Despite these great difficulties in obtaining precise dose measurements, researchers shouldn’t ignore the issue of Santa Susana health hazards. Actually, the “response” (health hazards) side of this dose-response relationship is full of data. Death records have been maintained by health departments in all US states and counties since the 1930s, and all deaths since 1979 are readily available on the internet. State-based cancer registries were rare just thirty years ago, but all states now operate registries that collect information on each diagnosed case of cancer in state residents. For example, California began collecting cancer incidence data in 1988.
Exposure to radioactive chemicals emitted from nuclear plants harms the body by killing cells and impairing them by breaking bands of DNA, the genetic material crucial to all human functions. This theoretically means that rates of all diseases should be elevated in a population exposed to radiation. In reality, this isn’t true, since many factors account for a person’s risk of disease, not just radiation exposure.
But some persons are more susceptible to radiation than others. The fetus, infant, and child are harmed much more than adults by a particular dose of radiation, because their immune systems are still underdeveloped, and because their cell division rate is much faster (and a damaged cell will have less time to repair itself before dividing into more damaged cells). Some diseases are also much more linked with radiation than others; for example, the only known cause of thyroid cancer (other than being female, history of thyroid disease, or low intake of iodine, which is found only in third world countries) is exposure to radiation, in particular radioactive iodine that seeks out the gland. Radioactive iodine is not found in nature, but only produced in fission, when uranium atoms are split in an atomic bomb explosion or in an operating nuclear reactor.
The following tables examine current rates (and historical trends) for certain conditions near Santa Susana. Unexpectedly elevated rates should not be automatically be viewed as ironclad proof that the Santa Susana laboratory harmed people, but as red flags that harm may have occurred, and as suggestions that more detailed research should continue.
A developing fetus is extremely delicate, and sensitive to external toxins. There are several ways to examine fetal health. One of these is analyzing rates of underweight and premature births. A failure to thrive in the womb often results in underdeveloped babies who must be delivered early.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has posted county-specific rates of premature and underweight live births from 1995 to 2006 (as of early 2011) on the internet. CDC data show that current Ventura County rates of babies born under 2500 grams (5.5 pounds, the standard definition of “underweight”) is relatively similar to the state rate. But a decade before the county rate was 13.6% below the state, and has risen over time. Rates for all major racial groups (white non-Hispanic, white Hispanic, Asian) making up 95% of Ventura County births, now exceed the state.
Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://wonder.cdc.gov/births. Accessed on March 3, 2011.
Adjoining the Santa Susana lab directly to its south are three zip code areas (91302, 91307, and 91377). It is a small area (62.3 square miles), with a current population of about 62,000 persons. The major cities include Balabasas (zip code 91302), West Hills (zip code 91307), and Oak Park (zip code 91377). The three-zip code area straddles the Ventura/Los Angeles County line.
The California Department of Human Services has collected birth weight data by zip code (mother’s residence) since 1989. During the past ten-year period 2000–2009, the rate in the three-zip code area was the highest in Ventura and Los Angeles counties, 36.9% above the California rate, based on 516 babies born under 5.5 pounds. The rate has risen from the early part of the decade (31.3% higher) to the latter part (43.4% higher). The three-zip code area is not especially poor (only 12% of births are to Hispanic mothers, compared to 51% statewide). Other local zip code areas have elevated low birth weight rates (not as high as the one described here). The location of the three-zip code area so close to Santa Susana contamination raises a red flag for more detailed research.
The impact of any harm to the fetus can also be observed during infancy, defined as the first year of life. Perhaps the most commonly used measure of infant health, or even of health in a population, is infant mortality, or the rate of deaths before the first birthday of live-born babies.
The current (2003–2007) infant death rate in Ventura County exceeds the state rate by 18%, and the neonatal death rate is 21.1% greater. The greatest excesses exist among white Hispanics (41.4% and 44.3% greater, respectively). Similar to low-weight births, the Ventura infant death rate was 21.4% less than the California rate in the mid-1980s, but has risen steadily over time, to the current mark of 18% greater.
Source: California Department of Public Health, www.cdph.ca.gov/data/statistics/Documents/birthzip2008.pdf. Accessed on March 7, 2011.
Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://wonder.cdc.gov/mortSQL.html. Accessed on March 3, 2011.
Another way to look at Ventura County’s infant mortality situation is to compare it with other counties in California. The eighteen most populated counties in the state, each with at least 420,000 residents, account for about 32 million of the 37 million California residents (over 86%). Ventura is one of these counties. In the period 2003–2007, Ventura had the fifth highest infant death rate of the eighteen counties (all races).
Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://wonder.cdc.gov/mortSQL.html. Accessed on March 3, 2011.
