“Population Mixing” and Moorside – No One Wants to Talk! WHY?

http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrB8pG2MsFTDUAA77GJzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTIybzJkN2pwBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZAMzYzAwYWU1MTFiZWY5OTM2NDFlNDFjMmM4ZTZlMmQyOQRncG9zAzYEaXQDYmluZw--?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dlego%2Bnuclear%2Bplant%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D6&w=676&h=507&imgurl=www.brickshelf.com%2Fgallery%2FMinifigTimes%2FLegoland%2FNuclear-Plant%2Flego-nuclear-power-plant-0813-004.png&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eurobricks.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fshowtopic%3D85745&size=1006.3KB&name=%3Cb%3ENuclear%3C%2Fb%3E+power+%3Cb%3Eplant%3C%2Fb%3E+opens&p=lego+nuclear+plant&oid=3c00ae511bef993641e41c2c8e6e2d29&fr2=&fr=&tt=%3Cb%3ENuclear%3C%2Fb%3E+power+%3Cb%3Eplant%3C%2Fb%3E+opens&b=0&ni=128&no=6&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=11pd685k9&sigb=12iof81st&sigi=134qdmenj&sigt=1171tmgha&sign=1171tmgha&.crumb=m1TNmkVP1zF&
#StopMoorside

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH QUIZZED BY TIM FARRON MP ABOUT THE PREDICTED RISE IN CHILDHOOD LEUKAEMIA FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF MOORSIDE

Tim Farron has written on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland to the Director of Public Health Cumbria County Council Colin Cox, Regarding construction of Moorside and “Population Mixing.”

“Population mixing” is a red herring used to explain the up to 20 times (Maryport) and 10 times (Seascale) acknowledged excess in cancers on the West Coast of Cumbria. IF the government will not take responsibility for radioactive emissions as a cause of excess cancer then it must take responsibility for its belief that “population mixing” is the cause of excess cancers. The public should be warned.

Radiation  Free Lakeland has written to all the prospective parliamentary candidates for Copeland on this crucial matter of public health- not one has replied.

Correspondence with Tim Farron MP below

Our Ref: Birk004/52/jag > 13 > February > 2017

Dear Marianne

Thank you very much for having taken the time to attend my advice surgery  at Kendal Leisure Centre on Friday morning with regard to the recent petition work you have undertaken at Workington and your request to re-send a letter to Colin Cox who heads up Public Health for Cumbria > regarding population mixing and who takes responsibility for this.  I can see why this explanation would be a great cause for concern, given  the projected 20,000 jobs which are likely to be generated alongside the 4,430 people in Cumbria currently claiming either JSA or Universal Credit.  I am pleased to confirm that I have written to the Director of Public Health, Cumbria to ask, following the work of the Health Impact assessment  which was undertaken on behalf of the Moorside Health Impact Assessment  Steering group whether any conclusions were reached on whether the  Government and the industry should take responsibility for population mixing and cumulative radioactive emissions from existing and new reactors. I will write again, when I have received the response. ..

With best wishes

Yours sincerely  Tim Farron MP

9th Feb 2017

Dear Tim Farron MP, Last May 2016 we wrote to the Director of Public Health along with hundreds of other concerned Cumbrians asking the following questions: A Government Committee recently said that “Population Mixing” caused by an influx of nuclear workers resulted in “a Mystery Virus.”

They said this is the likely cause of increased leukaemias near Sellafield. This view is rather undermined by the Sellafield workers having a Compensation Scheme for Radiation Linked Diseases. There are higher incidences of many diseases in the vicinity of Sellafield including childhood eye cancers and Downs Syndrome. Do you believe, like the government, that “population mixing” is the cause of the acknowledged and well documented excess of childhood leukaemia near Sellafield? Or do you agree with the co-discoverer of plutonium and uranium, Dr John Gofman that there is no safe dose of radiation?

Which do you think the government and the industry should take responsibility for:

A) Population Mixing?

