Child Leukaemia Doubles Near French Nuclear Plants: Study

[Hissyspit]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/11/child-leukaemia-doubles-near-french-nuclear-plants-study

Child leukaemia doubles near French nuclear plants: study

By Reuters
Wednesday, January 11, 2012

PARIS (Reuters) – The incidence of leukemia is twice as high in children living close to French nuclear power plants as in those living elsewhere in the country, a study by French health and nuclear safety experts has found.

- snip -

The study, conducted by the French health research body INSERM, found that between 2002 and 2007, 14 children under the age of 15 living in a 5-kilometre radius of France’s 19 nuclear power plants had been diagnosed with leukemia.

This is double the rate of the rest of the country, where a total of 2,753 cases were diagnosed in the same period.

“This is a result which has been checked thoroughly and which is statistically significant,” said Dominique Laurier, head of the epidemiology research laboratory at France’s nuclear safety research body (IRSN).

MORE[p]

[Octafish]

1. Incredible! Have similar studies been done in the United States?

If not, they should.

Some things are more important than energy -- a few even more important than money. Children, for instance.

[mainer]

2. I believe it has been reported elsewhere

I recall reading data at least two decades ago that the number of leukemia cases is correlated to proximity to nuclear power plants. 20 years ago, it was a big factor in our choosing where to live.

[Octafish]

5. The subject is controversial, unfortunately.

A scientific journal published an article reporting a spike of 14,000 deaths in the U.S. after Fukushima. Interesting to see if there's a correlation between who takes what side and where the money that makes their research go round comes from.

Fukushima Fallout and Infant Deaths: International Journal of Health Services' Vicente Navarro Responds

[mainer]

3. Here's a 2003 study that says yes

"Numerous reports document elevated cancer rates among children living near
nuclear facilities in various nations. Little research has examined U.S. rates near the
nation's 103 operating reactors. This study determined that cancer incidence for children
< 10 yr of age who live within 30 mi (48 km) of each of 14 nuclear plants in the eastern
United States (49 counties with a population > 16.8 million) exceeds the national
average. The excess 12.4% risk suggests that 1 in 9 cancers among children who reside
near nuclear reactors is linked to radioactive emissions. If cancer incidence in 5 western
states is used as a baseline, the ratio is closer to 1 in 5. Incidence is particularly elevated
for leukemia. Childhood cancer mortality exceeds the national average in 7 of the 14
study areas."


http://www.c-10.org/pdf/Elevated%20childhood%20cancer%20incidence%20proximate%20to%20U.pdf

[Octafish]

4. Thank you very much, mainer.

The nation's scientists, academics and industrialists have failed to follow-up on that study's important findings.

Our nation's journalists have let us down in adequately following and reporting this important news.

[hunter]

6. Words have meaning...

"But the study, to be published soon in the International Journal of Cancer, fell short of establishing a causal link between the higher incidence of leukemia, a type of blood cancer, and living near nuclear power plants."

At least the parent source isn't woo: http://english.inserm.fr

The only nuclear health studies that ever come up with hard numbers involve very significant radiation exposures: open air nuclear attacks and bomb tests, Chernobyl (and soon to be Fukushima), medical x-rays and radiation, that sort of thing... and even with those clear radiation exposures there are an abundance of very bad or even fraudulent studies either exaggerating the harm or minimizing it.

From my personal experiences, many of the "studies" surrounding the defunct Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant in California were a crap fling. There did seem to be a statistical signal in a few of them, but even those results could better be attributed to ag chemical runoff and similar factors. Nuclear power plants don't exist in isolation from other toxic human activities.

This paper seems to be another, "Hey, check this out, we might have found something..." It'll be interesting to look at the source when it's published.

[jpak]

7. Safe, Clean and Cheap

not