Epidemiology on the rampage

["Bernadette Baca" <Bernadette.Baca@tdh.state.tx.us>]

I have another one for you.  This again came from an electronic news 
service distributing information across the globe.  It might not be 
too bad of an idea to see about putting informational articles in the 
news.  These articles do not have to be pro anything but sheer 
information or updates, similar to other research and medical 
sections of our society.  Even if it's just to say "Hey, look what 
were reviewing today."  If we don't at leastTRY to start getting 
information out to the general public, good, bad, or otherwise, how 
do we expect the public to react rationally.  When was the time you 
got emotionally entangled in a report about the good/bad effects of 
asprin.  Asprin articles have become so common place that most 
individuals acknowledge the reports and move on.  Some greatly 
influence individuals, but on the whole the general public is not put 
at arms.  It seems only harmful reports are making the news around 
here and not anything positive or otherwise to off set the bad press.
--- Just my musings.

12:57 PM ET 02/25/98
Flawed radiation data puts old, kids at risk-study
         (Release at 2 p.m. EST)
            LONDON (Reuters) - Children and old people around the world
may be exposed to damaging levels of radiation from nuclear
plants because of flawed data used to set safety limits, New
Scientist magazine said Wednesday.
            The weekly journal said a study by British epidemiologist
Alice Stewart showed the very young and the elderly were more
sensitive to radiation damage than experts had realised.
            Regulatory agencies estimate the risks of exposure to
radiation by using rates comparing cancer among people living in
Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1950, five years after the United
States dropped atomic bombs on them, and people from other
Japanese cities.
            But Stewart said children and old people were
under-represented among the survivors used in the data.
            ``The atom bomb data are no good as a basis for radiation
safety regulations,'' she told New Scientist.
            She compared 2,601 survivors who suffered from acute
radiation injuries with 63,072 survivors who did not.
            ``Stewart found that of those with acute injuries, children
who were under 10 when the bombs exploded were a thousand times
as likely to die of cancer as people aged between 10 and 55,''
the magazine said.
            The study also found that people over 55 at the time of the
explosions were twice as likely to die of cancer as those aged
between 10 and 55.
            Stewart said the young and old were more sensitive because
their immune systems, which control vulnerability to cancers,
were either developing or breaking down.
            Her study is due to be published by the Scientific and
Technological Options Assessment unit of the European
Parliament.
_______________________
 
Bernadette Baca

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TDH - Bureau of Radiation Control     
Uranium Licensing Project
1100 West 49th
Austin, TX 78756 - 3189
(512) 834 - 6688  ext: 2206

-My supervisor has not read or approved this message, 
much less agrees with my point of view.  Therefore, use at your own risk and humor.

mailto:Bernadette.Baca@tdh.state.tx.us

"Beneath this chaos is a really big mess." - Jim Davis