About half of all births in California are to Hispanic mothers, and virtually all are classified as whites. Assessing infant death rates among white Hispanic mothers in the eighteen counties for 2003–2007 showed that Ventura County had the highest rate in the state. The Ventura rate of 738.43 deaths per 100,000 live births, based on 237 deaths, is 41.4% greater than that of all other California counties – a statistically significant difference. But the gap is far greater when Ventura is compared to some other well-populated California counties, i.e.:
– 134% higher than San Francisco County (738.43 to 315.60)
– 85% higher than Contra Costa County (738.43 to 399.83)
– 60% higher than Alameda County (738.43 to 461.32)
– 59% higher than Sacramento County (738.43 to 465.25)
Ventura County’s Hispanic population has no obvious risk factors that would account for its high infant mortality rate. The finding represents a public health issue that merits the continued monitoring and rigorous follow-up among officials – even though, prior to this publication, there has never been any public revelation of this situation.
Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://wonder.cdc.gov/mortSQL.html. Accessed on March 3, 2011.
The health of the child, along with the fetus and infant, is also an important aspect of conducting research of radiation health effects. A 2003 paper from the US Environmental Protection Agency estimated that children age 2–16 are three times more susceptible than adults to a given dose of radiation, while children under two are ten times more susceptible. Moreover, diseases and deaths in children are often an outcome of an insult(s) during the fetal and infant period – an insult that could include radiation exposure. Damage to the DNA during pregnancy may not be diagnosed as a disease such as cancer until later in childhood.
Probably the two most commonly accepted childhood diseases that result from radiation exposure are cancer and birth defects. In the US, there is no national system of tracking birth defects. However, cancer has been tracked for many years (deaths since the 1930s and cases – in California – since 1988).
Child cancers are different than adult cancers. The most common adult cancers – lung, breast, prostate, and colorectal – are virtually nonexistent among children. Pediatric cancers can roughly be divided into thirds – one third of the cases are leukemia, one third brain and nervous system, and the other third a mix of several other typ
es of cancer like lymphoma. Prior research shows that while leukemia is especially sensitive to radiation exposure, radiation raises the risk of all types of cancer in children.
Cancer rates can be measured in terms of mortality (deaths) and incidence (cases). But incidence is more meaningful by far, since medical treatments have improved to the point where a large majority of children survive the disease. Thus, when assessing any potential cancer risk from an environmental cause, incidence is by far a more helpful indicator. In California, the current (2002–2006) rate of child cancer cases (diagnosed in children age nineteen or younger) are available by county; similar to infant mortality, Ventura County has the highest rate of the disease of any of the eighteen most populated counties in California. In the five-year period 2002–2006, about 200 Ventura County children were diagnosed with cancer.
Source: California Cancer Registry. H. Accessed on March 4, 2011. Rates adjusted to 2000 US population.
In addition to cancer incidence, cancer deaths are reported by county and state health departments, and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention develops statistical data from them and makes them available on the internet. For the most recent five-year period (2003–2007), Ventura County had the highest rate of cancer deaths among children age 0–19 of the eighteen most populated California counties. The Ventura rate was 3.643 deaths per 100,000 persons, 19% over the California rate, based on forty-three deaths.
Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://wonder.cdc.gov. Accessed March 4, 2011.
Similar to infant deaths, the Ventura County child cancer death rate was 8.8% below the California rate in the mid-1980s. But since then, the rate has climbed steadily, and the latest rate (2003–2007) is 19.4% greater than all other California counties.
While children are most susceptible to harmful effects of pollutants like radiation, adults can be harmed as well. A review of the latest data from the California Cancer Registry shows that each year in Ventura County, nearly 700 persons are diagnosed with the disease, 99% of whom are adults. The county’s age-adjusted 2003–2007 rate of 446.7 cases per 100,000 persons is 2.9% higher than the state of California (434.3).
Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://wonder.cdc.gov. Accessed March 4, 2011.
Some types of cancer are more sensitive to radiation exposure than others. The type that is most often cited is thyroid cancer, the risk of which is elevated from exposure to radioactive iodine, produced only in atomic bomb explosions and nuclear reactor operations. Other than being female, having other thyroid conditions, and a diet low in iodine (not a factor in the US), scientists have yet to come up with any other risk factors for the disease (Mayo Clinic, American Cancer Society). According to the National Cancer Institute, the incidence rate of thyroid cancer has tripled across the US since 1980, faster than any other type of cancer, yet experts are struggling to understand why.
California’s cancer registry first produced comprehensive data in 1988. From 1988–2008, of the eighteen most populated California counties, Ventura County had the highest rate of thyroid cancer incidence. In that twenty-one year period, 1,211 cases of the disease were diagnosed. Because of the known large releases of radioactive iodine during the 1959 meltdown and from other nuclear operations, Santa Susana should be considered one possible factor for the high rate in Ventura County.
Source: California Cancer Registry. H. Accessed on March 4, 2011. Rates adjusted to 2000 US population.
Incidence rates of thyroid cancer in Ventura County exceed state rates for all racial and ethnic groups, except for Hispanics (5.7% below the state). The county rate for blacks is 74.9% higher than the state’s, i.e., nearly double, although this is based on just twenty cases.
