What
do we really know about radiation, and the effects it has on the human body?
First discovered in
the 18th century, uranium is an element found everywhere on Earth, but mainly
in trace quantities. In 1938, German physicists Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann
showed that uranium could be split into parts to yield energy. Uranium is the
principal fuel for nuclear reactors and the main raw material for nuclear
weapons. (Institute for Energy and Environmental Research 2012)
Our understanding of individual radionuclides, radiation dose,
and related health risk comes into
fruition from decades of studying the fallout from nuclear weapons tests and
x-rays. Researchers Steven Simon, André Bouville and Charles Land suggest that
the data supports the notion that certain types of cancer develop as a result
of the specific type of radiation exposure. The following is a statement from
their feature article in the 2006 issue of American
Scientist, Fallout
from Nevada Weapons Tests and Cancer Risks,
“We estimate that in the U.S. the primary
cancer risks from past exposure to radioactive fallout are thyroid cancer and
leukemia, whereas in a very few cases—for example, the Marshall Islands—large
internal doses as a result of ingestion of radionuclides have led to
significant risks of cancers in the stomach and colon.” (Simon, Bouville, Land
06)
“Radioactivity” can be defined as the property of some atoms
which causes them to spontaneously give off energy in the form of particles or
rays (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2011). It appears that radioactivity
and fallout have inspired more than just fear amongst our society. The science
surrounding the effects of radioactive fallout in human biology is so complex
because it incorporates so many areas of research. The high level scrutiny in
this particular field of research also surrounds the concerns for the complexity;
nuclear and radiation physics, chemistry, statistics, ecology, meteorology,
genetics, cell biology, physiology, exposure and risk assessment, and
epidemiology. (Simon, Bouville, Land 06)
Cancer investigators who specialize in
radiation effects have, over the intervening decades, looked for another
signature of nuclear testing—an increase in cancer rates. And although it is
difficult to detect such a signal amid the large number of cancers arising from
"natural" or "unknown" causes, we and others have found
both direct and indirect evidence that radioactive debris dispersed in the
atmosphere from testing has adversely affected public health. Frequently,
however, there is misunderstanding about the type and magnitude of those
effects. Thus today, with heightened fears about the possibilities of nuclear
terrorism, it is worthwhile to review what we know about exposure to fallout
and its associated cancer risks. (Simon, Bouville, Land 06)
Prior to 1980, nuclear weapon testing was being done while
the public was still relatively unaware of the risks associated with radiation
and fallout exposure. As the team of researchers explains in the article, by
studying those populations exposed to radiation, like Hiroshima
and Nagasaki
bomb survivors, the data showed an increase in cancer risks.
Nuclear
testing…ended in 1980, in part because of public concerns about involuntary
exposure to fallout. By that time, increased cancer risk had been established
as the principal late health effect of radiation exposure, based primarily on
studies of populations exposed to medical x rays, to radium and radon decay
products from the manufacture of luminescent (radium) watch dials and in
uranium mining, and to direct radiation from the atomic bombings of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki. (Simon, Bouville, Land 06)
The United States Department of Energy
showed another contributing factor which legitimized some of the fears being
expressed by the public. In 1979, research was being carried out to estimate
radiation doses in populations downwind of the Nevada Test Site. The following
excerpt lists some of their findings and provides an example of their
methodology from the American Scientist
article,
Doses from internal
irradiation within this local fallout area were ascribed mainly to inhalation
of radionuclides in the air and to ingestion of foodstuffs contaminated with
radioactive materials. Doses from internal irradiation were, for most organs
and tissues, substantially smaller than those from external irradiation, with
the notable exception of the thyroid, for which estimated internal doses were
substantially higher. Estimated thyroid doses were ascribed mainly to
consumption of foodstuffs contaminated with iodine-131 (I-131) and, to a lesser
extent, iodine-133 (I-133), and to inhalation of air contaminated with both
I-131 and I-133. Thyroid doses varied according to local dairy practices and
the extent to which milk was imported from less contaminated areas.
