iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert Alvarez

Robert Alvarez

Posted: October 14, 2010 11:22 AM

According to a recent New York Times article, thyroid cancer in the U.S. has been on the rise for nearly 40 years.

The long-standing explanation that this is due to better diagnostics is no longer accepted. This also means that the impacts of radioactive iodine fallout from nuclear weapons testing and Chernobyl cannot be so readily ruled out.

With a half-life of 8.5 days, Iodine-131 rapidly contaminates air, vegetation and milk supplies. Because it is absorbed mostly in the body's thyroid, radioactive iodine has been linked to thyroid cancer and other types of thyroid damage in humans for several decades. It takes about 90 days for the radioactivity of I-131 to diminish to very small levels. Thyroid cancer can have a latency period as long as 38 years.

According to the National Cancer Institute in 1992, about 150 million curies of radioactive iodine was released in open air from nuclear testing in Nevada, causing heavy contamination of the nation's milk supplies from the early 1950's to the early 1960's. This is more than 20 times the amount estimated to have been released by the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986. At the time of open air testing, millions of children were drinking this contaminated milk. In the early 1950's when radioactive fallout was over-exposing film in cardboard made with contaminated straw, the Eastman Kodak company secretly complained and was given routine warnings by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. The public was never warned by the U.S. government about the dangers of consuming milk it was contaminating in its quest to amass a nuclear arsenal.

After the ratification of the Limited Test Ban Treaty in 1963, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration established "Protective Action Guides" for Iodine-131 that triggered removal of dairy products from human consumption following nuclear accidents. Had these limits been in place during the open air nuclear testing in the 1950's and early 1960's, the NCI study indicates that milk supplies would have had to be removed from the markets for months at a time. The NCI admitted in testimony before the U.S. Congress in 1998, after an investigation by the U.S. Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, that it suppressed this study for 5 years. The NCI also conceded this may have caused as many as 212,000 excess thyroid cancers.

With trust in the U.S. government sinking like a stone, it's time for greater transparency about the price paid for nuclear weapons. As former Senator John Glenn (D-OH), a staunch supporter of the military, warned, "What good is it to protect ourselves with nuclear weapons, if we poison our people in the process?"


 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 49
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
myth buster
11:33 AM on 10/18/2010
This is why we ceased open-air testing of nuclear weapons a long time ago. Why are we complaining about a problem that has already been fixed?
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
12:47 PM on 10/18/2010
Maybe because old people are getting more thyroid cancers, and since many don't have health coverage, they want someone to cover the costs of their care.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
02:00 PM on 10/17/2010
What other number has been moving up over the past 40 years?

Perhaps this other number - average lifespan - also has something to do with the incidence of slow-moving and high-latency cancers?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bryan Elliott
11:08 AM on 10/17/2010
"With a half-life of 8.5 days, Iodine-131 rapidly contaminates air, vegetation and milk supplies."

... and is effectively gone within two years of its release (Google: 8.5 days * (log(Avogadro's number)/log(2)) = 1.83838093 years). 131-I from testing and Chernobyl can not physically have anything to do with thyroid cancer rates.

Meanwhile, my wife /has/ thyroid cancer*. You can live a very long time with it and suffer no ill effects - so the assertion that "The long-standing explanation that this is due to better diagnostics is no longer accepted." seems like a lie to me. I'll ask her endocrinologist next time we have to go see him.

The prevailing explanation for her cancer is carcinogens found in the waste treatment sourced sludge that was unregulatedly used in the 1980's for fertilizer.

* She had her thyroid removed and her system ablated with 131-I about 6 years ago. Recently, new cancer cells were detected in three lymph nodes and they had to be removed as well. Her doctor is trying to avoid secondary ablation as the radiological load from 131-I carries not just the low risk for causing lymphoma, but also imposes a heightened risk of thyroid damage for anyone around her.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bryan Elliott
11:20 AM on 10/17/2010
I should say, no ill effects until you start having ill effects, several years on. It's a very, very slow moving cancer. People have died from old age and it been discovered they had thyroid cancer during the autopsy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
04:35 PM on 10/18/2010
Comparing old age to involuntary exposure to weapons and reactor radiation. There is no end to your disingenuous analogies. You should stick to toys since you obviously have a vivid imagination.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bryan Elliott
12:03 AM on 10/18/2010
Hm. Just had a fun idea for the newest in quackery: homeopathic radionucleides. Because water has a memory, as nucleides decay, and as "like cures like", water containing 131-I can be held for 2 years (as the 131-Xe safely bubbles slowly out), after which it can be considered a homeopathic "cure" for thyroid cancer.

Just you wait. Someone will try to sell it. I can just see the marketing: "Science has discovered how to safely harness the quantum power of radioiodine to energize this homeopathic preparation as a safe, nonradioactive cancer treatment!"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joffan
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.
10:32 PM on 10/15/2010
This is utter nonsense, totally unsupported by the discussion in the NYT article itself. The better diagnosis hypothesis is still very much a possibility, even the strongest possibility.

As for the link to iodine-131, this is simple junk. The isotope is all gone within a year of its creation, and the maximum latency of 38 years means there are no cases left from weapons testing. Chernobyl never raised I-131 levels in the US.

