 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
The effects of the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear accident are widely agreed to be very low by scientists in the relevant fields. The American Nuclear Society concluded that average local radiation exposure was equivalent to a chest X-ray and maximum local exposure equivalent to less than a year's background radiation.[1] The U.S. BEIR report on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation states that "the collective dose equivalent resulting from the radioactivity released in the Three Mile Island accident was so low that the estimated number of excess cancer cases to be expected, if any were to occur, would be negligible and undetectable."[2] A variety of epidemiology studies have concluded that the accident has had no observable long term health effects.[3][4][5] One dissenting study is "a re-evaluation of cancer incidence near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant" by Dr Steven Wing of the University of North Carolina. In this study, Dr Wing and his colleagues argue that earlier findings had "logical and methodological problems" and conclude that "cancer incidence, specifically lung cancer and leukemia, increased following the TMI accident in areas estimated to have been in the pathway of radioactive plumes than in other areas."[6] Other dissenting opinions can be found in the Radiation and Public Health Project, whose leader, Joseph Mangano, has questioned the safety of nuclear power since 1985.[7][8][9]
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
ANSwas invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ National Research Council (US) Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (1990). Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation (BEIR V). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. p. 377. ISBN 978-0-309-03995-6. PMID 25032334.
{{cite book}}:|website=ignored (help) - ^ Cite error: The named reference
hatch90was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Hatch MC, Wallenstein S, Beyea J, Nieves JW, Susser M; Wallenstein; Beyea; Nieves; Susser (June 1991). "Cancer rates after the Three Mile Island nuclear accident and proximity of residence to the plant". American Journal of Public Health. 81 (6): 719–724. doi:10.2105/AJPH.81.6.719. PMC 1405170. PMID 2029040.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ R. J. Levin (2008), "Incidence of thyroid cancer in residents surrounding the three-mile island nuclear facility", Laryngoscope 118 (4), pp. 618–628 "These findings, however, do not provide a causal link to the TMI accident."
- ^ Wing, Steve; Richardson, David; Armstrong, Donna; Crawford, Douglas (January 1997). "A reevaluation of cancer incidence near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant: The collision of evidence and assumptions". Environmental Health Perspectives. 105 (1): 52–57. doi:10.1289/ehp.9710552. JSTOR 3433062. PMC 1469835. PMID 9074881.
- ^ Newman, Andy (November 11, 2003). "In Baby Teeth, a Test of Fallout; A Long-Shot Search for Nuclear Peril in Molars and Cuspids". The New York Times.
- ^ Mangano, Joseph (2004), "Three Mile Island: Health study meltdown", Bulletin of the atomic scientists, 60(5), pp.31-35
- ^ Fecht, Sarah (2004-04-08). "What Can We Do About Junk Science?". Popular Mechanics. Retrieved 2020-05-29.
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search