Radiation and Cancer

 Why Starmer’s nuclear power push raises cancer fears. The UK is investing £14.2bn in a new Sizewell plant and £2.5bn in small nuclear reactors. In 1942, the Mallinckrodt Chemical Works in Missouri, US, was processing uranium for the first atomic bomb. It ran out of space for its radioactive waste and moved it to an open air storage site near Coldwater Creek, north of St Louis. More than 80 years later, Harvard University has found that communities living near the creek, a tributary of the Missouri River, have an elevated risk of cancer. The findings, released this week, showed a dose-response effect, with those nearest the water having a far higher chance of developing most cancers than those living farther away. Researchers say it highlights the dangers of exposure to even small amounts of radiation over time. They say governments must be cautious when building new nuclear sites near towns and villages. The public was first alerted to the possibility that nuclear plants could be causing cancer when an ITV documentary in 1983 revealed a high number of childhood leukaemia cases between 1955 and 1983 in the village of Seascale, near Sellafield. While less than one case should have been expected in such a small community, researchers found seven youngsters suffering from the condition. Residents feared that radioactive discharges may be to blame and the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (Comare) was set up to investigate. Investigations by Comare did show that rates of two types of childhood leukaemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, were significantly higher than expected, and researchers found a similar cluster at Thurso near Dounreay. However, researchers did not find raised rates in other villages near Sellafield and Dounreay, leading them to think that something else was causing the rise, potentially local infections which are known to trigger cancer in some cases. The investigators theorised that an influx of workers moving to Seascale and Thurso to work in the nuclear industry might have exposed local residents to new infections, sparking a rise in childhood cancer rates. Viruses such as Epstein-Barr are thought to be linked to cancers such as non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Telegraph 19th July 2025

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/19/why-starmers-nuclear-power-push-raises-cancer-fears/

Nuclear power stations in the UK do not seem to be linked to risk of childhood cancer, according to a major new study. The latest study has examined cancer incidence near to nuclear power installations between 1995 and 2016. Commissioned by the UK Committee on the Medical Aspects of Radiation (COMARE), the research has been carried out by researchers from Imperial College London and the University of Bristol, UK. The research team examined the geographical spread of nearly 50,000 cases of cancer in children under the age of 14. These cancers include leukaemia, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, central nervous system cancers and other solid tumours. The researchers say they used advanced statistical modelling to search for signs of increased incidence within 25 kilometres of nuclear power stations. The team concluded that there was no evidence that children living near nuclear power installations have an increased cancer risk compared to children living elsewhere in Great Britain.

British Society for Haematology 21st July 2025

https://b-s-h.org.uk/about-us/news/nuclear-power-stations-cleared-of-child-cancer-link

See Ian Fairlie on Daviesxetcal cancer study