B) Cumulative Radioactive Emissions from existing and new reactors? The reply we received back from Colin Cox, the Director of Public Health Cumbria was dismissive and we are still waiting for an answer to our questions: “I am the Chair of the Moorside Health Impact Assessment Steering Group. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a rigorous approach to identifying and mitigating any health risks, and identifying and maximising any health gains, arising from this development. At its meeting this morning, the steering group agreed that the issue of population mixing will be considered within the overall HIA. The HIA is due to be completed by the end of this year. I will not be making any public comment on this matter before this process is complete. I hope this information is helpful. Regards, Colin Cox Colin Cox Director of Public Health Cumbria County Council” Given that John Woodcock MP insists that Moorside would bring over 20,000 jobs to Cumbria, a county with 4000 claiming either JSA or Universal Credit is this more of a threat than a promise? It seems to us that whether the well documented increase in cancers is due to an influx of nuclear workers or radioactive emissions, this is a lose-lose situation with regards the health and safety of Cumbrians. We have written to an acknowledged expert and member of government committees relating to Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment and Dr Paul Dorfman’s reply to us is below. ________________________________ From: Dorfman, Paul Sent: 13 June 2016 09:59 To: mariannebirkby@mariannebirkby.plus.com Subject: Re: Population Mixing V Radioactive Emissions. Govnt want their cake and eat it?] Dear Marianne Thank you for your letter concerning the key issue of childhood leukaemia in Cumbria. As you may know, I served as Secretary to the UK governmental scientific advisory Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters (CERRIE), where we reported on this issue. I am also currently an advisor on radiation risk to the Irish Government Environment Protection Agency (EPA), and am an advisor to the UK MoD on the dismantling of the laid-up UK nuclear submarine flotilla. In other words, I am an acknowledged expert on radiation risk. Regards future risk of childhood ill-health in Cumbria – I, like you, am of the clear opinion that the acknowledged significant increase in childhood leukaemia in Cumbria is associated with radiation releases from nuclear power plant. However, there is no question but that the view of the key UK governmental radiation risk scientific advisory body – the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE) – is that the Cumbrian childhood leukaemia excess is most likely associated with a ‘population mixing’. In other words, COMARE, and hence the UK government state that the Cumbrian childhood leukaemia excess is due to a novel virus brought in by a large number of construction workers which then goes on to infect a relatively isolated local population who do not have a defense against this virus. In this context, the UK government must take responsibility for this view. Thus the UK government must inform the local community to expect a potential increase in risk of childhood leukeamia following the construction of the planned nuclear facility at Moorside. Sincerely Paul Dr Paul Dorfman The Energy Institute University College London Central House 14 Upper Woburn Place London WC1HH 0NN +44 (0)7972385303 Founder, Nuclear Consulting Group http://www.nuclearconsult.com/ Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust Nuclear Policy Research Fellow

Last weekend in Workington we collected more signatures to add to the hundreds of letters already sent to the Director of Public Health in Cumbria to again remind him to reply to our questions. We would be very grateful if you could pass this letter on to him with the following questions for which we are still awaiting a reply. Which do you think the government and the industry should take responsibility for: A) Population Mixing? B) Cumulative Radioactive Emissions from existing and new reactors? Yours sincerely Marianne Birkby Radiation Free Lakeland

Save

Open Letter to All Copeland Candidates

toxic_love_sm.jpg

Toxic Love – Image by Andy Liepzig

The following letter was published in the Whitehaven News today.  It is a question we have asked repeatedly…

An Open Letter to All the Candidates in the Copeland By Election

Radiation Free Lakeland are a campaign group for nuclear safety with many supporters in West Cumbria.   Last September the science correspondents of all the national newspapers reported on the release of a new report which should concern all the Copeland candidates.

Since the 1980s there have been concerns that nuclear plants were causing leukaeimia in children after disease rates were found to be up to 20 times greater than the national average in communities like Seascale and Maryport

On 30th September 2016 the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (Comare) said there was no evidence that it was nuclear power plants themselves which were behind the increase, as, they said, the radioactive emissions “are too low.”

Instead, they said it was more likely that the large influx of people who moved to rural areas to staff the plants had brought in a mystery virus, which had triggered cancer in the children of local populations. They call this “population mixing.” Historically this was rather less of an increase than that which is being proposed now for Moorside which makes John Woodcock’s carrot of over “20,000 jobs” (Cumbria has 4000 receiving JSA or Universal Credit ) more of a threat than a promise.

