The definitive story on nuclear power and health
I recommend that you download, print off, and study at your leisure, the complete article – from
Evatt Foundation: Publication: Nuclear power & public health – 31 May 2010
Nuclear power & public health, Evatt Foundation:, By Peter Karamoskos, 31 May 2010“… there is a linear dose-response relationship between exposure to ionizing radiation and the development of solid cancers in humans. It is unlikely that there is a threshold below which cancers are not induced.” – National Academy of Science, BEIR VII report, 2006
“We need to develop a very firm commitment to the elimination of nuclear power as a source of energy on the earth.” – Russell Train, former US Environmental Protection Agency administrator, 1977″
[t]he [economic] failure of the U.S. nuclear power program ranks as the largest managerial disaster in business history, a disaster on a monumental scale.” – Forbes, 1985
Introduction
The public health implications for a resurgence of nuclear power appear to have taken a subordinate position to the economic and global warming arguments that the industry has advanced to justify its expansion. The purpose of this essay therefore is several-fold: to review the scientific evidence for public health impacts of nuclear power, to assess occupational hazards faced by nuclear industry workers involved in the nuclear fuel cycle, to assess the evidence for nuclear reactor safety and critically challenge the underlying assumptions which may be less than adequate. It will also examine the public health risks of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors. The common thread linking these safety issues is the risk posed to public health by ionising radiation and in particular the cancer risk. The nuclear industry and our understanding of radioactive health hazards, developed in tandem during the twentieth century, however, the relationship to this day has always been uneasy and often in conflict. A brief historical narrative of this joint evolution is reviewed as it is essential to understanding the context and scope of the public health issues at the heart of the nuclear power debate.
If we are to believe the nuclear industry, nuclear power is both safe and vital to our future, yet over half a century of nuclear power has proven both contentions as false……
Evatt Foundation: Publication: Nuclear power & public health – 31 May 2010
Thyroid cancer danger rises with repeated dental X-rays.
Repeated Dental X-Rays Increase Thyroid Cancer Risk TopNews United Kingdom, by Rasik Sharma , 06/07/2010 – It has been stated by the researchers from Brighton, Cambridge (England) and Kuwait that thyroid cancer risk elevates with an increase in the number of dental x-rays. This finding was cited in the medical journal Acta Oncologica. Continue reading
Workers exposed to radioactive polonium at BHP uranium mine
“These high readings should trigger further investigation and individual testing for polonium in the body,
Roxby’s radioactive risk, The Independent Weekly. HENDRIK GOUT04 Jun, 2010 Mining giant BHP Billiton is risking the lives of its staff and employees at Olympic Dam in South Australia by exposing them to unsafe levels of radiation, according to a company whistleblower. Continue reading
Murky history of Australia’s exposure to radiation from French nuclear tests
Prime Minister Whitlam sent HMAS Supply to witness the French Tests. A Royal New Zealand Naval vessel also took position and watched. Thus more ANZAC nuke vets were created by the exposures they suffered…….The same mistakes which caused the Black Mist incident and all other incidents in Australia to go unreported in the 1950s were still in play in the 1970s…………
Paul Langley’s Nuclear History Blog, 19 May, 2010, On 22 July 1973 French atmospheric nuclear testing recommenced at Mururoa Atoll in the South Pacific. Continue reading
Ionising radiation a greater cause of breast cancer than previously thought
“Our work shows that radiation can change the microenvironment of breast cells, and this in turn can allow the growth of abnormal cells with a long-lived phenotype that has a much greater potential to be cancerous,”
Study Raises New Concerns About Radiation and Breast Cancer « Berkeley Lab News Center, 14 May 2010, “………It is well established that exposure to ionizing radiation can result in mutations or other genetic damage that cause cells to turn cancerous. Now a new study led by researchers with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) has revealed another way in which radiation can promote cancer development. Continue reading
Ionising radiation double the cancer risk for the young
Many doctors unaware of radiation cancer risks
Cancer Panel Report Cites Medical Radiation Concerns, News Inferno.com, May 12th, 2010 “…..the President’s Cancer Panel (PCP) pointed to the huge increase in Americans’ exposure to medical radiation. Continue reading
Beware of Australian govts bearing small, hurried, gifts to Maralinga veterans
As Queen’s Counsel Cherie Blair leads the Australian atomic veterans into legal battle with the British government over compensation, the Australian government hurriedly decides to at last give some (pretty lousy) compensation to them
Could it be that there’s a little clause in there somewhere, about the veterans dropping their legal case in UK, if they want to get Australian govt recognition?
American Cancer Society misrepresented President’s Cancer Panel findings
why………did the ACS react so strongly and go on to misrepresent the findings of the Cancer Panel as if the NIH were an antagonist, rather than an ally?
the Chronicle of Philanthropy famously once blasted the ACS as being “more interested in accumulating wealth than in saving lives”
Every Cancer Counts, Carl Pope: Memo to the American Cancer Society, THE HUFFINGTON POST, May 11, 2010, “…..The ACS comment was widely and understandably reported as an attack on the scientific validity of the Cancer Panel’s findings. But in reality, the Cancer Panel never said that pollution is the major cause of cancer. Continue reading
Cancer risks for young women in medical radiation
PCP:Medical radiation ups breast cancer risk, foodfconsumer.org, 08/05/2010 The President’s CancerPanel released this week an annual report on the cancer risks from the environment warning that medical radiation raises breast cancer risk. Continue reading
President’s Cancer Panel Report highlights Breast Cancer
the President’s Cancer Panel report is in general cautious and makes sensible policy recommendations. It also makes a number of (mostly) sensible recommendations for individual citizens. In general, it is cautious and highlights a neglected aspect of cancer research.
(USA) The President’s Cancer Panel steps into it : Respectful Insolence, 11 May 2010, Continue reading
Uranium tailings inflict cancer on a town in Utah
A town under siege from Cancer, ABC 4.com – Salt Lake City, Utah Newsby: Brent Hunsaker
MONTICELLO, Utah 7 May 2010, – The Uranium mill was big for little Monticello. Still, not everyone worked there. So why would people who never set foot on mill property still get cancer? Continue reading
Be wary: Australian govt compensation may impede current legal action
Aust Govt to compensate nuke vets, Paul Langley’s Nuclear History Blog, 7 May 2010, “……..This may be very good news for the surviving 2,000 nuclear veterans out of the Australian 8,000 service personnel who were used as target practice for the British nuclear weaponeers,…..
It still leaves the question as to whether the payments will contain clauses impeding the current legal action against the British government, Continue reading
Environmentally induced cancer, including by radiation “grossly underestimated”
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 