[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
more on Critics Allege Infant Mortality Rate
this just came in today...
> ----------
> From: abdc@birthdefects.org[SMTP:abdc@birthdefects.org]
> Reply To: abdc@birthdefects.org
> Sent: Wednesday April 26, 2000 11:35 AM
> To: newsletter@birthdefects.org
> Subject: E-News April 2000
>
> Association of Birth Defect Children
>
> E-News April 2000
>
> Infant Deaths Drop Dramatically After Nuclear Plants Close
>
> [WASHINGTON, D.C] -- A new study shows infant death rates near five U.S.
> nuclear plants dropped immediately and dramatically after the reactors
> closed, raising questions about the government's refusal to consider the
> effects of radioactive emissions
> from nuclear plants on local residents. Moreover, dramatic decreases in
> childhood cancer cases and deaths from birth defects, which are strongly
> affected by radiation exposure, occurred near one of the reactors.
> According to the study's author, this reseachsuggests that the health of
> 42 million Americans who live downwind and within 50 miles of a nuclear
> plant may be affected by these reactors,
>
> The study was conducted by the New York-based Radiation and Public Health
> Project and published in the spring issue of
> the scientific journal. Environmental Epidemiology andToxicology. In light
> of the study, model Christie Brinkley today joined Rep. Michael Forbes
> (D-N.Y.) and others in calling upon the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
> (NRC) to immediately consider whether adverse health effects are
> associated with nuclear plant operations before renewing nuclear power
> plant licenses. Brinkley is a board member of the STAR (Standing for Truth
> About Radiation) Foundation, a group formed in 1997 by concerned Long
> Island residents.
>
> "As a mother of young children who lives near nuclear facilities, I worry
> daily that radiation from these plants may be deadly to our
> children," Brinkley said. "So far, the federal government has buried its
> head in the sand. If closing the nuclear power plants was not
> responsible for the decline in infant deaths, what was?"
>
> The NRC rules do not consider the potential adverse health effects of
> radioactive emissions when considering license renewal applications.
> Owners of twenty-eight nuclear reactors at 17 nuclear facilities around
> the country are scheduled to seek license renewals by 2003. The NRC has
> never voluntarily studied the link between radioactive emissions from
> nuclear plants and patterns of cancer.
>
> The study, conducted by Joseph J. Mangano, a research associate at the
> Radiation and Public Health Project, examined infant death rates in
> counties within 50 miles and in the prevailing wind direction of five
> reactors: Fort St. Vrain (located near Denver, Colo.), LaCrosse (near
> LaCrosse, Wis.), Millstone/Haddam Neck (near New London CT), Rancho Seco
> (near Sacramento, Calif.) and Trojan (near Portland, Ore.).
>
> In the first two years after the reactors closed, infant death rates in
> the downwind counties under 40 miles from the plants fell 15 to 20
> percent from the previous two years, compared to an average U.S. decline
> of just six percent between 1985 and 1996. In each of the five areas
> studied, no other nuclear reactor operated within 70 miles of the closed
> reactor, essentially creating a nuclear-free zone.
>
> The study detailed the plunges in newly-diagnosed leukemia and cancer
> cases and birth defect deaths in children under five years in
> the four-county local area downwind from Rancho Seco. This excessive
> decline has continued through the first seven years after the June 1989
> closing. In contrast, the local infant death rate rose in the two years
> after Rancho Seco began operations in 1974.
>
> "This article is the first to document improvements in health after a
> nuclear plant closes," says study author Mangano. "It supports many other
> studies showing elevated childhood cancer near operating reactors.The
> federal government allows nuclear reactors to emit a certain level of
> radiation, saying that the amount is too low to result in adverse local
> health effects. However, this study clearly calls that assumption into
> question, as do other studies," he concluded.
>
> Janette Sherman, an Alexandria, Va., M.D. who specializes in internal
> medicine and toxicology, and has written books about the causes of breast
> cancer and the relationship between chemical exposure and disease, said
> she believes Mangano's study confirms the link between radiation and
> illness.
>
> "This confirms the best of public health principles: that when you remove
> a known cause of illness, health improves", Sherman said.
> "The adverse effects on humans exposed to radiation are predictable. What
> is gratifying about the research is that it showed childhood health
> measures increasing so dramatically and quickly after the reactors
> closed."
>
> Dr. Janette Sherman, BDRC Scientific Advisor
> Publishes New Book On Breast Cancer
>
> Life's Delicate Balance - Causes and Prevention of Breast Cancer
> ISBN: 1-56032-870-3 (paperback) $24.95
>
> Order through the Amazon.com link on BDRC's website <www.birthdefects.org>
> or by going to www.routledge-ny.com
>
> Additional information about the effects of radiation on human health can
> be found on the Radiation and Public Health site
> at: www.radiation.org
>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Comment : note how this is presented as though it were established fact !
...we might as well start burning witches again.
Jaro
frantaj@aecl.ca
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html