RSS Feed
New York - Report: Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester Highest Rate of Thyroid Cancer |
|
| |
News Source: 1010wins
Text Size
|
|
Local rates were not elevated in the late 1970s, when the two Indian Point reactors began operating, but have sharply increased since, according to the report.
The report says Radioactive Iodine is one of many chemicals routinely and accidentally released into the air by reactors at the plant.
"High thyroid cancer rates near Indian Point represents an epidemic, and is a significant public health concern," says Joseph Mangano MPH MBA. "The only major known cause of the disease is exposure to radioactive iodine, which is emitted into the air by nuclear plants." Mangano, Executive Director of the Radiation and Public Health Project research group, published the article in the International Journal of Health Services.
Jim Steets is a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear, the company that operates Indian Point says the science in this new report is faulty, and that Indian Point does not produce the types of isotopes that would lead to such issues.
The U.S. thyroid cancer rate has nearly tripled since 1980, the sharpest rise of any cancer (along with liver). Over 37,000 Americans are diagnosed with the disease each year.
The 40-year licenses for the two Indian Point reactors will soon expire. Entergy Nuclear has requested that federal regulators grant a 20 year license extension, but numerous parties, including Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, are opposing this extension.
More of today's headlines
“Williamsburg, NY - The Satmar Rebbe Rabbi Zalman Teitelbaum interrupted his vacation in the Catskills to take part in a mezuzah-posting ceremony last week at Pardes...”
Williamsburg, NY - Satmar to Open Subsidized Wedding Hall
New York, NY - City Hall Orders $1.75B in Additional Budget Cuts Including Layoffs
Total34
Read Comments (34) — Post Yours »
1
Nov 16, 2009 at 04:11 PM Bugsy Siegel Says:
"U.S. thyroid cancer rate has nearly tripled since 1980" if that is true, how can we attribute a rise in thyroid cancer to the Indian point plant. One would have to compare rates among the US population to rates in Westchester.
2
Nov 16, 2009 at 04:34 PM Milhouse Says:
A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects.
3
Nov 16, 2009 at 03:58 PM anonymous Says:
Leakage of nuclear isotopes which cause an uptake by the thyroid is a probable cause. The Russian nuclear disaster also increased the cases of thyroid malignancies, They need people [experts] with Geiger counters to measure the enviromental radiation in that area
4
Nov 16, 2009 at 03:51 PM Anonymous Says:
Yidden wake up, this effects you!
5
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:08 PM Charlie Hall Says:
“ A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects. ”
It may or may not be, depending on the number of cases.
6
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:23 PM Charlie Hall Says:
“ Leakage of nuclear isotopes which cause an uptake by the thyroid is a probable cause. The Russian nuclear disaster also increased the cases of thyroid malignancies, They need people [experts] with Geiger counters to measure the enviromental radiation in that area ”
The question is as follows: How do the 400 extra cases of cancer that are attributable to Indian Point compare to the health effects of, say, a coal fired power plant that produces the same amout of electricity. Pollution from coal fired power plants cause thousands of deaths from asthma and lung cancer each year in the US, not to mention the deleterious health effects on coal miners and the horriffic environmental destruction that many coal mining processes create.
7
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:21 PM anonymous Says:
The isotope which affects the thyroid gland is Cesium and a byproduct of nuclear energy production. I am sure the gedolim have an answer to it.
8
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:19 PM Charlie Hall Says:
“ A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects. ”
In case anyone is interested in actual numbers, it was a total of 1075 cases of thyroid cancer. Had the residents of the four counties developed thyroid cancer at the same rate as the US population, 675 cases would have been expected. The conclusion is that Indian Point -- or something else -- caused 400 people to get thyroid cancer.
9
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:22 PM Monsey Man Says:
Every time someone runs for office and goes to the Monsey Mosdos, people sit around like monkeys clapping for a banana when they say "we need to shut that plant." Ellen Jaffee, Christopher St. Lawrence, even Hillary Twersky Clinton. As long as the people running the Mosdos get what they need for their own families, all is kosher; and when people get sick or nebach worse, we have to have a kinos because we can't figure it out.
10
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:13 PM Charlie Hall Says:
“ "U.S. thyroid cancer rate has nearly tripled since 1980" if that is true, how can we attribute a rise in thyroid cancer to the Indian point plant. One would have to compare rates among the US population to rates in Westchester. ”
That is exactly what the authors did. (I downloaded the original article.) The US rate increased from 4.33 to 11.03 cases per 100,000. Rates in Orange, Putnam, Rockland, and Westchester were respectively 16.6, 18.0, 18.3, and 12.6 per 100,000.
11
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:14 PM Charlie Hall Says:
“ A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects. ”
The rates in the four counties *were* statistically significantly higher from the US average. You can download the article and see for yourself.
