[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Chelyabinsk
All,
The following note is from Myron Pollycove (M.D., US NRC; Prof Emeritus UCal
San Francisco, and Ret. Head of Nuclear Medicine, San Fran General
Hospital), identifying and summarizing an additional substantial study that
also finds no adverse health effects in the Chelyabinsk population.
Regards, Jim Muckerheide
=======================
Jim,
Strikingly absent from the cited references is:
Kostyuchenko VA, Krestina L Yu, Long-term irradiation effects in the
population evacuated from the East-Urals radioactive trace area. The Sci.
Total Environ.142:119-125 (1994).
This article reports cancer mortality in 7852 Eastern Urals villagers
following radiation exposure produced by the 1957 Mayak thermal explosion.
Tumor-related mortality was 28%(P<0.05), 39%(P<0.05), and 27% lower in the
496 mGy, 120 mGy, and 40 mGy groups, respectively, than in the unexposed
villagers.
Myron
> All,
>
> Note that the UNSCEAR 2000 Report Section on Manmade Radiation is at:
> http://www.unscear.org/pdffiles/annexc.pdf
> Go to page 22 (of the pdf file) for Chelyabinsk.
>
> Regards, Jim Muckerheide
>
>> Following the excellent recommendations by:
>>
>>> From: Yarmoshenko IV <ivylist@ECKO.URAN.RU>
>>> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 10:14:33 +0600
>>> Subject: Re: Chelyabinsk
>>
>> Note that the principal source of the collected data is UNSCEAR 2000.
>>
>> A recent paper (2000), including Dr. Degteva, is:
>> Radiation and Environmental Biophysics, Volume 39 Issue 4 (2000) pp 219-225
>>
>> Mortality in the offspring of individuals living along the radioactively
>> contaminated Techa River: a descriptive analysis
>>
>> M. M. Kossenko (1), Y. Ostroumova (1), A. Akleyev (1), N. Startsev (1), M.
>> Degteva (1), F. Granath (2), P. Hall (2)
>>
>> Received: 18 August 2000 / Accepted: 22 September 2000
>>
>> Abstract: From 1949 onwards, radioactive waste was released into the Techa
>> River in the southern Urals and the population living along the river was
>> exposed to ionising radiation. Relocation of these people did not start
>> until several years later, causing many individuals to be exposed to
>> substantial doses from internal and external radiation. The identification
>> and follow-up of the exposed individuals started more than 40 years ago and
>> is still continuing. The Techa River offspring cohort (TROC) that has
>> recently been established, comprises 10,459 children born to at least one
>> parent living along the Techa River during the period 1950-1992. Of these
>> children, 3,897 were born during the period of highest release, i.e. between
>> 1950 and 1956 and might thus have been exposed in utero. A total of 1,103
>> individuals have since died mainly due to infectious and respiratory
>> diseases, injury and poisoning. Only 25 cases were identified as having died
>> of a malignant condition. The radioactive contamination of the Techa River
>> in the southern Urals gives a unique possibility to study the adverse
>> effects of protracted exposure to ionising radiation in a large
>> well-described cohort. The Techa River offspring cohort will make it
>> possible to study the effects on those exposed in utero or early in life and
>> the follow-up of the cohort in the future is, therefore, of great
>> importance. Comparisons with other cohorts of humans exposed early in life,
>> will increase our knowledge in this field of research.
>>
>> Refs on the doses/effects to the region are:
>>
>> 24. Krestinina LY, Kossenko MM, Kostyuchenko VA (1991)
>> Lethal developmental defects in descendents of a population
>> residing in the area of a radioactive trace. Med Radiol 36:
>> 3032
>> 25. Kossenko MM, Izhevsky PV, Degteva MO, Akleev AV,
>> Vyushkova OV (1994) Pregnancy outcome and early health
>> status of children born to the Techa river population. Sci Total
>> Environ 142: 91100
>> 26. Kossenko MM, Gudkova NV (1996) Leukemia in the progeny
>> of the exposed parents. (in Russian) Med Radiol Radiat Safety
>> 41: 2328
>> 27. Akleyev AV, Lyubchansky ER (1994) Environmental and
>> medical effects of nuclear weapon production on the Southern
>> Urals. Sci Total Environ 142: 18
>> 28. Degteva MO, Vorobiova MI, Kozheurov VP, Tolstykh EI,
>> Anspaugh IR, Napier BA (2000) Dose reconstruction system
>> for the exposed population living along the Techa River.
>> Health Phys 78: 542554
>>
>> A summary of previous studies from the paper is:
>>
>> "Fatal congenital malformations have previously been
>> studied in 33,500 children of parents exposed as a result
>> of the so-called Kyshtym accident [24]. The average gonadal
>> dose was 5 mSv and the non-exposed comparison
>> group included 21,357 individuals. No increase in severe
>> developmental defects relating to ionising radiation was
>> seen.
>> Liquid radioactive waste was discharged into the
>> Techa River from the Mayak radiochemical facility in
>> the period 19491956. Pregnancy outcome and health
>> status of the children born to parents living along the
>> Techa River has previously been studied [25] and no effect
>> of ionising radiation could be seen on birth rates,
>> number of abortions (medical or spontaneous), stillbirths,
>> congenital malformations, or mortality when children
>> of exposed and unexposed parents were compared.
>> A study of leukaemia incidence among offspring of parents
>> exposed in the Techa River villages has previously
>> been conducted [26]. During the period 19501998, 13
>> cases of hematopoetic malignancies were registered in
>> the offspring. The incidence of haematological malignancies
>> in the offspring did not exceed that of the comparison
>> group and no leukaemia incidence related to gonadal
>> doses of the parents was found.
>> The aim of the present paper was to describe the newly
>> established Techa River offspring cohort (TROC), its
>> structure and potentials, as well as the present status of the
>> ongoing studies on mortality related to gonadal, in utero
>> and childhood exposure to ionising radiation. Causes of
>> death in the TROC have not yet been studied in detail."
>>
>> In the preliminary childhood mortality data in the paper, there are no
>> obvious significant effects, but the oldest of this group is only 50 years
>> old so the group will need to be followed into the cancer-prone years to see
>> if cancer is increased.
>>
>> Note the following statement:
>>
>> "The external
>> exposure has been found to be substantially lower
>> because previous calculations were based on the assumption
>> that all residents in a village received the same dose
>> as those living closest to the riverbank. Thus, the distance
>> from the river had not been taken into consideration;
>> furthermore, the old calculations overestimated the
>> time spent on the riverbanks."
>>
>> And, in ref to Alice Stewart's and other studies:
>> "In utero exposure to ionising radiation,
>> as a consequence of x-ray exposure during pregnancy,
>> has been more thoroughly studied but the data
>> are controversial. Case-control studies have consistently
>> shown a small increased risk of childhood leukaemia
>> following a history of prenatal radiation, but most cohort
>> studies have not supported this association. Early
>> case-control studies were criticised for selection bias,
>> since no adjustment was made for potential confounders
>> such as concomitant diseases in the mother and/or
>> the fetus, and recall bias, as exposure information was
>> based on interviews with the parents of affected children.
>> Little is known about the carcinogenic effect of gonadal
>> and in utero exposure to ionising radiation after
>> protracted exposure. The TROC will provide the opportunity
>> to the scientific community to study carcinogenesis
>> in a cohort with a fairly reliable follow-up (comparably
>> few leaving the area under surveillance) and carefully
>> calculated dosimetry. The population is slowly moving
>> into the period of life when cancer is most frequently
>> diagnosed, i.e. the oldest member of the cohort will be
>> 50 years old in 2000, and follow-up is thus needed for
>> many years to come."
>>
>> ************************************************************************
>> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
>> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
>> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
>>
>
> ************************************************************************
> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
>
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.