No Safe Level of Radiation
Radiation damage and protection levels are based on “Reference Man,” a healthy, white male in the prime of life, and mostly ignore the more vulnerable fetus, growing infant and child, the aged, those in poor health, and women who are, according to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) 37- 50% more vulnerable than adult men to the harmful effects of ionizing radiation.
These levels do not take into account the far greater vulnerability of women and children, especially pregnant women and unborn children.
A panel from the U.S. National Academy of Sciences charged to investigate the dangers of low-energy, low-dose ionizing radiation has concluded, “that it is unlikely that a threshold exists for the induction of cancers… (BIER VII, 2005)” and these levels are cumulative.
Therefore, saying that there can be a “safe” level of radiation exposure is simply wrong. There is no guarantee that even the smallest doses of radiation will not cause harm.
Radiation treatment for cancer may increase risk for new cancers later in life. The report Second Cancers Caused by Cancer Treatment, American Cancer Society, January 31, 2012, discusses the risk of some cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy, increasing a person’s risk of developing a different type of cancer later in life.
The Banana Myth
The human body is born with potassium-40 in its tissues and it is the most common radionuclide in human tissues and in food. We evolved in the presence of potassium-40 and our bodies have well-developed repair mechanisms to respond to its effects. The concentration of potassium-40 in the human body is constant and not affected by concentrations in the environment.
The nuclear industry tries to compare the safety of radiation in bananas to the safety of other types of radiation. This is a false argument. Unfortunately, nuclear workers and others have been given this false education about radiation.
How Radiation Harms
Ionizing radiation (the type released from nuclear reactors) travels through our living tissue with much more energy than either natural chemical or biological functions. This extra energy tears mercilessly at the very fabric of what makes us recognizably human—our genetic material.
Elderly and people with immune disorders are more susceptible to ionizing radiation.
Women are more susceptible to this damage than men and children more susceptible than adults. Children and the unborn are especially susceptible because of their rapid and abundant cell division during growth. Female children are the most susceptible.
Recent French and German studies indicate higher rates of leukemia for children living near nuclear power plants. The well respected 2007 German KiKK study found children under age five living near nuclear power plants had over twice the normal rate of leukemia. See Table V and chart below.
- Over twice the normal rate (2.19) if they lived within 3.1 miles (5 km).
- 1.33 times the normal rate if they lived within 6.2 miles (10 km).
KiKK German Study: Estimated dose response curve for leukaemias (upper curve) based on conditional logistic regression model (593 cases, 1,766 matched controls; distance axis cut off at 50 km). Lower curve: estimated lower one-sided 95% confidence band. Dotted lines: categorical results for inner 5- and 10-km zone.
Cancers linked to ionizing radiation exposure include most blood cancers (leukemia, lymphoma), lung cancer, and many solid tumors of various organs.
Heart ailments are also associated with radiation exposure.
Additionally, evidence exists that radiation is permanently and unpredictably mutating the gene pool and contributing to its gradual weakening. The New Scientist quotes a report that calls genetic or chromosomal instabilities caused by radiation exposure a “plausible mechanism” for explaining illnesses other than cancer, including “developmental deficiencies in the fetus, hereditary disease, accelerated aging and such non-specific effects as loss of immune competence.”
A living being’s genetic material is the library that houses the instructions for many important aspects of that being and his or her offspring including the ability to defend against a myriad of diseases. If we allow ionizing radiation to tamper with our genes, it could cause irreversible damage, not just to this generation through cancer, but to future generations through gene mutations and ensuing disease.
The health consequences of the April 26, 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster are continuing. See this important video on the health consequences of Chernobyl and how the International Agency for Atomic Energy (IAAE) is involved in suppressing the information.
Dr. Don Mosier video on mammogram (xray) cancer risks. See more from 10/15/2013 San Clemente Nuclear Waste symposium.