12
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:57 PM Anonymous Says:
“ A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects. ”
You must be one of the "chachums" who think it doesn't run in my family!
13
Nov 16, 2009 at 05:43 PM Anonymous Says:
“ A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects. ”
“ A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects.”
Azoy, Mr. Milhouse. Pray to Hashem that none of these "statistically significant" are your family, okay?
14
Nov 16, 2009 at 07:11 PM Milhouse Says:
“ “ A 66% difference is not statistically significant. Move along, folks, there's nothing to see here. Just some more panic-mongering by the usual suspects.”
Azoy, Mr. Milhouse. Pray to Hashem that none of these "statistically significant" are your family, okay? ”
What difference does it make whose family it is? Cancer happens everywhere; it always has, and it always will until Moshiach abolishes disease. The question is whether people living in those counties really are more likely to get this particular kind of cancer; only if so need we go on to ask why, and consider all possible answers, starting with demographics. But until a statistically significant difference is shown there's nothing to wonder about.
15
Nov 16, 2009 at 07:06 PM Milhouse Says:
“ In case anyone is interested in actual numbers, it was a total of 1075 cases of thyroid cancer. Had the residents of the four counties developed thyroid cancer at the same rate as the US population, 675 cases would have been expected. The conclusion is that Indian Point -- or something else -- caused 400 people to get thyroid cancer. ”
Or that it's yet another of the so-called "clusters" that can be found in ANY set of random numbers if you stare at them hard enough. Even if the US population were demographically homogenous (which it isn't), and the conditions in the entire country were exactly the same (which they aren't), there would be no reason at all to expect the cancer rate to be exactly the same in every zip-code-sized sample taken from the entire population. We should expect some variation to happen just by fluke.
16
Nov 16, 2009 at 06:25 PM anonymous Says:
Important is the technical construction of the reactor, the technical expertse of the personnel responsible for operating the reactor and how well the reactor is serviced
17
Nov 16, 2009 at 06:22 PM anonymous Says:
in nuclear energy production the fact is that the population is a captive audience to those who manage the nuclear facility . If they are neglient and nuclear material [isotopes] escape and enter the environment the population is the vicitim.
18
Nov 16, 2009 at 08:18 PM Milhouse Says:
“ in nuclear energy production the fact is that the population is a captive audience to those who manage the nuclear facility . If they are neglient and nuclear material [isotopes] escape and enter the environment the population is the vicitim. ”
Except that there's no reason to believe any such thing has happened.
19
Nov 16, 2009 at 11:37 PM Anonymous Says:
It would be interesting to know thyroid cancer rates in populations living near other nuclear power plants.
If nuclear power plants are causing thyroid cancer, would potassium iodide help?
20
Nov 16, 2009 at 11:21 PM Anonymous Says:
What is more dangerous, and something that is never mentioned in many health reports is sleeping near a wall that has wires behind the wall. Studies show conclusive evidence of people with fatigue problems, headaches, cancer and other illnesses that are a direct cause when sleeping with many wires that are behind the wall and near where your head is while sleeping. We are exposed to alot of stuff with todays technologies and radio waves etc.
To have all these "waves" radio frequencies and sleeping with clocks and cell phones near your bed is very dangerous. This is fact.
21
Nov 16, 2009 at 11:11 PM mp Says:
my sister living in monsey is a victim she almost ended up with a trake.
22
Nov 17, 2009 at 02:02 AM Anonymous Says:
Yes folks, my wife had gone through this, Hashem Yerachem Alehu btoch Klal Yisroel. A report like should be a great concern. Ask around by Medical Referal Organizations & by RCCS how many request for Thyroid Carcinoma they get. Also ask Dr. Mark Urken of Beth Israel - Director, Division of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology - Co-Director, Institute for Head and Neck and Thyroid Cancer how many Heimishe Patients he has. We should only hear Gute Besuros.
23
Nov 17, 2009 at 09:50 AM Anonymous Says:
“ What difference does it make whose family it is? Cancer happens everywhere; it always has, and it always will until Moshiach abolishes disease. The question is whether people living in those counties really are more likely to get this particular kind of cancer; only if so need we go on to ask why, and consider all possible answers, starting with demographics. But until a statistically significant difference is shown there's nothing to wonder about. ”
I'm sure you also think second hand smoke, radon, x-rays, plane travel, pollution, medicines, pesticides, etc... are all buba meisas too in causing cancer.
24
Nov 17, 2009 at 09:46 AM Anonymous Says:
“ Yes folks, my wife had gone through this, Hashem Yerachem Alehu btoch Klal Yisroel. A report like should be a great concern. Ask around by Medical Referal Organizations & by RCCS how many request for Thyroid Carcinoma they get. Also ask Dr. Mark Urken of Beth Israel - Director, Division of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology - Co-Director, Institute for Head and Neck and Thyroid Cancer how many Heimishe Patients he has. We should only hear Gute Besuros. ”
Tell this to people like Milhouse.
