Health issues and concerns

Seldom, if ever, are communities studied for health effects from uranium recovery facility contaminants.  If done by industry or government, cancer registry reviews are used, and never epidemiological studies looking for unusual incidences of other diseases.  Cancer registry reviews do not track people who leave the community, and do include newcomers, reducing the statistical outcome to irrelevance.   Because cancers can take from 10 to 30 years to manifest, If a high incidence of cancer is found, agencies and industry claim it could be due to other influences, e.g. lifestyle or exposure from some other source.  In other words, the only health studies used by government are those that cannot, by their very nature or in the methods used, give any definitive answers.

To add insult to injury, instead of studying people, government agencies study environmental sampling data gathered primarily by the industry, the party responsible for the contamination in the first place.  If the data does not indicate a high enough concentration of contaminants, then it is assumed there are no health effects in the community.  If the data shows high concentrations, then areas are marked for clean up (using deficient standards) and the case is closed.

Actually studying communities near these facilities could reveal information about the affect of chronic exposure to low-level concentrations of contaminants, and possibly support improving limits on contaminants that industry is allowed to emit.  That's a detour on the Yellowcake Road that industry and government do not want to travel, because it would raise clean up costs and cut profits. Federal and State decisions on allowable standards for clean up and emissions are based on Cost v. Benefit studies, and decisions are heavily influenced by industry lobbyists.  The benefit of saving one life is not considered worth the cost.  Industrial waste is swept under the carpet - out of sight - out of mind.  This is a practice none of our wise grandmother's would have tolerated in our homes, because the dirt will come back to haunt you.  If you want to solve the mystery surrounding epidemics of diabetes, ADD, autism, autoimmune disease, and more, just look under our industrial carpets.

Radiation Risk

For decades the nuclear industry and regulating government agencies operated under the assumption that only acute (high level) exposure caused health risk.  New research proves that chronic exposure to low levels of radiation can cause a multitude of health problems.  Much has been discovered through biological cellular and molecular research.  Radiation exposure breaks biomolecular bonds causing DNA damage that leads to solid cancers, leukemia, Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma, and hereditary health effects.  Hereditary effects can include chromosonal disease or congenital defects. Some people are more susceptible, such as the elderly, the fetus, very young children, or people suffering from other illnesses.  Miscarriage, reproductive disorders, and developmental disabilities can be caused, and some people are simply susceptible due to hereditary predisposition.  The types of cancer possible include, but are not limited to:

Brain, Colon, Ovary, Liver, Bone, Gall Bladder, Salivary Gland, Urinary, Bladder, Leukemia, Lung, Lymphoma, Thyroid, Breast (Male/Female), Esophagus, Stomach, Pharynx, Bile Ducts, and Kidney.

The National Academy of Sciences, reviews research to help determine clean up and industry operating standards for government agencies, and have studied the effect of radiation on the human body for years.  In June 2005, the NAS BIER-VII Phase 2 report found that a preponderance of scientific evidence shows that even low doses of ionizing radiation may cause harm.  The report further states that  health risks rise proportionally with levels of exposure and as overall lifetime exposure accumulates.  Studies in mice "produced extensive data that radiation-induced cell mutations in sperm and eggs can be passed on to offspring," and that there is no reason to believe the same wouldn't hold true for human offspring.  Click to read the NAS Press Release.  Click on this link for the full report:  http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11340#toc

John W. Gofman, M.D, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology, UCB, in Key Facts Justifying Opposition to Nuclear Pollution at Any Level: A Brief Letter of Concern-February 6, 2001, writes, "It follows from the absence of any safe dose that citizens everywhere have a strong scientific basis for opposing activities which can cause radioactive pollution at any level. The fact that humans cannot escape exposure to ionizing radiation, from various natural sources, is no reason to let human activities increase the exposure. Moreover, the record of governments and their licensed agents has often been horrible regarding containment of radioactive poisons. This record argues strongly against confidence in any promises of future containment."  Click to read Dr. Goffman's 2001 Statement.

Panna Maria Uranium Mill and Mine Residents Show Damage to Cell Repair Response

To put it simply, when a cell is hit by radiation it will either die, mutate, or repair itself.   The cell's ability to repair itself helps us tolerate exposure from natural radiation or medical treatments.  Dr. William Au, et al, from the Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, studied residents living near the Panna Maria Uranium Mill and Mine in Texas to see if they had increased genotoxic effects from exposure to radioactive toxicants in their soil and water.  The study found that cells of residents lost the ability to repair after chronic or repeated exposure to low levels of radiation.  Click to read Dr. Au's study.

