[ RadSafe ] Sternglass => Mangano scaremongering =>was:RE:Sci.Am. about Fukushima and US Pacific NW infant mortality
C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk
Sun Jul 10 12:28:17 CDT 2011
The radsafe moderator has said I didnt answer this question of yours. Here is the answer. Prior to 1945 the most common cause of death of infants in England and Wales would have been infections/ pneumonia. After 1945 the rates fell sharply but the rate of fall was arrested when the fallout began. In those areas where the rainfall and fallout was high there was actually an increase which fell back again when the Sr-90 stopped appearing in the milk. The effects were greatest in the neonatal period 0-1month and there was also an effect on stillbirth. Is that an answer?
I dont understand historical perspective point. I attach the graph from my 1995 book.
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Steven Dapra
Sent: Fri 08/07/2011 02:39
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Sternglass => Mangano scaremongering =>was:RE:Sci.Am. about Fukushima and US Pacific NW infant mortality
(See my interspersed comments marked as "SD")
At 10:42 AM 7/7/2011, you wrote:
>The paper by Whyte shows increases in infant mortality , neonatal
>mortality and stillbirths in the USA and also in England and Wales
>over a long period of time.
>Whyte,R.K (1992) `First Day Neonatal Mortality since 1935: A
>Re-examination of the Cross Hypothesis', British Medical Journal, 304: 343-6.
>This is a longer period than was considered by Ernest Sternglass,
>who she cites in her paper. Sternglass was writing in 1971.
Whyte cited Sternglass. Sternglass did not write in
1971. The Proceedings were held in 1969, and Whyte so states in her
citation (no. 32). The citation was to the "Proceedings of the ninth
annual Hanford biology symposium at Richland Washington, May 5-8,
1969." Whyte gives the germane page numbers as pp. 693-717. These
Proceedings appear to be available at the local university library,
and I will make a concerted effort to examine them over the weekend
and report to RADSAFE on whatever I find.
You may also want to try this:
Evidence for Low-Level Radiation Effects on the Human Embryo and
Fetus, in Radiation Biology of the Fetal and Juvenile Mammal,
Proceedings of the 9th Annual Hanford Biology Symposium, May 5-8,
1969, pp. 681-692, AEC Symposium Vol. 16, Ed. by M.R. Sikov and D.D.
Mahlum, Division of Technical Information U.S.AEC, 1969 (.CONF-690501).
Note the different page numbers. This citation is near the
bottom of the page at
>What she shows in her paper is that there were increases in all
>these indicators over the period of the fallout 1959-63, not just in
>USA but also in England and Wales. Dapra's explanation that it was
>something about blacks in New York was n[ . . . ] [edited, so my
>posting will go through --- SD] as it also happened in England and Wales.
This was *not* my explanation. I was quoting from a letter
to the editor of the British Medical Journal, and I gave the
citation. It is: Sepkowitz, S. (Letter to the editor); British
Medical Journal, 304: 776; March 21, 1992. (SD)
>There is no need for any other reference apart from Whyte: the
>graphs are there to see and her conclusions also.
I included the other references for the benefit of parties
who may have wanted to know about the ensuing discussion of Whyte's
>Incidentally, the fallout was highest in Wales because of the high
>rainfall the Sr90 was 3 times higher and was measured by the
>Agricultural Research Council. In Wakes the infant mortality was a
>sharp peak. I obtained all the causes of death from the Registrar
>General for England and Wales in 1994 to see what they died of. The
>most common cause was congenital heart defects.
What was the most common cause of death for the 20 y before
1945, and the 20 y after Cross published his 1973 paper on first day
mortality in England, Wales, and the United States? (Citation to
Cross is "Cost of preventing retrolental fibroplasia?", Lancet 1978,
ii:954-6.) We could use some historical perspective on this. (SD)
>The trend followed the Sr90 in milk exactly. Sr 90 was also examined
>in mice by Luning and Frolen in Sweden:
>Luning K.G, Frolen, H., Nelson, A and Roennbaeck, C. (1963),
>'Genetic effects of Strontium-90 on immature germ cells in mice.'
>Nature No 4980 199: 303-4
>Luning, K. G., Frolen, H., Nelson, A., and Ronnback, C. (1963),
>`Genetic Effects of Strontium-90 Injected into Male Mice', Nature,
>No 4864 197: 304-5.
>They compared it with Cs-137. The baby mice died after the Sr90 but
>not the Cs137. Smirnova and Lyaginskaya in 1969 did the same
>experiment in rats (inject father, unexposed mother) and the dead
>babies had heart defects.
>Smirnova, E. I. and Lyaginska, A. M. (1969), `Heart Development of
>Sr-90 Injured Rats', in Y. I. Moskalev and Y. I. Izd (eds.),
>Radioaktiv Izotopy Organizs (Moscow: Medizina), 348.
>I wrote all this up in my 1995 book Wings of Death.
>Busby, C. C. (1995), Wings of Death: Nuclear Pollution and Human
>Health (Aberystwyth: Green Audit)
>I will get round to publishing it sometime.
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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 133056 bytes
More information about the RadSafe