25
Nov 17, 2009 at 09:09 AM Milhouse Says:
“ What is more dangerous, and something that is never mentioned in many health reports is sleeping near a wall that has wires behind the wall. Studies show conclusive evidence of people with fatigue problems, headaches, cancer and other illnesses that are a direct cause when sleeping with many wires that are behind the wall and near where your head is while sleeping. We are exposed to alot of stuff with todays technologies and radio waves etc.
To have all these "waves" radio frequencies and sleeping with clocks and cell phones near your bed is very dangerous. This is fact. ”
No, they don't. This is unadulterated falsehood.
26
Nov 17, 2009 at 10:28 AM Anonymous Says:
“ No, they don't. This is unadulterated falsehood. ”
“ No, they don't. This is unadulterated falsehood.”
There you have it ladies and gentlemen, Dr. Milhouse has ruled on the matter.
27
Nov 17, 2009 at 11:23 AM Charlie Hall Says:
“ No, they don't. This is unadulterated falsehood. ”
I would not call it false; there is some evidence for this. But it is pretty weak, and if there is an effect, it is pretty small.
28
Nov 17, 2009 at 11:21 AM Charlie Hall Says:
“ Or that it's yet another of the so-called "clusters" that can be found in ANY set of random numbers if you stare at them hard enough. Even if the US population were demographically homogenous (which it isn't), and the conditions in the entire country were exactly the same (which they aren't), there would be no reason at all to expect the cancer rate to be exactly the same in every zip-code-sized sample taken from the entire population. We should expect some variation to happen just by fluke. ”
The article did adjust for some demographic characteristics of the population. And what they found was that the highest rates of thyroid cancer were in areas with the highest concentration of nuclear power plants -- the "clusters" were not random. If you disagree with the findings it is now up to you to come up with a competing explanation that describes the data at least as well.
29
Nov 17, 2009 at 11:19 AM Charlie Hall Says:
“ in nuclear energy production the fact is that the population is a captive audience to those who manage the nuclear facility . If they are neglient and nuclear material [isotopes] escape and enter the environment the population is the vicitim. ”
France does a much better job at nuclear power than does the United States. It produces electricity for a fraction of the cost we pay in the US, and their nuclear industry has a much better safety record. I would support the US adopting the French model, but I'm sure I'm going to get blasted as a "socialist" for saying that (France's electric utilities are all government-owned).
30
Nov 17, 2009 at 11:17 AM Charlie Hall Says:
“ I'm sure you also think second hand smoke, radon, x-rays, plane travel, pollution, medicines, pesticides, etc... are all buba meisas too in causing cancer. ”
Actually, the evidence connecting second hand smoke to cancer is really weak. If there is an effect, it is very small.
31
Nov 17, 2009 at 01:56 PM Anonymous Says:
“ Actually, the evidence connecting second hand smoke to cancer is really weak. If there is an effect, it is very small. ”
Throughout the years, the science of secondhand smoke has driven the secondhand smoke policy engine from separate smoking and nonsmoking sections to separately ventilated smoking rooms to 100% smokefree environments. We now know that 53,800 people die every year from secondhand smoke exposure. This number is based on the midpoint numbers for heart disease deaths (48,500), lung cancer deaths (3,000), and SIDS deaths (2,300) as calculated in the 1997 California EPA Report on Secondhand Smoke. And children are at significant risk to many acute and chronic diseases as a result of secondhand smoke exposure.
32
Nov 17, 2009 at 06:43 PM Askupeh Says:
“ Except that there's no reason to believe any such thing has happened. ”
There is every reason to believe that anything that could go wrong could have gone wrong, just they aren’t telling you. Do you really trust them? I don’t.
33
Nov 17, 2009 at 08:38 PM Milhouse Says:
“ Throughout the years, the science of secondhand smoke has driven the secondhand smoke policy engine from separate smoking and nonsmoking sections to separately ventilated smoking rooms to 100% smokefree environments. We now know that 53,800 people die every year from secondhand smoke exposure. This number is based on the midpoint numbers for heart disease deaths (48,500), lung cancer deaths (3,000), and SIDS deaths (2,300) as calculated in the 1997 California EPA Report on Secondhand Smoke. And children are at significant risk to many acute and chronic diseases as a result of secondhand smoke exposure.
”
Averaging a bunch of made-up numbers just gives you another made-up number. The "science" and the policy are both driven by the well-funded campaign by the plaintiffs' bar eager to extort money from yet more victims.
34
Nov 17, 2009 at 11:55 PM Milhouse Says:
“ There is every reason to believe that anything that could go wrong could have gone wrong, just they aren’t telling you. Do you really trust them? I don’t. ”
Yes, it would be impossible to cover up.