grinner
04-08-2004, 03:24 PM
Glowing praise for radioactive units
By Richard Macey
April 8, 2004
Radiation: it may be good for us.
That is the conclusion of Taiwanese scientists who surveyed thousands of people exposed for years to radiation after recycled steel, contaminated with cobalt-60, was used to build hundreds of apartment blocks in the country.
The scientists say their findings suggest radiation could be used to prevent illness and help elderly people build their natural defences against cancer.
The "serendipitous contamination" began in the early 1980s when the steel was used to build 1700 apartments. About 10,000 people lived in them for between nine and 20 years, unaware they were receiving, on average, 200 times the radiation an Australian would expect to receive in a year.
But the scientists, including several employees past and present of Taiwan's Atomic Energy Council - criticised over the contamination scandal - say the residents were not harmed.
"On the contrary," they claimed in a report last month to an international nuclear conference in Honolulu, "the incidence of cancer deaths in this population was greatly reduced - to about 3 per cent of the incidence of spontaneous cancer death in the general Taiwan population.
"In addition, the incidence of congenital malformation was also reduced - to about 7 per cent of the incidence in the general public."
The scientists claimed low doses of radiation "could be employed to prevent and control serious illnesses" and that "an annual supplement of whole-body radiation . . . to elderly volunteers would stimulate their defences and provide protection against the scourge of cancer."
However Australia's nuclear watchdog, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, was sceptical yesterday. "There are several flaws in the Taiwan study," said Peter Burns, director of environmental and radiation health.
"A proper epidemiological study would compare the exposed population to a similar population, not the Taiwan average, as cancer rates can vary markedly in any society," Dr Burns said.
Further, "because the exposure has only recently stopped, cancer rates would be expected to increase over the next 20 to 30 years, so that a long-term follow-up is required to be sure that the rates have not increased." link (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/07/1081326798332.html)
By Richard Macey
April 8, 2004
Radiation: it may be good for us.
That is the conclusion of Taiwanese scientists who surveyed thousands of people exposed for years to radiation after recycled steel, contaminated with cobalt-60, was used to build hundreds of apartment blocks in the country.
The scientists say their findings suggest radiation could be used to prevent illness and help elderly people build their natural defences against cancer.
The "serendipitous contamination" began in the early 1980s when the steel was used to build 1700 apartments. About 10,000 people lived in them for between nine and 20 years, unaware they were receiving, on average, 200 times the radiation an Australian would expect to receive in a year.
But the scientists, including several employees past and present of Taiwan's Atomic Energy Council - criticised over the contamination scandal - say the residents were not harmed.
"On the contrary," they claimed in a report last month to an international nuclear conference in Honolulu, "the incidence of cancer deaths in this population was greatly reduced - to about 3 per cent of the incidence of spontaneous cancer death in the general Taiwan population.
"In addition, the incidence of congenital malformation was also reduced - to about 7 per cent of the incidence in the general public."
The scientists claimed low doses of radiation "could be employed to prevent and control serious illnesses" and that "an annual supplement of whole-body radiation . . . to elderly volunteers would stimulate their defences and provide protection against the scourge of cancer."
However Australia's nuclear watchdog, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, was sceptical yesterday. "There are several flaws in the Taiwan study," said Peter Burns, director of environmental and radiation health.
"A proper epidemiological study would compare the exposed population to a similar population, not the Taiwan average, as cancer rates can vary markedly in any society," Dr Burns said.
Further, "because the exposure has only recently stopped, cancer rates would be expected to increase over the next 20 to 30 years, so that a long-term follow-up is required to be sure that the rates have not increased." link (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/07/1081326798332.html)