Bone-marrow doses less than 50 mGy were estimated for communities in a local
fallout area within 300 kilometers of the NTS, where ground-monitoring data
were available, and an order of magnitude less for other communities in
Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah and portions of adjoining states. (Simon,
Bouville, Land 06)
In
the month of August in 1980, a detailed account was published on some of the
effects that resulted from nuclear tests called, The Forgotten Guinea Pigs: A Report on Health
Effects of Low-Level Radiation Sustained As a Result of the Nuclear Weapons
Testing Program Conducted by the United States Government, prepared
for the use of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, United States
House of Representatives, and its Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
This investigation focused on the nuclear weapons testing programs that ran
from the 1940’s to the 1950’s. The impact of those initial findings gets
reflected in the conclusion of the official report.
Atmospheric testing
of nuclear weapons in the 1950’s and 1960’s may well have been essential to secure
the national defense. However, because the agency charged with developing
nuclear weapons was more concerned with that goal than with its other mission
of protecting the public from injury, the government totally failed to provide
adequate protection for the residents of the area. There was sufficient
information available from the beginning to suggest that if it was not possible
to conduct the testing outside the continental United States, then the people
living nearby needed protection. The necessary protection could have been
provided by evaluating some of the people but, at a minimum, the government
owed the residents a duty to inform them of the precise time and place of each
test and to instruct them as to what precautions should be taken. In addition,
the government’s program for monitoring the health effects of the tests was
inadequate and, more disturbingly, all evidence suggesting that radiation was
having harmful effects, be it on the sheep or the people, was not only
disregarded but actually suppressed.
The greatest irony of
our atmospheric nuclear testing program is that the only victims of U.S.
nuclear arms since World War II have been our own people. (U.S. Congress,
House, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Subcommittee on Oversight
and Investigations 1980)
Many
faults were found and listed in the actual testing processes which were then
immediately followed by the implementation of safety procedures for future
weapons testing.
*The complete original report
is available for download in a .pdf file at the Federal
Depository Library Program website.
In
1983, Congress enacted Public Law (97-414) directing the Department of Health
and Human Services (DHHS) to open up an investigation, which was eventually
delegated to the National Cancer Institute, into the potential risks of thyroid
cancer from exposure to iodine-131 (I-131) due to the radioactive fallout from
the atomic bomb tests held at the Nevada Test Site during the 1950s and early
1960s.
In
1990, Congress passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA). This
represents an official government apology to the victims of America’s Cold
War nuclear program. This piece of legislation also publicly acknowledges the
United States’ failure to warn the workers in uranium mines, the on-site test
victims, and the downwind communities exposed to fallout from atomic bomb
tests. (U.S.
Department of Justice 2008)
In
1997, the National Cancer Institute published their research findings in a two-volume
report titled, Estimated Exposures and Thyroid Doses Received by the
American People from Iodine-131 in Fallout Following Nevada Atmospheric Nuclear
Bomb Tests. After
the details were discovered, the United States Congress requested
that the Department of Health and Human Services expand on their research. This would mean that in the future, investigations
would have to include looking for other radionuclides in the fallout from
weapons testing and consider testing outside of the United States to other regions of
the country that may have potentially exposed people to significant amounts of
radiation. (National Cancer Institute 1999)
In
2003, thirteen years after those initial NCI estimates from I-131 weapons
testing fallout: it released a new publication: Radioactive I-131 from Fallout, to public health care providers and
advocacy groups, but still not to the general public. The official press
release of the NCI Complete Nationwide
study of Radioactive Fallout from 1950s Nuclear Tests, states the
researchers discover,
“Depending on their
age at the time of the tests, where they lived, and what foods they consumed,
particularly milk, Americans were exposed to varying levels of I-131.” (National
Institutes of Health 1997)
One
of the major contributing factors that may have helped prompt the investigation
surrounding nuclear fallout and children is also reflected in the subsequent
line,
“Since I-131
accumulates in the thyroid gland, concerns have been raised that the fallout
could cause thyroid cancer in people who were exposed to it as children.” (National
Institutes of Health 1997)
The Pacific Proving
Ground program has provided a significant amount of data due to the level
of fallout-related doses contaminating the Marshall Islands and its’
inhabitants.