Source: California Cancer Registry. H. Accessed on March 4, 2011. Rates adjusted to 2000 US population.
Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://wonder.cdc.gov. Accessed March 4, 2011. Rates adjusted to 2000 US standard population.
Cancer mortality is also an indicator of health status that may suggest a link with contamination from Santa Susana. In the past twenty-five years, the Ventura County cancer death rate has steadily been about 4% to 7% below that of other California counties (below). This does not suggest any link with Santa Susana radioactive pollution, but also may reflect the ability of advanced medical treatments to keep cancer victims alive, especially in a low-poverty county like Ventura, where people have access to medical care.
There are consistently high rates in Ventura County of health status measures most closely linked with radiation exposure. These are known as descriptive statistics, and do not represent a conclusive proof of cause-and-effect between Santa Susan emissions and cancer risk to local residents. But they do suggest that local health has been adversely impacted.
There are no other obvious reasons why disease and death rates should be elevated; basic socio-demographic indicators in Ventura County are similar to that of California (below). The county has somewhat smaller proportions of black and Asian residents, and has a much lower poverty rate (8.7% vs. 13.3% in 2008), suggesting that rates of many diseases in Ventura County should be lower than the California rate. Thus, it is important that the search for other factors explaining these unusually high disease and death patterns continue. In addition, it would be helpful to acquire and analyze sub-county health data, such as the zip code specific rates of infant deaths, to examine any correlation with proximity or wind direction from Santa Susana.
Source: US Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov. Accessed on March 4, 2011.
Thus far, more than two decades after the effort to understand how Santa Susana had impacted health in Southern California commenced, little research has been done. The 2006 study by a panel of UCLA researchers that concluded between zero and 1800 cancers (average of 260) were caused by the 1959 meltdown is a start. But this is just one study, which has never been published by a peer-reviewed medical journal. In an area where millions of people will develop cancer in their lifetime, this number appears small considering how large-scale the 1959 accident was, and how much contamination was created at the site. The high local rates of low-weight births, infant deaths, and thyroid cancer cases means that more detailed research is merited to find more precise answers to the question of health risk, especially while contamination still exists at Santa Susana, and the threat to human health remains.
A Note from the Author and Acknowledgements
For purposes of readability, and following the precedents set by distinguished scholars such as Mike Wallace (Gotham) and many others, I have elected to leave footnotes out of the body of the text. But all my statements of fact and quotations are readily verifiable, and I welcome any questions about my research in putting together this book, which has been years in the making.
While many have helped me understand the facts about nuclear power in America, special thanks are in order. Kay Drey provided the support and encouragement that made this book possible. Kristen Shrader also encouraged me to pursue this piece, and her advice was invaluable. Buzz Cuthbert reviewed the book and made helpful comments that improved the book’s comprehension. RPHP Board members and many advisors strongly backed the pursuit of the book. Alec Baldwin was kind enough to endorse the book with his prologue. Last but not least, my wife Susan served as a sounding board, and gave good advice on the initial drafts.
J.M.
Figures
References
Nuclear’s Rise and Fall
Ambrose S. Eisenhower: Soldier and President. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990, 342.
Black H. Pittsburgher Magazine, May 1958. In Wasserman H and Solomon N, Killing Our Own: The Disaster of America’s Experience with Atomic Radiation. New York: Dell Publishing Company, 1982, 207.
Brownstein B. “The Price-Anderson Act: Is It Consistent with a Sound Energy Policy?” The Cato Institute, 1984. http://www.catoorg/pubs/pas/pa036.html. Accessed on May 17, 2011.
Eisenhower
D. The White House Years: Mandate for Change, 1953–1956. New York: Doubleday & Company, 1963, 312–313.
Eisenhower D. Speech to the United Nations, New York City, December 8, 1953.
Energy Information Administration. Information on capacity factor for US nuclear reactors, 1971 to 2008. www.eia.doe.gov/emau/mer/pdf/pages/sec8_3.pdf.
Energy Information Administration. “An Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Construction Costs.” Technical Report DOE/EIA-0485, January 1, 1986.
Idaho National Laboratory, Experimental Breeder Reactor I fact sheet.
May J. The Greenpeace Book of the Nuclear Age – The Human Cost. Greenpeace, 1989. http//www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/
press/reports/the-greenpeace-book-of-the-nuc.pdf. Accessed on May 17, 2011.
National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Statistics of the United States. Annual Volumes, 1943–1953.
Norris RS and Cochran TB. United States Nuclear Tests, July 1945 to 31 December 1992. Washington DC: National Resources Defense Council, 1994.
Strauss L. Speech to National Association of Science Writers, New York City, September 16, 1954.
Union of Concerned Scientists. “Lessons Learned from Year-Plus Reactor Outages.” Union of Concerned Scientists, Washington DC, 2006. http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/nuclear_safety/
Mad Science: The Nuclear Power Experiment Page 26