Medical reference for cancer risk from mammogram: Breast Cancer and the Environment: A Life Course Approach (2012), Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, Committee on Breast Cancer and the Environment: The Scientific Evidence, Research Methodology, and Future Directions; Institute of Medicine. Appendix F contains information on the mammogram (xray) cancer risks referenced in Dr. Mosier’s presentation as well as the current NRC nuclear worker occupational radiation dose limits. The NRC webpage for occupational dose limits is http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part020/part020-1201.html
Amy Berrington de González, D.Phil, is a senior investigator at National Cancer Institute and has done numerous reports on the cancer risks of radiation. Much of her research is referenced in the above report. Click here to see her biography and links to her studies.
Rocketdyne workers at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL) in California show significantly higher rates of cancer. See Epidemiologic Study to Determine Possible Adverse Effects to Rocketdyne/Atomics International Workers from Exposure to Ionizing Radiation, UCLA School of Public Health, June 1997.
- Blood and Lymph System Cancer: All available evidence from this study indicates that occupational exposure to ionizing radiation among nuclear workers at Rocketdyne/AI has increased the risk of dying from cancers of the blood and lymph system.
- Lung Cancer: Exposure to external radiation appears to have increased the risk of dying from lung cancer.
- Upper Aerodigestive Tract Cancer: Results of this study strongly suggest that exposure to internal radiation has increased the risk of dying from cancers of the upper-aerodigestive tract.
- Age Affect on Cancer Type: While the estimated effects of external radiation on total cancers, radiosensitive solid cancers, and lung cancer were largest for doses received after age 50, the estimated effect on hemato- and lymphopoietic cancers was largest for doses received before age 50.
The Implications of the Massive Radiation Contamination of Japan with Radioactive CesiumSteven Starr, Senior Scientist, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Clinical Laboratory Science Program Director, University of Missouri. Text version.
Presented March 11, 2013 at the Helen Caldicott Foundation Symposium: The Medical and Ecological Consequences of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident, March 11th & 12th, 2013, New York City. Video by Cinema Forum Fukushima, HD 21 min 10 sec. See other symposium presentations.
Dr. Ernest Sternglass discusses the dangers of exposure to even the lowest doses of radiation and how his work evolved based on the scientific findings of Dr. Alice Stewart.
He talks about how his scientific work led to President John F. Kennedy calling for a ban on atmospheric testing of nuclear bombs, and how Dr. John Gofman’s important work on the increase of childhood cancers and leukemia was attacked by the nuclear power industry.
Dr. Ernest Sternglass was Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Pittsburgh. He was Co-founder and Director of the Radiation and Public Health Project (www.rphp.org), and author of “Secret Fallout: Low-Level Radiation from Hiroshima to Three Mile Island”. Dr Sternglass has extensively studied and published on the public health effects of atomic bomb testing and nuclear reactors. As an activist, he organized and campaigned vigorously on the effects of low-level radiation exposure.
The work of Stewart, Gofman and Sternglass led to scientists worldwide accepting the linear non threshold model of health and radiation exposure.
Irradiation, in itself, will never be a food safety program. There is much yet to learn about the effects of moderate dosage irradiation on fruit and vegetable microbiology and physiology. Until we learn more, we would do well to continue to rely on strong food safety programs to prevent contamination of our products rather than to believe that we can fix the problem after it has happened.
FDA has approved a variety of foods for irradiation, including:
Beef and Pork
Crustaceans (e.g., lobster, shrimp, and crab)
Fresh Fruits and Vegetables
Lettuce and Spinach
Molluscan Shellfish (e.g., oysters, clams, mussels, and scallops)
Seeds for Sprouting (e.g., for alfalfa sprouts)
Spices and Seasonings
FDA requires that irradiated foods bear the international symbol for irradiation. Look for the Radura symbol along with the statement “Treated with radiation” or “Treated by irradiation” on the food label.