“Many of the Marshall Islands
remain contaminated by nuclear fallout and many of these survivors living
during the time of the testing suffer increased incidence of several types of
cancers and birth defects.”
The level of uncertainty surrounding the link between
fallout and specific cancers was so high because the number of cancer cases
involved was so small. For example, one way they handled the difficulties in
correlating fallout levels with thyroid cancer rates was found in more collaborative
efforts.
“To provide more
accurate information on the risk of thyroid cancer from radioactive fallout,
NCI investigators, in collaboration with other U.S. government agencies and
international organizations, are watching with the government of scientists in
Belarus and Ukraine to study thyroid cancer among children in those countries
who were exposed to fallout of various isotopes of iodine, mainly I-131, from
Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986.” (National Institutes of Health 1997)
In
2006, the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) released a
report entitled, Science for the
Vulnerable: Setting Radiation and Multiple Exposure Environmental Health
Standards to Protect Those Most at Risk. The researchers’ findings lead them
to conclude,
“…federal radiation
protection standards are dangerously skewed, thus ignoring the most vulnerable
members of the American public.” (Makhijani, Smith, Thorne 2006)
Also
featured in the reports, the following point gets made,
“…society pays a
great deal of attention the reproductive rights of a woman who does not want a
child, but very little attention to the rights of women who want to be mothers
of healthy babies.” (Makhijani, Smith, Thorne 2006)
The IEER also brings to light some problems with the federal
safety standards, such as the lack of group
estimates other than what is called, “the reference man”, based on a 14 pound adult
Caucasian male in his twenties (IEER 2012). This obviously would exclude children,
an embryo or fetus, and women. All of which are often more sensitive to the
harmful effects of radiation from fallout or toxic materials left from uranium
mining. (Institute for Energy and Environmental Research 2012) So, the IEER
researchers suggest that,
When considering the development of radiological protection standards, it is proper to bear in mind that variations in sensitivity will arise not only due to age and sex, but also due to exposure to toxic chemicals that will interact with radiation in complex and poorly understood ways. (Simon, Bouville, Land 2006)
Almost all
radionuclides in fallout emit beta (electron) and gamma (photon) radiation. A
cascade of events follows once tissue is exposed to radiation: As the initial
radiation scatters, and atoms in the body are ionized by removal of weakly
bound electrons. Radiation can damage DNA by direct interaction or by creating
highly reactive chemical species that interact with DNA (Simon, Bouville,
Land 06).
-How data was collected-
Doses from fallout
received in the 1950s and 1960s have been estimated…using mathematical exposure
assessment models and historical fallout deposition data.
The relatively large
particles that tend to fall out first are not efficiently transferred to the
human body. At more distant locations in the region of local fallout, internal
dose is relatively more important because smaller particles that predominate
there are biologically more available (Simon, Bouville, Land 2006).
Due to a lack of information on I-131 exposure
specifically, a larger body of existing data is used from similar forms of
research, such as studying medical x-rays.
Relatively little of
the information on radiation-related risk comes from studies of populations
exposed mostly or only to radioactive fallout, because useful dose-response
data are difficult to obtain. However, the type of radiation received from
external sources in fallout is similar to medical x rays or to gamma rays
received directly by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki A-bomb survivors,
allowing information from individuals so exposed to be used to estimate
fallout-related risks from external radiation sources (Simon, Bouville, Land 2006).
The
criticisms of this particular research surround the small number of studies on
persons exposed to I-131 from NTS fallout producing somewhat suggestive, but not conclusive evidence that it is linked to specific forms of cancer.
Thyroid cancer is a rare disease
overall—with U.S. lifetime rates estimated to be 0.97 percent in females and
0.36 percent in males—and it is extremely rare at ages younger than 25.
Furthermore, the malignancy is usually indolent, may go long unobserved in the
absence of special screening efforts and has a fatality rate of less than 10
percent. These factors make it difficult to study fallout-related thyroid
cancer risk in all but the most heavily exposed populations. Thyroid cancer
risks from external radiation are related to gender and to age at exposure,
with by far the highest risks occurring among women exposed as young children.