Harmful Impacts to the Developing Embryo and Fetus

Pregnant women living near uranium recovery facilities, or those working at facilities, are at higher risk for damage to the developing emybro.  Researchers Kozlowski, et al, write, "The harmful impacts of ionizing radiation on the developing embryo and fetus are well recognized. However, the molecular and biological mechanisms of embryonic injury, particularly at the earliest stages of development, are poorly understood."  The goal of their project was to address the "mechanisms of radiation damage and radioprotection in a vertebrate embryo in vivo."  The research found, among other things, that the Central Nervous System was more sensitive to radiation than other tissues in the developing embryo.  Click to read Embryo Study.

Chris Shuey, of SRIC, writes, "Rates of birth defects in babies born to Navajo women living in uranium mining areas in New Mexico and Arizona between 1964 and 1981 were 2 to 8 times the national averages, depending on the type of defect.  An association between uranium exposure and birth defects may be significant when the mothers’ and fathers’ exposures are combined,"  (Shuey, Chris, 2007.  URANIUM EXPOSURE AND PUBLIC HEALTH IN NEW MEXICO AND THE NAVAJO NATION: A LITERATURE SUMMARY.  Compiled for Southwest Research and Information Center). 

Lung Cancer, Radon and Mining

“Studies have long linked radon exposure to lung cancer within the mining industry...According to the EPA, approximately 21,000 people die every year from radon-induced lung cancer, exceeding the annual death toll from drunken-driving accidents and residential house fires combined.”  Click to read article on Radon Exposure.

The Bystander Effect - Cells don't have to be hit directly by radiation to suffer damage

SCIENTIFIC AND PUBLIC HEALTH RAMIFICATIONS OF THE KIKK STUDY 

Childhood Leukemia and Cancers Near German Nuclear Reactors:  Significance, Context, and Ramifications of Recent Studies, by  RUDI H. NUSSBAUM, as published in The International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, Vol. 15, No 3 (2009); 15:318-323.

Historically, in the evolution of scientific ideas, major contradictions between established beliefs and incontrovertible findings would spawn critical reviews of long accepted assumptions, often resulting in revolutionary changes of basic axioms. At least from the time of Galileo, powerful interest groups have strenuously opposed these paradigm shifts. The claim that the unassailable KiKK findings are unexplainable and the attempts to invalidate them have their historical antecedents.

The KiKK study points out the need for a critical reexamination of uncertainties, flaws, and inappropriate generalizations in fundamental assumptions and models on which current radiation safety standards and regulations are based. A US government-sponsored case-control study, similar in design to the German KiKK study, would provide invaluable additional data for a sound scientific basis for such a reexamination since there are only minor design variations between US and German nuclear reactors. The KiKK study’s ramifications add to the urgency of a policy debate regarding the high toll exacted in public health for nuclear power production.  read more... userfiles/file//KiKKCommentaryJuly2009IJOEH.pdf

Follow DOE Low-Dose Radiation Research Program

The goal of the [Department of Energy] Low Dose Radiation Research Program is to support research that will help determine health risks from exposures to low levels of radiation. This information is critical to adequately and appropriately protect people while making the most effective use of our national resources.  Click http://www.science.doe.gov/ober/BSSD/lowdose.html

Heavy Metal and Chemical Risk

Most people think about cancer as the only health issue when it comes to contaminate exposure from uranium mining and milling.  However, heavy metal toxicity is also a serious problem, causing many illnesses as well as cancers.  Ingestion of heavy metals and radionuclides through water or vegetables, taking them in through a cut on your skin, breathing them into your lungs, and other ways they absorb into your blood stream are the many risks for the person working in the industry or living near a uranium recovery facility.