Bulk foods, such as fruits and vegetables, are required to be individually labeled or to have a label next to the sale container. FDA does not require that individual ingredients in multi-ingredient foods (e.g., spices) be labeled.
It is important to remember that irradiation is not a replacement for proper food-handling practices by producers, processors and consumers. Irradiated foods need to be stored, handled and cooked in the same way as non-irradiated foods, because they could still become contaminated with disease-causing organisms after irradiation if the rules of basic food safety are not followed.
Bulk or packaged food passes through a radiation chamber on a conveyor belt. The food does not come into contact with radioactive materials, but instead passes through a radiation beam, like a large flashlight.
The type of food and the specific purpose of the irradiation determine the amount of radiation, or dose, necessary to process a particular product. The speed of the belt helps control the radiation dose delivered to the food by controlling the exposure time. The actual dose is measured by dosimeters within the food containers.
See Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Vol 3, cite 21CFR179 (current as of February 12, 2015)
TITLE 21—Food and Drugs
CHAPTER I—Food and Drug Administration
Department of Health and Human Services
SUBCHAPTER B—Food for Human Consumption (Continued)
PART 179—Irradiation in the Production, Processing and Handling of Food
A 1972 Japanese study using the Trandescantia Ohiensis (Spiderwort Bluejacket) plant shows how very low levels of radiation cause genetic damage. The stamen hairs of the flower have a blue dominant gene and a pink recessive gene. When stamen hair cells turn pink after being radiated, it’s a sign of genetic damage. The scientist, Sadao Ichikawa, includes a plea that this study is important given the planned growth of nuclear plants. He states:
Since further rapid promotion of developing and construction [of] nuclear power plants, nuclear ships, and other nuclear facilities are intended in this country and also all over the world, and since utilization of radioisotopes is increasing also rapidly, some significant increase of environmental radiation level is expected to occur as the inevitable result. Such increase of environmental radiation level, if once occurred, will continue until the causes (nuclear power plants, etc.) will be removed, and is considered to result in continuous increases of mutation rate in various organisms of course including human beings. The resultant increase of radiation-induced mutations will almost necessarily give the population some effects, which may not be ignored (possibly serious). Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to demonstrate further the genetic effects of radiations at low levels in order to prevent radiation hazard expectable in the near future…
SUMMARY: Somatic mutation rates from blue to pink were studied in the stamen hairs of Tradescantia ohiensis KU 7 clone, a blue/pink heterozygote, exposed to 100 to 510 mR/hr gamma rays or to 12 mR/hr scattering radiation. The results obtained supported the previous finding of the sensitive genetic responses of this botanical system, demonstrating that the genetic effect could be detected with this system at a radiation level as low as 3.60 R total exposure (also possibly only 0.96 R) given at a low exposure rate of 12 mR/hr. Pooling the present and previous data, a somatic mutation rate of 3.88 or 3.43 X 10-4 pink mutant events per hair per R was obtained for gamma-ray irradiation during hair development. The somatic mutation rate calculated for scattering radiation was even higher than this (1.25 x 10-3). The doubling dose of the somatic mutations at the specific locus was calculated to be 13.8 or 15.6 R when irradiated with gamma rays during hair development, and the corresponding value with scattering radiation was 4.29 R. Lower doubling doses could be calculated based on published data from the stamen hairs of the same and three other Tradescantia clones irradiated more acutely. These low doubling doses seem to throw doubt on the safety standards of radiations.
- Leukaemia in young children living in the vicinity of German nuclear power plants (KiKK study) pdf version
- Childhood leukemia – French study confirms findings in Great Britain, Germany and Switzerland of childhood leukemias near nuclear power plants
- Childhood leukemia higher around French nuclear power plants—Geocap study, 2002–2007 – International Journal of Cancer 2012
- Runaway Use of Radiation Harming Patients – Dr. Eric Topol, Director of the Scripps Translational Science Institute and Editor-in-Chief of Medscape Genomic Medicine and theheart.org 12/17/2012