On Uranium Mining

This video covers the topic of cancer rates around uranium mines.

Karl Grossman, former op-ed columnist and author (Cover Up: What Your Not Supposed to Know About Nuclear Power), makes the claim that lung cancer rates are elevated around uranium mines.

Gywneth Cravens, author (The Power To Save The World: The Truth about Nuclear Energy), recalls her experiences living in New Mexico, and claims that is not the case.

References:

1. Cancer mortality in a Texas county with prior uranium mining and milling activities, 19502001

John D Boice Jr et al 2003 J. Radiol. Prot. 23 247-262 doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/23/3/302

2. Differences in Cancer Incidence among Indians in Alaska and New Mexico and U.S. Whites, 1993-2002

Janet J. Kelly1, Anne P. Lanier1, Steven Alberts2 and Charles L. Wiggins3

1 Office of Alaska Native Health Research, Community Health Services, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, Anchorage, Alaska; 2 Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; and 3 Epidemiology and Cancer Control, Cancer Research and Treatment Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico

3. Radiation, Smoking, and Lung Cancer
A binational study provides new insights into the effects of smoking and radiation exposure on different histological types of lung cancer.

by Kiyohiko Mabuchi, RERF Department of Epidemiology, Charles E Land, RERF consultant, and health statistician, US National Cancer Institute, Radiation Epidemiology Branch, Bethesda, Maryland, and Suminori Akiba, RERF Department of Epidemiology.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Gywneth
• Cravens
• Karl
• Grossman
• Nuclear
• Atomic
• power
• energy
• Uranium
• Mining
• Navajo
• native
• american

[MrHarristheman]

Is this all true? where did she get her information?

[RaySquirrel]

Gyeneth Cravens is a former resident of New Mexico. In her book "The Power to Save the World", in her chapter on the effects of uranium mining, she cites three peer-reviewed scientific studies on the matter. I have them listed on the information tab of this video. Anyone can look them up through Google scholar.

[substanti8]

@RaySquirrel

I wish you had not cut her off, just when she in the middle of the most important point. 3:35

She did not state it correctly (perhaps because she doesn't completely understand the science), but she's essentially right. Inhaling cigarette smoke GREATLY increases the radiation dose to the bronchial epithelium (the key tissue of concern).

"400 times more [radiation exposure] than a nuclear plant" 7:07

NONSENSE. She's spouting an outdated industry talking point.

[RaySquirrel]

@substanti8 And may I ask what resource you are refferencing that makes you so certain that her claims are non-sense? All of her sourses I have listed in the info column. I have checked them out. They are all legit. You only sound arrogant by just blindly dissmissing her claim.

[substanti8]

pubs.acs. org/doi/abs/10.1021/es00127a00­2

.

"Fabric filters are very effective for the removal of suspended particulate material from gas streams. Collection efficiencies above 99.9% are commonly achieved in well-designed bathhouse systems. The technology is quite versatile, limited principally by the availability of fabrics that can withstand the sometimes hot or corrosive conditions in the gas and by the pressure drop developed across the filter as a result of dust cake buildup on the fabric."

[substanti8]

@RaySquirrel

.

You listed no sources to support her nonsense about radiation exposure from coal-burning power plants. It's industry propaganda based on (1) false framing (i.e. "coal vs. nuclear," as if other options don't exist) and (2) outdated assumptions about pollution control equipment.

.

The typical coal plant today releases less than 1% of its fly ash into the air. Airborne fly ash is the primary radiation dose mechanism.

[substanti8]

@MrHarristheman

Is it true? Well, RaySquirrel has identified part of the case against nuclear power that Karl Grossman has ... uh, grossly overstated. But the fact remains that uranium mining is, indeed, very dangerous.

It's so dangerous that uranium miners are one of about four epidemiological "cohorts" (groups of people with high death rates) that were used to establish radiation standards. Two others are HIroshima victims and the radium dial painters (1920s). I can't remember the fourth.