Health Risks of Ionizing Radiation: - Clark University
Health Risks of Ionizing Radiation: - Clark University
Health Risks of Ionizing Radiation: - Clark University
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
11<br />
NUCLEAR POWER ACCIDENTS<br />
The two nuclear power accidents eligible for this<br />
review are not the only two in human history, but they<br />
are the only two with substantial epidemiological<br />
analysis <strong>of</strong> health outcomes in surrounding<br />
populations. The Three Mile Island (TMI) accident<br />
in Pennsylvania was relatively low-level, although<br />
it was the largest accidental release <strong>of</strong> radiation<br />
from a commercial power facility in the US, but<br />
the Chernobyl accident was a major catastrophe.<br />
This section begins with a short review <strong>of</strong> the TMI<br />
accident and goes on to explore in some depth the<br />
follow-up <strong>of</strong> the effects <strong>of</strong> Chernobyl.<br />
11.1 Three Mile Island<br />
The partial meltdown at TMI on March 28, 1979<br />
released several million curies <strong>of</strong> xenon and iodine<br />
isotopes into the air. The average whole-body<br />
gamma dose for a person within 5 miles <strong>of</strong> TMI was<br />
estimated to be about 0.1 mSv (Hatch, et al. 1990;<br />
Talbott, et al. 2000; see Figure 11-1). This amount<br />
<strong>of</strong> radiation is low, and detecting risks at this level is<br />
not likely using standard epidemiological methods.<br />
On the other hand, there were problems with dose<br />
estimation, including legal restrictions on how the<br />
doses could be estimated and missing data for critical<br />
periods immediately after the accident (Wing et al.<br />
1997). Based on the <strong>of</strong>ficial dose estimates, an early<br />
report from a President’s Commission concluded<br />
that the only possible health impact would be mental<br />
distress 1 , but several cancer outcomes appear to have<br />
been elevated as described below.<br />
Hatch et al. (1990) analyzed cancer incidence<br />
according to levels <strong>of</strong> dose, comparing incidence<br />
among those in the highest quartile to incidence<br />
among those in the lowest quartile 2 . Incidence<br />
was further broken down in according to years <strong>of</strong><br />
observation. 1975-1979 was the pre-accident period;<br />
1981-1985 and 1984-1985 are periods defined<br />
according to the assumed latency <strong>of</strong> various cancers<br />
(2 or 5 years). Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and lung<br />
Figure 11-1. <strong>Radiation</strong> emissions and incidence <strong>of</strong> lung<br />
cancer, 1981-1985, in the TMI 10-mile area (http://ehp.niehs.<br />
nih.gov/members/2003/6200/6200.html#accci).<br />
1 JG Kemeny et al. 1979. Report <strong>of</strong> the President’s Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island – The Need for<br />
Change: The Legacy at TMI. ISBN 0-93578-003. Washington, DC: Govt. Printing Office.<br />
2 Dividing a group into quartiles means creating four groups; the lowest 25% <strong>of</strong> dose, the highest 25% <strong>of</strong> doses, and<br />
two groups in the middle (25-50% and 50-75%).<br />
130