How likely is it that previous governments would have knowingly instigated an increase of up to 20 times the national average of childhood leukaemia in Cumbria? Anyone who has been through their child being diagnosed with leukaemia knows the heartache and that their lives and the lives of their whole family and network of friends will be changed forever, whatever the outcome. What on earth could be worth even the risk of one child having leukaemia?   In the 1950’s it was the special relationship with America and the Manhattan Project which drove the nuclear industry. One of the key scientists in the Manhattan Project was Dr John Gofman who described the licensing of new nuclear power plants as “premeditated murder” and said that there is evidence of harm to DNA “all the way down to the lowest doses” of radiation.   The reason we are told nuclear is “necessary” today is to provide so called “low carbon” electricity. Really? Even the CEO of the National Grid Steve Holliday says that the idea of large coal fired or nuclear power stations for “baseload” power is “outdated.”

Any MP for Copeland, host of the already intolerably dangerous “nuclear heartland’ is tasked not only with protecting the wider population but also West Cumbrians.

We would like to ask you the following question relating to the local population:

QUESTION: COMARE, and the UK government state that the Cumbrian childhood leukaemia excess is due to a novel virus brought in by a large number of construction workers which then goes on to infect a relatively rural local population.   Do you think that government must take responsibility for this view and inform the local community to expect an increase in childhood leukeamia following the construction of the planned nuclear facility at Moorside?

Yours sincerely,

Marianne Birkby

Radiation Free Lakeland

References:

Incidence of Increased Cancers

https://archive.org/details/op1278204-1001

COMARE and Childhood Leukaemia

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/09/30/childhood-leukaemia-probably-caused-by-mystery-virus-raising-hop/

National Grid – Nuclear is Outdated

http://energypost.eu/interview-steve-holliday-ceo-national-grid-idea-large-power-stations-baseload-power-outdated/

Save

Government Believes that “Population Mixing” Can Seriously Damage YOUR Child’s Health – #StopMoorside

population-mixing-can-damage-your-childs-health

tim-farron-with-the-map-of-excess-cancers
Tim Farron MP looking at the Map of “excess” cancers  from Sir Douglas Black’s Independent Advisory Group 1984

Tim Farron MP has agreed to quiz  the Director of Public Health Cumbria on his failure to reply to our questions regarding Moorside and the health of children in the vicinity of the proposed Moorside reactors..

Dear Tim Farron MP,

Last May 2016 we wrote to the Director of Public Health along with hundreds of other concerned Cumbrians asking the following questions:

A Government Committee recently said that “Population Mixing” caused by an influx of nuclear workers resulted in “a Mystery Virus.” They said this is the likely cause of increased leukaemias near Sellafield. This view is rather undermined by the Sellafield workers having a Compensation Scheme for Radiation Linked Diseases. There are higher incidences of many diseases in the vicinity of Sellafield including childhood eye cancers and Downs Syndrome.

 Do you believe, like the government, that “population mixing” is the cause of the acknowledged and well documented excess of childhood leukaemia near Sellafield? Or do you agree with the co-discoverer of plutonium and uranium, Dr John Gofman that there is no safe dose of radiation? Which do you think the government and the industry should take responsibility for:

  1. A) Population Mixing?
  2. B) Cumulative Radioactive Emissions from existing and new reactors?  

 The reply we received back from Colin Cox, the Director of Public Health Cumbria was dismissive and we are still waiting for an answer to our questions:

“I am the Chair of the Moorside Health Impact Assessment Steering Group. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a rigorous approach to identifying and mitigating any health risks, and identifying and maximising any health gains, arising from this development. At its meeting this morning, the steering group agreed that the issue of population mixing will be considered within the overall HIA.

The HIA is due to be completed by the end of this year. I will not be making any public comment on this matter before this process is complete. I hope this information is helpful.

Regards,

Colin Cox

Colin Cox Director of Public Health Cumbria County Council”

Given that John Woodcock MP insists that Moorside would bring over 20,000 jobs to Cumbria, a county with 4000 claiming either JSA or Universal Credit is this more of a threat than a promise?   It seems to us that whether the well documented increase in cancers is due to an influx of nuclear workers or radioactive emissions, this is a lose-lose situation with regards the health and safety of Cumbrians.

