NEI Nuclear Notes

Tom Kauffman The following is a guest blog post by Tom Kauffman, NEI's Director of Media Relations. Over more than three decades since the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear accident , claims that radioactivity from the plant caused negative health effects have been refuted time and time again. In over twelve studies, not one found any detectable impacts. Any claim that cancer or other diseases have been caused by the accident doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny. That holds for the industry as a whole too. In research conducted for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Dr. James Hansen concluded that  the use of nuclear energy has saved 1.8 million lives that otherwise would have been lost due to burning of fossil fuels . Despite this compelling scientific evidence, a former resident of the area, Jill Murphy Long, is trying to distort the truth with a new film, Meltdown . In her conversations with the press, Long has said, "I think this conversation ne...

The following guest post was submitted by NEI Media Manager, Mitch Singer. Last month I attended two public hearings in Homestead, Fla., focusing on the proposed two new additional nuclear plants, Turkey Point 6&7 , at the nearby facility that has two operating reactors and a natural gas plant. Turkey Point has significant support and people are upbeat about the prospects of the additional units. Aerial view of Turkey Point But as to be expected there were a number of opponents. One person who testified identified himself as a biologist. Unfortunately, he sounded more like a script writer for a 1950s horror film as, he accused the operators of Turkey Point of causing all sorts of flesh-eating maladies as the result of radiation leaks from the plant. Back in high school, all of my science teachers taught me the same valuable lesson: science is the pursuit of truth based on evidence from study and experimentation. It was a lesson I took to heart, and one that I wish mor...

Dr. Helen Caldicott For a number of years now, we've been sure to follow the public pronouncements of anti-nuclear activist Dr. Helen Caldicott and how the public is beginning to push back against her radical agenda . The latest example comes from the Sydney Morning Herald , where Caldicott's latest op-ed was greeted frostily in the comments section following the article. Here's a sampler: As someone who worked as a medical physicist, whose job it was to be on to of these sorts of issues. I must say this is alarmist, unbalanced and inaccurate and should be treated with a healthy degree of suspicion., Long on rhetoric, short on actual data. [...] I'm very surprised such a vague article could be published in the SMH. "Growing body of scientific evidence", "unprecedented increase" and "huge continuing" are the words used here to back up the basic premise. No numbers, emotive language and non-specifics - these are the hallmark...

In the wake of the accident at Fukushima , the world once again got a chance to know Dr. Robert Peter Gale . One of the world's leading authorities on the biological effects of radaition, Dr. Gale first came to prominence in the late 1980s when he coordinated medical and relief efforts for victims of the accident at Chernobyl . And in the wake of Fukushima, the world turned once again to Dr. Gale when it came to rationally gauging the immediate and long-term health effects of the accident in Japan . Perhaps we should be grateful then that Dr. Gale, along with co-author Eric Lax, has just written a new book aimed at demystifying radiation and its potential health effects. Radiation: What It Is. What You Need to Know , was just published by KnopfDoubleday and is available at Amazon.com and bookstores nationwide. Here's a thumbnail review that appeared earlier today in the New York Times : Dr. Gale, a leukemia expert who advised governments in the wake of the nuclear di...

Over the last few days, we've seen thousands of stories around the Web concerning a study that concluded that radiation released into the atmosphere from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power had caused mutations in the local population of butterflies . At the same time, another piece of research noted that there hasn't been any observable effect thus far on people . When I read the story, I do what I always do, and shot off a note to Ralph Andersen, NEI's chief health physicist. Here's what he had to say about the study: Please note that there are species of plants, insects and animals that are particularly sensitive to changes in environmental conditions, including radiation. The pale grass butterfly is among the most sensitive, which is why it was selected for study following the accident at Fukushima Daiichi. This article provides a rational perspective on what has been found, what it may mean, and what it doesn’t necessarily mean. Similar findings in som...

Over at Pajamas Media , Dr. Linda Halderman writes about the connection .

Joseph Mangano , is at it again with his baby teeth act, this time in the pages of the Star-Ledger with an op-ed calling for the closing of Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant. One more time, here's the crux of our case against Mangano . Eight state departments of health have investigated Mangano's claims, and all eight states (Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Michigan) refused to validate them. Even better, here's what the New Jersey Commission on Radiation Protection had to say about Mangano's research: The Commission is of the opinion that "Radioactive Strontium-90 in Baby Teeth of New Jersey Children and the Link with Cancer: A Special Report," is a flawed report, with substantial errors in methodology and invalid statistics. As a result, any information gathered through this project would not stand up to the scrutiny of the scientific community. There is also no evidence to support the allegation that the ...

Yesterday, the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League ( BREDL ) unveiled a study that makes some startling claims about the community that hosts the Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia: The number of people dying from cancer in Burke County is on the rise, and one group says a nuclear plant may be to blame. A new study released by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League shows the number of people dying of cancer in Burke County has shot up 25%, while the rest of country's cancer rate was on the decline. "If I lived in this county I'd want to know why these numbers are increasing," said Louis Zeller with Blue Ridge. [...] But the most startling statistic is the change in infant mortality. In Burke County the number of infant deaths increased 70% compared to the other surrounding counties in the CSRA . But even the backers of the study admit waste from other plants could be contributing to the problem. "It's like a crime being committed, but too many ...