The article also strongly indicates that the extra cases are not radiologically-caused cancers.

So all the Mr Alvarez's article amounts to really is him jumping and down with an unclear statistic and shouting "ooh! scary!"
photo
snowballinhell
Humans have a 100% chance of extinction
01:26 AM on 10/16/2010
I was going to post this above, but see that it is more than appropriate for the Joffan's comment:

Take a look at this article. I don't usually refer people to Wikipedia, but this is a good place to start your own search for more information. While I am giving a link to the Sedan crater in Nevada, it is important to know that the fallout from the Sedan detonation was unintentional. This explosion wasn't the only 'oops' moment in our nuclear weapons testing. Also, iodine was not the only element involved in fallout, as I am sure you know. Anyway, here is another reference to check out.

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/inetSeries/TTW_C1-BW.html

Toxic chemicals, whether nuclear or organic, are bad for your health. Even President Bush's Commission highlighted the link between chemical/radiation exposure and cancer. \\http://www.nukewatch.com/quarterly/fall2010/page5.pdf

Information about toxics peaks for itself. We might want to take note and be vigilant to your own health needs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joffan
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.
08:26 PM on 10/16/2010
Let me guess that this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedan_%28nuclear_test%29 was the link you were directing me to. And let me explain where the story falls short. Phrases like "Sedan's fallout contamination exposed a little under 7% of Americans to radiation" are meaningless, without saying how much radiation is involved. That's not to say that the Sedan shot was harmless; but the article gives no basis for assessing it. And I'd hold back on how unintentional the debris cloud was, given that this was a test of nuclear excavation as part of Plowshare.

I don't disagree with the concept that there are more possibilities of harm to be considered in general - but the article above was specific to thyroid cancer, attempting to link that to things it could not realistically be linked to.

I would never agree that information on toxic materials speaks for itself. A case needs to be made of the amount and the effect. Simple detection of a substance is not sufficient to indicate that it is present in harmful amounts.
12:49 PM on 10/17/2010
SEDAN was buried shot designed to move material outside of the crater as part of the Project PLOWSHARE. About 90% of the bomb debris was contained inside the crater, but some escaped as they expected. The SEDAN crater is quite a sight to see, especially standing on the rim of the crater. The Baneberry underground shot in 1970 was the one that vented unexpectedly.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
12:46 PM on 10/18/2010
Well, just because there's no radioactive iodine in a sixty-year-old thyroid now doesn't mean that its decay in that same thyroid in 1961 didn't cause damage that's now manifesting itself as a cancer. The 38 years quoted could easily be 50 or 60.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joffan
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.
04:03 PM on 10/18/2010
I agree that the damage caused by the radio-iodine can easily outlast the presence of actual I-131. That's well established, although only at much higher levels of exposure than recorded for most people of that age in the US.

You might like to wonder whether there is a differential in thyroid cancers for the age range that was in childhood at the same time as the weapons tests. Alvarez doesn't mention any strong indicators like that - which suggests to me they don't exist.

I know thyroid cancers can manifest relatively quickly, so I took "a latency period as long as 38 years" to mean the upper limit. That was potentially an over-interpretation. However, even if it's a midpoint, it wouldn't explain a currently rising trend. If anything it should be falling, if the weapons tests really were a major persisting cause.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:26 PM on 10/15/2010
what about radioactivity in the atmosphere from nuke plants?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joffan
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.
10:33 PM on 10/15/2010
There isn't any. Maybe you mean coal plants, or gas plants.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
02:31 PM on 10/18/2010
Actually Joffan, Your comments are false!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The term fro radiation releases at our nation's commercial nuclear reactors is: Federally-permitted release of radiation form nuclear reactors. The releases occur everyday at all 104 commercial reactors.


http://www.ratical.com/radiation/CNR/PP/chp5.html (Promises, Promises, Promises)


http://www.whoseflorida.com/nuclear_waste.htm


http://www.nutritionmission.org/page/page/1026915.htm
02:18 AM on 10/16/2010
You mean the 1000 picocuries or so?
02:26 AM on 10/16/2010
Completely pointless. Not all radioactive isotopes are equal. The reason I131 is of particular concern is because of its high mobility and high biouptake. While plutonium is nasty, it isn't very mobile and the biouptake isn't particularly high even though it is a bone seeker, and Pu239 is particularly not a very large concern because of its very low radioactivity from its long half life. Pu238 would be if it were mobile, as would Sr90. But they aren't. I131 is mobile and has high biouptake, which is why that's the isotope that people concern themselves with when dealing with radioactive contamination.

The rest haven't demonstrated any higher incidence of mortality at concentrations relative to I131.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
11:53 AM on 10/18/2010
Your post is complete hogwash. The primary concern of Pu 239 is the inhalation threat, not bone uptake. The inhalation threat is particulary bad for smokers who have there lung cilia paralyzed from the bad habit. There smoking may be voluntary, but the plutonium from weapons testing and nuclear power plants is involuntary. Low radiation from Pu 239? Read the second paragraph of the third article below.

http://www.ccnr.org/plute_tox.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1976869/

http://www.ieer.org/ensec/no-3/puhealth.html
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
12:43 PM on 10/18/2010
No concentration in the thyroid, so it's not relevant to thyroid cancer.