Key Issues
Radiation Safety at Nuclear Power Plants: Studies Look at Public, Workers
<< Previous
Radiation Health Effects On Nuclear Workers
U.K. Study
The January 1992 issue of the British Medical Journal published the results of the U.K.’s National Radiological Protection Board’s (NRPB) study of 95,000 nuclear workers. The purpose of the study was to assess the effects of low occupational exposure to radiation.
Researchers found that death rates from cancer did not exceed those in the general population. The results of this study were consistent with data from survivors of the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which remain the most important reference for assessing the health effects of radiation. For that reason, the U.K. study was generally believed to confirm the International Commission on Radiation Protection’s system of radiation protection. When it released its findings, the NRPB announced plans to do a second study, using a larger study population and longer follow-up.
Gardner Study
The February 1990 British Medical Journal published the results of a five-year study conducted by Martin Gardner, an epidemiologist and medical statistician at the University of Southampton, England. Gardner identified a possible association between childhood leukemia in Seascale, England, and the fathers’ preconception exposure to radiation while working at the Sellafield nuclear fuel reprocessing plant.
He observed that of 74 cases of childhood leukemia in West Cumbria, 10 of the children had parents who worked at Sellafield. The study also suggested a possible association between the incidence of childhood leukemia in West Cumbria and paternal employment in farming and steel-making, two occupations that involve exposure to chemicals.
The Gardner study’s findings are inconsistent with scientific understanding about radiation. For example, studies of 7,400 children of male Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, whose average radiation exposure was four times that of the Sellafield workers, show no evidence of an increase in leukemia or other cancers.
Numerous studies since 1990 failed to support a radiation-cancer link.
A 1996 report by the U.K.’s Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment, which spent more than 10 years examining the Sellafield data, said epidemiologists could stop looking for Gardner’s hypothetical radiation-childhood leukemia link at Seascale. “We conclude that the level of risk is inconsistent with the radiation doses actually received via occupational exposure and current estimates of genetic risk,” the report said.
The results of a study examining the Gardner hypothesis were published in the May 1999 issue of the British Medical Journal. In it, the authors concluded that “overall, the findings suggest that the incidence of cancer and leukemia among children of nuclear industry employees is similar to that in the general population.”
Radiation Health Effects On Nuclear Workers
U.K. Study
The January 1992 issue of the British Medical Journal published the results of the U.K.’s National Radiological Protection Board’s (NRPB) study of 95,000 nuclear workers. The purpose of the study was to assess the effects of low occupational exposure to radiation.
Researchers found that death rates from cancer did not exceed those in the general population. The results of this study were consistent with data from survivors of the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which remain the most important reference for assessing the health effects of radiation. For that reason, the U.K. study was generally believed to confirm the International Commission on Radiation Protection’s system of radiation protection. When it released its findings, the NRPB announced plans to do a second study, using a larger study population and longer follow-up.
Gardner Study
The February 1990 British Medical Journal published the results of a five-year study conducted by Martin Gardner, an epidemiologist and medical statistician at the University of Southampton, England. Gardner identified a possible association between childhood leukemia in Seascale, England, and the fathers’ preconception exposure to radiation while working at the Sellafield nuclear fuel reprocessing plant.
He observed that of 74 cases of childhood leukemia in West Cumbria, 10 of the children had parents who worked at Sellafield. The study also suggested a possible association between the incidence of childhood leukemia in West Cumbria and paternal employment in farming and steel-making, two occupations that involve exposure to chemicals.
The Gardner study’s findings are inconsistent with scientific understanding about radiation. For example, studies of 7,400 children of male Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, whose average radiation exposure was four times that of the Sellafield workers, show no evidence of an increase in leukemia or other cancers.
Numerous studies since 1990 failed to support a radiation-cancer link.
A 1996 report by the U.K.’s Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment, which spent more than 10 years examining the Sellafield data, said epidemiologists could stop looking for Gardner’s hypothetical radiation-childhood leukemia link at Seascale. “We conclude that the level of risk is inconsistent with the radiation doses actually received via occupational exposure and current estimates of genetic risk,” the report said.
The results of a study examining the Gardner hypothesis were published in the May 1999 issue of the British Medical Journal. In it, the authors concluded that “overall, the findings suggest that the incidence of cancer and leukemia among children of nuclear industry employees is similar to that in the general population.”