(Simon, Bouville, Land 2006)
The researchers acknowledge and factor in the noted
criticisms of this issues research,
However, observations
of thyroid cancer risk among children exposed to fallout from the Chornobyl
reactor accident in 1986 have led to a reassessment. An Institute of Medicine
report concluded that the Chornobyl observations support the conclusion that
I-131 has an equal effect, or at least two-thirds the effect of internal
radiation. More recent data on thyroid cancer risk among persons in Belarus and Russia exposed as young children to
Chornobyl fallout offer further support of this inference. (Simon, Bouville,
Land 2006)
The
IEER website features a Brief Fact Sheet
on Iodine-131 and Nevada Test Site Fallout, showing that NCI estimates the
releases from the Nevada tests were up to 130
million curies, compared to the Chernobyl
reactor incident, which was estimated to be around 7.3 million curies. (Institute
for Energy and Environmental Research 1997)
The applicability of
risk estimates based on studies of external radiation exposure to a population
exposed mainly to internal sources, and to I-131 in particular, has been
debated for many years. This uncertainty relates to the uneven distribution of
I-131 radiation dose within the thyroid gland and its protraction over time.
Until recently, the scientific consensus had been that I-131 is probably
somewhat less effective than external radiation as a cause of thyroid cancer…(Simon,
Bouville, Land 2006)
References:
Epstein, Samuel S. 2003. U. S. National Cancer Institute
(NCI) Withheld Atom-Bomb Test Data. Cancer
Prevention Coalition. Available online at
Epstein, Samuel S. 2003. Stop Cancer Before it Starts: How
to Win the War on Cancer. Cancer
Prevention Coalition. Available online at http://www.preventcancer.com/press/pdfs/Stop_Cancer_Book.pdf.
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. 1997. Brief
Fact Sheet on Iodine-131 and Nevada
Test Site Fallout. (October).
Available online at http://www.ieer.org/latest/i131info.html.
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. 2007. Healthy from the Start / Tritium
(Vol. 14, No. 4). (February 5). Available online at http://ieer.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/SDA-14-4.pdf.
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. 2012.
Uranium: Its Uses and Hazards. Last modified (May). Available online at http://ieer.org/resource/factsheets/uranium-its-uses-and-hazards/.
Makhijani, Arjun, Brice Smith, and Michael C. Thorne. 2006. Science
for the Vulnerable: Setting Radiation and Multiple Exposure Standards. Institute for Energy and Environmental
Research. (October 19). Available online at http://ieer.org/resource/reports/science-vulnerable-setting-radiation/.
National
Cancer Institute. 1999. Estimated Exposures and Thyroid Doses Received by the
American People from Iodine-131 in Fallout Following Nevada Atmospheric Nuclear Bomb Tests. The
National Cancer Institute at the National Institute of Health. Available online at http://www.cancer.gov/i131/fallout/contents.html.
National Institutes of Health. 1997. NIH Press Release: NCI
Completes Nationwide Study of Radioactive Fallout from 1950s Nuclear Tests. National Institutes of Health. (July
25). Available online at http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/jul97/nci-25.htm.
Simon, Steven, André Bouville, and Charles Land. 2006.
Fallout from Nuclear Weapons Tests and Cancer Risks. American Scientist. Available online at http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/issue.aspx?id=982&y=2006&no=1&content=true&page=5&css=print.
U.S.
Congress, House, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations. 1980. "The Forgotten Guinea Pigs": A
Report on Health Effects of Low-Level Radiation Sustained as a Result of the
Nuclear Weapons Testing Program Conducted by the United States Government. The
Federal Depository Library Program at Cal. Available online at http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/doemoff/govinfo/federal/fdlpexhibit/The_Forgotten_Guinea_Pigs.pdf.
U.S.
Department of Justice. 2007. Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA).
Available online at http://www.justice.gov/civil/common/reca.html.
U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Radiation
and Radioactivity. (Last updated July 08). Available online at http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/understand/radiation_radioactivity.html#radioactivity.
No comments:
Post a Comment