Heavy metals found at uranium recovery facilities include Molybdenum, Cobalt, Nickel, Arsenic, Copper, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Vanadium and Zinc, to name a few.  Uranium is both a heavy metal, with those inherent dangers, as well as a radioactive material.  Depending on which metal, illnesses associated with over exposure can include, but are not limited to, the following:

Cancer,  Chronic Silicosis, Chronic Beryllium Disease, Cataracts, Retinopathy, Neuropathy, Myelopathy, Pulmonary Fibrosis, Nephritis, Chromosonal Diseases, Congenital Defects, Miscarriage, Liver Disease, Autoimmune Disease (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Scleroderma), Dymylinating Diseases (M.S. etc.), Saturnine Gout/Gouty Arthritis, Reproductive Disorders, DNA Damage, and Diabetes. 

Chemicals found at uranium mines and mills can include Sulfuric acid, Hydrochloric Acid, Nitric Acid, Sulfate, Solvents, Caustic Soda, Kerosene, and more.  Uranium conversion facilities add fluorine and fluorides to the chemical mix.  Risk can be from inhalation, ingestion or skin exposure.  Pathways of exposure for both employees, neighbors and wildlife can include water and air contamination from spills, accidents, or leaking tanks.  Serious burns to skin and lungs happen all too often at uranium recovery facilities, and uranium hexaflouride gas releases at conversion facilities have injured employees at Converdyn's Metropolis, Illinois facility, and killed employees at General Atomic's Sequoyah Fuels conversion facility in Gore, Oklahoma.

Studies and Articles link kidney disease and diabetes to living near uranium mine

The University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, et al, prepared recommendations for a Uranium Health-Based Ground Water Standard for the New Mexico Environment Department of Ground Water Quality Bureau, May 2003.  The study states, "Based on our review of relevant technical information and data available at this time, the calculations provided, and the uncertainties discussed, a recommended standard of 0.007 mg of uranium per liter of water is recommended to be protective of kidney toxicity in New Mexico populations.

The State of New Mexico did not accept this recommendation, and instead adopted 0.030 mg per liter of uranium, the current EPA groundwater standard. Click to read UNM Uranium Standard Research.

Chris Shuey, MPH, of SRIC, in URANIUM EXPOSURE AND PUBLIC HEALTH IN NEW MEXICO AND THE NAVAJO NATION: A LITERATURE SUMMARY, writes, "A significant predictor of kidney disease and diabetes was found to be environmental exposure due to living within .8 kilometers (2,625 feet) of a uranium mine site, and coming in contact with uranium as a heavy metal."

In Fremont County, CO, where the permit to explore for uranium was granted within 500 feet of 44 land and home owners, and uranium mining is the next logical step, residents would be almost twice as close as those concerned about in the study (.8 kilometers = 2, 625 feet = ½ mile.  500 feet = 1524 kilometers. / .4 kilometers = 1,312 feet).  The same contaminates found at mines are found at uranium mills.  The Cotter Uranium Mill's nearest residential neighbor is about 1/4 mile away, and a private golf course borders Cotter's entrance and is directly across from mill processing buildings and storage tanks. Paducah's Enrichment Facility and Converdyn's Metropolis Conversion Facility are located near large populations.  Click to read Shuey's Literature Review.

The following news story probes link between uranium and kidney illness, By Zsombor Peter, Staff Writer
http://www.gallupindependent.com/2007/august/080407zp_studyurnmkdnyilns.html

Uranium Damages DNA as a Heavy Metal

"The fact that uranium, as a radioactive metal, can damage DNA is well documented. But what Stearns and her collaborators recently have found is that uranium can also damage DNA as a heavy metal, independent of its radioactive properties." Click to read Yellow Monster Article.

Community Risk

Seldom, if ever, are communities studied for health effects from uranium recovery facility contaminants.  To add insult to injury, instead of studying people, government agencies study environmental sampling data gathered primarily by the industry, the party responsible for the contamination in the first place.  Actually studying people could reveal new information about the effect of chronic exposure to low-level concentrations of contaminants, and possibly improve the standard limits on contaminants that industry is allowed to emit.  That's a road industry and government do not want to travel, because it would raise clean up costs and cut into profits.

Health studies expensive, time-consuming and scientifically challenging

Chris Shuey, MHP, of SRIC, states during testimony to Congress in March 2009, "Health studies in uranium-mining communities are expensive, time-consuming and scientifically challenging, but they can and should be done."  Click to read Shuey Testimony to Congress.

