NUCLEAR POWER OPPONENTS CITE LINK TO INFANT DEATH RATES

By Andrew C. Revkin, NY Times, April 30, 2002

Antinuclear campaigners plan to announce today that a new study shows that infant death rates downwind of eight American nuclear power plants dropped significantly after they were shut down.

Some plan to use the findings to support calls for closing the nuclear reactors at Indian Point, the plant closest to New York City, in Westchester County.

But federal officials, some radiation experts and representatives of the nuclear power industry said that there was no evidence to link illness and proximity to nuclear plants and that minute, occasional releases from such plants were much lower than natural radiation levels.

The new statistical study, which is being published in the next issue of The Archives of Environmental Health, was conducted by a group of scientists who for many years have purported to show a link between mortality and illness and low levels of radiation from power plants, bomb tests and other sources.

But their past work has never been replicated by federal health researchers, and the statistical analysis they used in some earlier studies has been challenged by the National Cancer Institute.

The study said the infant death rate in communities for two years preceding the plant shutdowns averaged 8.44 deaths per 1,000 births and, when all the mortality data for two years after the plant shutdowns were combined, the infant mortality rate dropped to 7.01 per 1,000 births.

The difference was statistically significant, the authors said, and the drop was greater than the general drop in infant death rates around the country in recent years.

The scientists, from the Radiation and Public Health Project, a nonprofit group, defended their new findings and cited the need for much more research.

Joseph J. Mangano, a public health statistician and the national coordinator for the group, said a statistical link does not prove a cause and effect, but points to the need for more work.

"A lot of things could affect infant deaths," he said. "The list is literally endless. This doesn't mean we've proved anything beyond a shadow of a doubt, but what I will say is we really need to do more follow-up."

Among other things, the study examined statistics from counties and cities downwind of eight nuclear plants that shut down either for a prolonged period or permanently - in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, California, Oregon, Colorado, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Dr. John Boice Jr., who directed a 1991 National Cancer Institute study of disease patterns around nuclear plants and other institutions using radiation, said no link emerged.

 "There are so many other important things to worry about in terms of radiation - like what are we doing to do with the waste and the terrorism issue," he said last night.

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

News
 

What will it take -- a brick from the sky?

Scientists for years have been trying to show us the links between infant mortality, cancers, and other immune related diseases and the increased levels of radiation in the environment from nuclear emmissions and fallout.  The only ones I have ever heard refute the claims are those directly or indirectly receiving pay checks from an industry, heavily subsidized by taxpayers, and backed by government made up of legislators whose ludicrous campaigns were paid for by industry dollars. "Normal" background radiation is always cited to soothe. Most people do not know that "normal", includes the emissions from nuclear plants after one year in operation.

Wake up America. We must do all we can to demand the solution -- energy efficiency and alternatives, such as fuel cells, wind, and solar.

Karin Westdyk
West Milford, NJ

973-208-1620