A NEW British study suggests the children of men exposed to radiation while
working at nuclear plants are twice as likely to develop leukaemia.
Researchers from the University of Leeds and the London School of Hygiene and
Tropical Medicine looked at the health of 39 557 children born to 18 131 male
workers at 15 nuclear sites, including Sellafield in Cumbria, Dounreay in
Caithness and Aldermaston in Berkshire. Funded by the British government鈥檚
Department of Health and the Health and Safety Executive, the study is the most
comprehensive survey of nuclear workers and their families ever undertaken.
The study is an attempt to confirm or reject the work of the late Martin
Gardner, an epidemiologist from the University of Southampton. In 1990, he
suggested that the high rate of leukaemias suffered by children around
Sellafield was linked with the radiation to which their fathers had been exposed
at the plant. Gardner鈥檚 theory was rejected, however, by the authors of the last
major study carried out by the National Radiological Protection Board and others
(This Week, 15 November 1997, p 5).
Advertisement
Now researchers led by Eve Roman, an epidemiologist with the Leukaemia
Research Fund at the University of Leeds, have concluded that Gardner鈥檚 theory
鈥渃ould not be disproved鈥� on the basis of their findings. In this week鈥檚
British Medical Journal, the team reports that the risk of leukaemia among
the children of fathers exposed to radiation before conception was twice that of
children whose fathers were not exposed to radiation. The leukaemia rate in
children whose fathers accumulated the highest doses of radiation before
conception (more than 100 millisieverts) was nearly six times greater.
The researchers point out, however, that the total number of leukaemia cases
is still very low. They also confirm that the overall rate of all types of
cancer amongst the children is not significantly different from that of the
general population.
The team presented their results to workers at Sellafield last week, but the
findings have clearly riled British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL), the government-owned
company that runs the site.
鈥淲e find the study scientifically to be deeply and probably irretrievably
flawed,鈥� says Andy Slovak, BNFL鈥檚 chief medical officer. He suggests that future
analyses of the survey results, which will look at infertility, miscarriages and
other aspects of child health, could also be thrown into doubt.
The researchers strongly reject BNFL鈥檚 accusations, however, arguing that the
company has failed to understand what they were doing. 鈥淚t is one of the biggest
and most definitive studies,鈥� says Martin Bobrow, a medical geneticist at
Cambridge University and part of the study鈥檚 steering group. 鈥淎nd it is well
诲别蝉颈驳苍别诲.鈥�
Janine Allis-Smith, from Sellafield鈥檚 local anti-nuclear group, Cumbrians
Opposed to a Radioactive Environment, welcomes the findings. 鈥淚 am pleased for
all of us who have always believed that Martin Gardner was right,鈥� she says.