David Richardson, Dept. of Epidemiology School of Public Health, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC , March 1, 2007, in his review of cancer studies at a uranium mill site, writes, "...for many US states comprehensive cancer registry data began to be collected relatively recently and there is no national reglstry that may be used to easily ascertain cases when people move across state boundanes." Richardson's critical review of cancer studies done at the Superfund Site bordering the Cotter Uranium Mill explains the limitations of methods currently used in such studies, and discusses potential solutions for those limitations that could be used in additional research at sites like this. Click to read Richardson't Review.

Chris Shuey, MHP, of SRIC, writes, "Despite more than 50 years of uranium development on the Navajo Nation, no comprehensive public health study has ever been conducted in uranium-mining communities. The federally funded DiNEH Project is an ongoing cross-sectional study examining the relationship of high rates of kidney disease in the Eastern Navajo Agency to exposure to uranium and other heavy metals in the environment. Preliminary results of the study indicate that the percentages of self-reported chronic kidney disease, diabetes, high blood pressure and autoimmune diseases are higher in Navajo communities with higher numbers of uranium mines. Initial exposure modeling indicates that environmental exposures, including living within 0.8 kilometer of a uranium mine site and coming in contact with uranium wastes, are significant predictors of kidney disease/diabetes."  Click to read Shuey's Navajo Literature Summary.

Employee Risk

All information previously covered on contaminants, health risks, and associated illnesses apply to employees of uranium recovery facilities.  The greatest difference and concern for the employee is that he/she is allowed a much higher level of exposure than neighbors or visitors of the mines, mills, conversion and enrichment facilities. 

SANTA SUSANA FIELD LABORATORY EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDY

This facility operated nuclear reactors, handled plutonium and conducted rocket-engine tests, none of which are related to nuclear fuel production.  However, the recommendation of the study is that the findings should be applied to any facility where workers are exposed to radiation.  The study was performed by a team of researchers from UCLA to determine if workers were affected by exposure to radioactive and chemical materials, and if the neighboring community was affected.

The Findings:  "The study makes several findings that call into question whether current regulatory exposure limits are sufficiently protective, and we recommend that regulatory bodies revisit their standards in light of the SSFL study and other recent studies that reached similar conclusions.  (i). Nuclear workers are currently permitted to receive 5 Rem (also called 50 mSv) each year, the equivalent of 150 Rem (1500 mSv) over a 30-year career. The SSFL study, and several other large recent studies of radiation-exposed workers, have found evidence of cancers occurring from radiation at levels significantly lower than this regulatory limit. In light of these findings, we recommend that the current limits for radiation exposure be reconsidered by all regulatory and advisory bodies responsible for radiation protection."  Click to read the SSFL EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDY OVERSIGHT PANEL report.

The National Apology to Uranium Workers

 As stated by U.S. Senator Bingaman in 1999, "The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or RECA, was originally enacted in 1990 as a means of compensating the individuals who suffered from exposure to radiation as a result of the U.S. government’s nuclear testing program and federal uranium mining activities. While the government can never fully compensate for the loss of a life or a reduction in the quality of life, RECA serves as a cornerstone for the national apology Congress extended to those adversely affected by the various radiation tragedies," (click to read Congressional Record).  The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) was enacted to facilitate the compensations.

Unfortunately, it has been weighted down with difficulties in determining eligibility, disagreements over who does or doesn't receive compensation for medical expenses, and in actually collecting the compensation.  Some improvements have happened.  Now not only are Department of Energy nuclear weapons workers (including employees, former employees, contractors and subcontractors) eligible for lump-sum compensation, but also uranium miners, millers, and ore transporters and eligible survivors of employees.   Click to read LHSFNA article and ANWAG Press Release.  Ceilings on compensation vary, and are rather complicated depending on various circumstances, but some are capped at $250,000.

For Information on Compensation Eligibility visit the Department of Labor, Office of Worker's Compensation Programs:    
http://www.dol.gov/esa/owcp/energy/regs/compliance/main.htm
 

Cold War patriots

Uranium miners, widows get warm reception

Uranium, Health & the Pinon Ridge Mill

FOR MOST PEOPLE, the most sobering and confusing aspect of the proposed Paradox Valley Energy Fuels uranium mill in the west end of Montrose County is the question of human health.
By Dick Kamp Wick Communications Environmental Liaison
read more...  userfiles/file//MontrosePressUMillParadox11-16-08.pdf