We have written to an acknowledged expert and member of government committees relating to Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment and Dr Paul Dorfman’s reply to us is below.

________________________________ From: Dorfman, Paul Sent: 13 June 2016 09:59 To: mariannebirkby@mariannebirkby.plus.com Subject: Re: Population Mixing V Radioactive Emissions. Govnt want their cake and eat it?]

Dear Marianne

Thank you for your letter concerning the key issue of childhood leukaemia in Cumbria.   As you may know, I served as Secretary to the UK governmental scientific advisory Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters (CERRIE), where we reported on this issue. I am also currently an advisor on radiation risk to the Irish Government Environment Protection Agency (EPA), and am an advisor to the UK MoD on the dismantling of the laid-up UK nuclear submarine flotilla. In other words, I am an acknowledged expert on radiation risk.

Regards future risk of childhood ill-health in Cumbria – I, like you, am of the clear opinion that the acknowledged significant increase in childhood leukaemia in Cumbria is associated with radiation releases from nuclear power plant.   However, there is no question but that the view of the key UK governmental radiation risk scientific advisory body – the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE) – is that the Cumbrian childhood leukaemia excess is most likely associated with a ‘population mixing’.

In other words, COMARE, and hence the UK government state that the Cumbrian childhood leukaemia excess is due to a novel virus brought in by a large number of construction workers which then goes on to infect a relatively isolated local population who do not have a defense against this virus.   In this context, the UK government must take responsibility for this view. Thus the UK government must inform the local community to expect a potential increase in risk of childhood leukeamia following the construction of the planned nuclear facility at Moorside.

Sincerely   Paul   Dr Paul Dorfman

The Energy Institute University College London Central House 14 Upper Woburn Place London WC1HH 0NN +44 (0)7972385303 Founder, Nuclear Consulting Group http://www.nuclearconsult.com/ Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust Nuclear Policy Research Fellow

____________________________________________________

Last weekend in Workington we collected more signatures to add to the hundreds of letters already sent to the Director of Public Health in Cumbria to again remind him to reply to our questions. We would be very grateful if you could pass this letter on to him with the following questions for which we are still awaiting a reply.

Which do you think the government and the industry should take responsibility for:

A) Population Mixing?

B) Cumulative Radioactive Emissions from existing and new reactors?  

 

Yours sincerely

Marianne Birkby

on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland

 

WORLD CANCER DAY 4th FEB- JOIN US SAY NO TO MOORSIDE and NUCLEAR DUMPING

government-warning

 

GREAT NEWS – TOSHIBA’s foray into nuclear ventures has resulted in them experiencing a gigantic financial black hole which means that their nuclear construction business is in tatters.

It is however way too soon to call time on Moorside as our nuclear obsessed Govnt will be pulling out all stops to stay with the plan …Toshiba was always going to pull out after construction of the diabolic reactors (Nuclear Engineering International 16th September 2014 Toshiba planning to sell some of its stake in the venture “within the first year of plant operations”).  

The South Koreans (KEPCO)  have been in talks with NuGen to try to keep the whole shebang going.

Also not in the mainstream press is the fact that Toshiba have a 150 year lease on the Springfields nuclear fuel site at Preston providing nuclear fuel for the UK and around the world.

Join us on 4th Feb in Workington town centre at 10am (at the Look Out Clock) on World Cancer Day to say NO to Moorside and Nuclear Dumping.  Bring Banners, Bring Yourselves – Join the Resistance!

We will have a letter for people to sign to Colin Cox, Cumbria’s Director of Public Health who has so far refused to answer our question.

Do you

A.  Agree with government that population mixing is the cause of the “excess” of childhood leukaemia in areas of Cumbria

Or

B. Agree with Nuclear power pioneer Dr John Gofman that “Licensing a nuclear power plant is random premeditated murder ….the evidence is good all the way down to the lowest (radiation) doses”

When we asked Colin Cox this question back in May 2016 we recieved the dismissive reply below:

“Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding health risks arising from “population mixing” during the development of Moorside power station in West Cumbria. I am the Chair of the Moorside Health Impact Assessment Steering Group. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a rigorous approach to identifying and mitigating any health risks, and identifying and maximising any health gains, arising from this development. At its meeting this morning, the steering group agreed that the issue of population mixing will be considered within the overall HIA. The HIA is due to be completed by the end of this year. I will not be making any public comment on this matter before this process is complete. I hope this information is helpful.

Regards, Colin Cox

Colin Cox Director of Public Health Cumbria County Council The Courts Carlisle CA3 8NA”

 

Our letter below will be available for people to sign on Saturday 4th February in Workington from 10am to 12noon at the Look Out Clock (or nearby)

To Colin Cox, the Director of Public Health Cumbria,

A Government Committee recently said that “Population Mixing” caused by an influx of nuclear workers resulted in “a Mystery Virus.” They said this is the likely cause of increased leukaemias near Sellafield. This view is rather undermined by the Sellafield workers having a Compensation Scheme for Radiation Linked Diseases. There are higher incidences of many diseases in the vicinity of Sellafield including childhood eye cancers and Downs Syndrome.

In the Eighties, the families of 19 children living within 20 miles of Sellafield took the site operators to court.  The children all had leukaemia.  They lost their case, the judge ruling that the radiation dose from the plant was too low to have caused leukaemia.

The Government subscribes to the 1988 Leo Kinlen theory, which suggests that exposure to a common unidentified infection through population mixing results in childhood leukaemia.  Prof Kinlen said: “This exposure is greater when people from urban areas mix with rural communities eg when construction workers and nuclear staff move into the Sellafield area.”  History is about to repeat itself.  The Government plans to parachute into Cumbria thousands of temporoary workers to work at Beckermet, site of the proposed “biggest new nuclear development in Europe.”

Dr Paul Dorfman, secretary to the UK governmental sceintific advisory Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters (CERRIE), an acknowledged expert on radiation risk, told us: “I, like you, am of the clear opinion that the acknowledged significant increase in childhood leukaemia in Cumbria is associated with radiation releases….However…the view of the key UK governmental radiation risk scientific advisory body (COMARE) is that the Cumbrian childhood leukaemia excess is most likely associated with “population mixing.”

“COMARE, and hence the Government state that the Cumbrian childhood leukaemia excess is due to a novel virus brought in by a large number of construction workers which then goes on to infect a relatively isolated local population who do not have a defence against this virus.”

“Thus the Government must inform the local community to expect a potential increase in risk of childhood leukaemia following the construction of the planned nuclear facility at Moorside.”

Nuclear power pioneer Dr John Gofman said decades ago: “Licensing a nuclear power plant is…licensing random premeditated murder.  When you license a plant, you know what you’re doing, so its premeditated….The evidence on radiation producing cancer is beyond doubt. It’s not a question any more:radiation produces cancer and the evidence is good all the way down to the lowest doses.”

Do you

A.  Agree with government that population mixing is the cause of the “excess” of childhood leukaemia in areas of Cumbria

Or

B. Agree with Nuclear power pioneer Dr John Gofman that “Licensing a nuclear power plant is random premeditated murder ….the evidence is good all the way down to the lowest (radiation) doses”

yours sincerely,

Name

Address

 

 

BREAKING NEWS. ….as  we predicted the South Koreans have been wined and dined ….report in Utility Week ……

“South Korean investment could save Moorside
31/01/2017
South Korean investment in Moorside could help to safeguard the future of the proposed nuclear plant in Cumbria, New Nuclear Watch Europe has told Utility Week
The NuGen consortium which is developing Moorside is jointly owned by Toshiba and Engie. Toshiba announced on Friday it was reviewing its nuclear activities in response to a financial crisis, leaving a question mark over the future of the project.
“This is an anxiety but it’s one to which there is a solution, albeit probably at the cost of a little bit of time,” said Tim Yeo, who chaired the Energy and Climate Change Committee from 2010-2015 and is now chairman of the trade group New Nuclear Watch Europe. “I think what it will throw up is the possibility of bringing a new partner into the NuGen consortium”, he added.
South Korean utility Kepco was reported to be close to investing in the project in October, and in December the Times reported that representatives from the company had met with business and energy secretary Greg Clark.
“They’ve been a bit discouraged, I think, by the reception they’ve had in the UK,” said Yeo. “But my understanding is they are now talking to Toshiba about taking a stake… I think there’s no doubt that Kepco, with the full backing of the Korean government, is interested.”
He said Kepco’s involvement could delay the project if it insisted on using its own reactor technology as it would have to go through the lengthy Generic Design Assessment process. “That would set the programme back a bit,” he added.
“Going forward, we will revise the positioning of the nuclear business as our main focus business in the energy sector, and review the future of nuclear businesses outside Japan”, said Toshiba president and chief executive Satoshi Tsunakawa at a press conference on Friday.
The Japanese conglomerate is facing an undisclosed write-down amounting to “several billion US dollars” on the purchase of US nuclear construction firm CB&I Stone & Webster by its subsidiary Westinghouse. The plans for Moorside feature three AP1000 reactors supplied by Westinghouse with a combined capacity of 3.8GW.
Yeo said it is a “concern” that Toshiba is “obviously struggling to make any money from its nuclear activities”. However, he denied that the group’s financial meltdown is reflective of the nuclear industry as a whole.
He said there are “plausible explanations” as to why a number of nuclear firms have faced financial difficulties in recent years. “In the case of the EPR, the EDF project, those are associated, in my view, with the fact that it’s a first of a kind technology. The history of the nuclear industry over the last 50 years shows that first of a kind projects more often than not run into timetable and cost overruns.”
Earlier this month it was reported that Toshiba was seeking public financing for Moorside.
Author: Tom Grimwood,
Channel: Finance & investment

Demo 4th February in Workington Stand Up to Cancer – Stop Moorside

Government Warning.jpg

The 4th of February is World Cancer Day.  Radiation Free Lakeland will be in Workington’s town centre, meeting at the Look Out Clock , Ivison Lane.

from 10am to demonstrate Opposition to Moorside and Opposition to Continued Dumping of Carcinogenic Radioactive Wastes into the our rivers, seas, soil and air.  Reading the press it seems that almost everything gives you cancer EXCEPT RADIOACTIVE EMISSIONS!

We will have info to give out about our still unanswered questions to government and to the Director of Public Health in Cumbria about Population Mixing V Radioactive Emissions being the cause of “excess” childhood blood cancers.  Childhood cancers across the UK have gone up almost 30% since the nuclear industry started polluting.

Tim Farron MP has written repeatedly on our behalf and there have been independently written letters to the press about the government aligning itself with the view that a “mystery virus” due to population mixing from the influx of nuclear workers to a rural area is the reason for increased childhood cancers in the vicinity of nuclear installations.  Does the government intend to take responsibility for this belief and advise people of the risks of the proposed population mixing at Moorside and other new nuclear build?

Tim Farron Population Mixing letter 15th dec 2016.jpg  Or do they, like us, know very well that the increase in leukaemia has nothing to do with the pseudo science of a “mystery virus”.    The government and the Director of Public Health Cumbria have not answered our questions.

“Population Mixing” Theory Debunked

Radioactive Particles

Kinlen Theory Debunked By Dr Ian Fairlie

October 3, 2016

The Kinlen hypothesis debunked

A recent COMARE report on child cancers near NPPs was published on the day after the Government committed the UK to a new nuclear power station. This was not a coincidence: it is a prime example among many of nuclear policy-led science. We should have science-led policies but these rarely, if ever, occur on nuclear matters.

The report downplays radioactive releases from NPPs as an explanation for the nearby raised levels of cancers. Instead it champions the Kinlen hypothesis.

Since 1988, Professor Kinlen has been suggesting that increases in childhood cancers near nuclear facilities are due to an infective, perhaps viral, agent arising from the influx of new workers to rural areas. But most scientists throughout the world discredit this theory because of its myriad problems and inconsistencies.

First, the idea leads to the expectation of a sharp rise in leukaemia incidence, followed by a decline as the situation settles down. However at Dounreay and Sellafield most of the leukemias arose several decades after the population influxes. In addition, increased leukemias and NHLs continued long after the influxes had stopped and indeed were STILL occuring as recently measured in the 2000s, and are probably still arising today, were the Government to release all the relevant and most recent data.

Second, for the hypothesis to be true the leukaemias should occur in the indigenous population and not in the migrants. In fact, at Sellafield, the reverse is mainly the case.

Third, the theory does not explain why leukemias have arisen near nuclear facilities without population influxes, eg Aldermaston and dozens of reactors in other countries.

Fourth, and most tellingly, no infective agent or virus has ever been found despite intensive research over many decades.

Those who have worked in cancer research know that the infective theory of human cancer causation became a global obsession after the 1930s. For decades, the Imperial Cancer Research Fund was exclusively dedicated to a general infective theory of malignant disease. Also, the British Empire Cancer Campaign allocated much of its resources to a hunt for viruses that caused cancer and, year after year, promised its supporters imminent prevention of leukaemia by immunisation. In the 1960s, the US National Cancer Institute set up a large institute dedicated to the isolation and characterisation of viruses causing human cancer. But by the early 1980s, the building was used as a warehouse. This worldwide, protracted, and costly crusade failed to prove an infective cause for any human malignant disease.

It does not seem a wise scientific policy to try to reinstate an infective theory that has been so intensively explored and so decisively discredited.

 

Public Health and Moorside’s “Population Mixing”

Moorside - Because You're Worth It #StopMoorside Petition

Increased Childhood Leukemia caused by Population Mixing or Radioactive Emissions 0r both ?  Either or both – the industry and government appear to think that elevated rates of childhood leukaemia is a price worth paying for nuclear power.

Below is a letter to Cumbria County Council’s Director of Public Health – please write to him in your own words, feel free to use the information below.  Write to your MP, your GP, make a fuss…Resist!

Dear Colin Cox,

“POPULATION MIXING” AND
“THE BIGGEST NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE”

Controversy has been raging for decades about the link between childhood
leukemia and nuclear installations. In 2011 the headlines in the UKs
national and local media ran the story “Nuclear Power Plants Cleared of
Causing Leukaemia” Meanwhile, world-wide, over 60 studies have examined
cancer incidences in children near nuclear power plants. The German KIKK
study found up to 120% increase in leukemias among children under 5 years
old living with 5 km of all German Nuclear power plants . Here in the UK,
unwelcome findings were avoided by clever use of statistics. Instead, a
lot of effort has been put in by the industry and government to support
the theory of “population mixing” as a cause of increased childhood
leukaemia.

Alex Elliot the Chair of the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in
the Environment and a clinical physicist at the University of Glasgow, UK,
says that leukemia cluster researchers should look for causes other than
radiation. The UK government has taken seriously (and gratefully?) the
work of Leo Kinlen, an epidemiologist based at the University of Oxford,
UK. The Leo Kinlen theory, put forward in 1988, suggests that exposure to
a common unidentified infection through population mixing results
in Childhood Leukaemia.

“This exposure is greater”, Prof. Kinlen says, “when people from
urban areas mix with rural communities e.g. when construction
workers and nuclear staff move into the Sellafield area”.

Doctors Heather Dickinson and Louise Parker of Newcastle University
(which has strong links to the nuclear industry) claimed in 1999 that
their work backs up Professor Leo Kinlen’s population mixing theory
as the likely cause of the cluster of childhood leukaemia cases at
Seascale near Sellafield. “Population Mixing is a significant risk
factor for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma,
especially in young children, accounting for over 50% of cases in
Cumbria and most cases in Seascale”.

The population of West Cumbria is set to explode with the plan to house
thousands of temporary workers in what is essentially a rural area.

When those behind the proposal for the “biggest nuclear development in
Europe” were asked at a public meeting whether they would be issuing
a health warning regarding “population mixing” the response was a
blank stare.

There was an equally blank stare when they were asked if the Compensation
Scheme for Radiation Linked Diseases would be extended to the wider
population.

If the nuclear industry believes its own hype then…has there been any
inquiry at all into the numbers of childhood leukaemias that would be
caused by the proposed Population Mixing scheduled to take place in West
Cumbria?

Or is the detriment to childrens lives, the trauma to their families, the
cost to the NHS, considered a price well worth paying to keep the nuclear
military industrial complex alive?

Please will Cumbria County Council do all it can to protect the public of
Cumbria and at the very least urge a moratorium on the biggest new nuclear
build in Europe? The jury is still out on the causes of increased
childhood leukemia (and other radiation linked diseases) but the official
finger of suspicion falls on “population mixing.” The industry cannot
have it both ways.

yours sincerely

Marianne Birkby
on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland

 

References
Nuclear Power Stations Cause Childhood Leukemia and here’s the proof
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2525488/nuclear_power_stations_cause_childhood_leukemia_and_heres_the_proof.html

Population Mixing
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110506/full/news.2011.275.html
Newcastle University and Ian Fells http://powerbase.info/index.php/Ian_Fells
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/business/business-news/newcastle-company-head-push-create-9612055

POLICE CHIEF’S HOPES AND FEARS OVER POPULATION BOOM Wed 19 Jan 11http://www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/news/police-chief-s-hopes-and-fears-over-population-boom-1.800525?referrerPath=news

Quantifying the effect of population mixing on childhood leukaemia risk:
the Seascale cluster http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2374359/

Seeding Leukaemia http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/3346407/Did-Sellafield-workers-seed-leukaemia.html

The German Kikk study http://www.alfred-koerblein.de/cancer/english/kikk.htm

NuGen and Population Mixing

2112.vogtle_1

An Open Letter to the Mayor of Copeland : Mike Starkie

from Radiation Free Lakeland.
Dear Mayor Mike,

Thank you for organising the meetings regarding the rather intimidating
letters from NuGen. People are understandably upset about the possible
compulsary purchase of their homes in order to clear a space for the
building of temporary accommodation for thousands of nuclear workers.

We are a voluntary group and have many members based in Copeland who feel
that they are are on an unstoppable ride to untried untested new reactors.
They feel that any consultation which does not allow for an unequivocal
NO but merely looks for ideas on “mitigation” is a token gesture to
democracy.

What has not been made public by NuGen or the government is the
“population mixing” aspect of bringing in thousands of temporary workers
to what is an essentially rural area. The benefit of temporary workers to
the industry, is of course, that they are not included on the unemployment
figures for Cumbria at a later date.

The industry run a Compensation Scheme for Radiation Linked Disease for
the workforce while pooh poohing any health effects outside the military
fences of nuclear installations. Those outside the gates are not
compensated for health impacts. Rather the government and industry have
grabbed onto the “population mixing” hypothesis. “Population mixing” is
the government and industry’s preferred explanation for the excess of
leukemias (and other radiation linked diseases) in the vicinity of nuclear
installations. This begs the question of why the industry and government
are not flagging up a warning: “population mixing around nuclear
installations can seriously damage your child’s health.”

The Leo Kinlen theory, put forward in 1988, suggests that exposure to a
common unidentified infection through population mixing results in
Childhood Leukaemia. “This exposure is greater”, Prof. Kinlen says, “when
people from urban areas mix with rural communities e.g. when construction
workers and nuclear staff move into the Sellafield area”.

I attach correspondence with Dr Dickinson whose subsequent work has also
been seized on by government and industry. In explaining significantly
increased childhood cancers around nuclear plants the government has been
persuaded by the “population mixing” model rather than emissions from
nuclear power plants.

A paper Dr Dickinson wrote in 1999 describes population mixing as “a
significant risk factor for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and non-Hodgkin’s
lymphoma, especially in young children, accounting for over 50% of cases in
Cumbria and most cases in Seascale”.

Doctors Heather Dickinson and Louise Parker of Newcastle University
claimed in 1999 that their work backs up Professor Leo Kinlen’s population
mixing theory as the likely cause of the cluster of childhood leukaemia
cases at Seascale near Sellafield.
In correspondence with Dr Dickinson she referred me back
to the Department of Health who then referred me back to The North of
England Children’s Cancer Research Unit – a perfect circle of avoidance.

When I asked NuGen at a public meeting whether they would be issuing a
health warning regarding “population mixing” they looked at me blankly.
They looked equally blank when I asked if the Compensation Scheme for
Radiation Linked Diseases would be extended to the wider population.

Please can you find out if NuGen subscribe to the “population mixing”
theory and if so will they be issuing a health warning.

Yours sincerely,

Marianne Birkby
Radiation Free Lakeland