information ou dépendance non autorisée 
envers celle-ci peut être illégale et est strictement interdite.

_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu