Re: Newspaper article on Plutonium

[denison.8@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu (Eric Denison)]

If the incidence rates of various cancers have increased over the past few
decades, one of the biggest reasons has to be the huge ingrease in detection
technology.  I don't have hard numbers on this, as it's difficult to
quantify most of the technological progress, but I have noted a general
correlation in the numbers of cancer victims and the ability of medical
professionals to detect and treat tumors of various types (this is a topic
of particular interest to me).

Decades ago, a tumor had to be large enough to be palpable or to cause overt
health effects before a physician could find it without surgery.  Even after
opening a patient, the physician was limited to visual screening of tissues
in order to determine what was to be removed.  With the advent of more
sensitive X-ray procedures, MRI and CAT/PET scans, previously undetectable
cancers became treatable.  Most recently, radio-immuno guided surgery (RIGS)
technology has made it possible for surgeons to locate and remove tumor
masses that are almost invisible to the unaided eye.

I am inclined to believe that the actual incidence of most cancers is
staying level (or maybe actually declining?), but that we are finding more
cancers and finding them earlier than we did before.

Eric Denison
Radiation Safety Technician

>It's my understanding that the incidence rates of many types of cancer have 
>increased significantly over the last few decades.  To my knowledge no 
>satisfactory explanations have been found.  Under these circumstances how 
>meaningful is it to say "no increase in stochastic effects have ever been 
>detected or reported among the peoples of the world from this event"?  How can 
>a contribution from fallout, including plutonium, be ruled out?
>
>I happen to be a supporter of things nuclear, but I don't see that it helps
the 
>nuclear cause to make statements like this.
>
>
>
>
>
>StevenFrey @ aol.com 
>97/09/12 21:28
>
>To: radsafe @ romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list) @ INET
>cc:  (bcc: Brian Gaulke)
>Subject: Re: Newspaper article on Plutonium
>
>Another atmospheric event involving Pu-238 occurred during the 1970 Apollo 13
>mission. The mission carried a sizeable quantity of the radionuclide (a
>hundred pounds or more) to power instrumentation intended to be left on the
>lunar surface. Due to the in-flight emergency, the Pu-238 never made it to
>the lunar surface. It instead returned to Earth still aboard the Lunar Module
>whereupon it entered the atmosphere at unchecked  velocity. Presumably some
>or all of the plutonium source burned up and was released to the atmosphere.
>Yet no increase in stochastic effects have ever been detected or reported
>among the peoples of the world from this event to my knowledge. So much for
>"deadly" Cassini mission!
>
>
>
>
>