Not just increasing breast cancer rates among mature women but now ‘terrifying and almost unbuildable’ – Sizewell C nuclear power station does not seem to worry Scottish Labour

Support Talking-up Scotland's work to counter the lies and get you the facts, daily, at: https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/checkout/help-talking-up-scotland-tell-truth-about-scotland/payment/nBQxjVzq/details

Professor John Robertson OBA

Once again, thanks to Dottie for alerting me to this.

From the FT, yesterday:

The design of the UK’s latest nuclear power station is “terrifying”, “phenomenally complex” and “almost unbuildable”, according to Henri Proglio, a former head of EDF, the French state-owned utility behind the project. 

One month after the final green light for Sizewell C, 1,700 workers are on site in Suffolk, on the UK’s east coast, preparing the sandy marshland for two enormous reactors that will eventually generate enough electricity for 6mn homes.

The plant will be a replica of the European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) design that is running four to six years late and 2.5 times over budget at Hinkley Point C in Somerset, which has had problems wherever it has been built, in France, Finland and China.

Disturbing though it may be to hear that an engineer would be terrified at the prospect of building it, I suspect the local population, especially mature women, might have more cause to be terrified should they manage to build it.

Why?

Lesson for opponents of nuclear power in Scotland as researchers revisit study of Essex nuclear power station and breast cancer incidence among mature women nearby to find an even greater risk, only a short distance from new Sizewell C, and ‘establishment bias and cover-up’

In March 2001, independent researchers, commissioned by local residents living near Bradwell nuclear power station in Essex, published Cancer Mortality and Proximity to Bradwell Nuclear Power Station in Essex, 1995-99; Preliminary results showing:

substantial excess mortality risks, particularly from breast cancer in women who had lived in wards adjacent to the river Blackwater. This finding was similar to the findings of earlier studies on coastal populations near the Irish Sea and near the Hinkley Point nuclear site in Somerset.2

Soon after, local authority researchers criticised the above research and with access to statistics denied to the first group, insisted:

no evidence of any statistically significant increases in cancer in any ward in the study area and that the risks of cancer in populations living in annular areas described by circles around the nuclear site of radii 4, 10 and 17km around the plant showed no association with proximity to the plant.3

A year later, the first researchers revisited their findings and accepted some errors but stated:

there is no difference in the overall result, as we shall show.

Two results are immediate. First the corrected files make the estuary effect more apparent, since the Maldon wards now have more breast cancer deaths after the correction, and second, the effect is reinforced after the inclusion of the two extra years 2000 and 2001.4

and now claim:

Analysis of the corrected file for 1995-99 for the 26 ward area confirms the existence of significantly raised breast cancer mortality in wards which border the mud flats and creeks of the river Blackwater compared with wards which do not. This finding is reinforced slightly by the correction. Thus we see that the Blackwater estuary wards have (Table 4) 58% more breast cancer deaths than the non-Blackwater wards.5

In the full research report the authors reveal deliberate attempts by the local authority researchers to:

cover up a significant health problem and its source. 6

They conclude with damning comments which reinforce what I have written repeatedly about the importance of being deeply sceptical of official statements downplaying the risks of nuclear energy in Southern Scotland:

Ever since the 1983 discovery of the Sellafield (Seascale) leukaemia cluster it has become increasingly apparent to people living near nuclear sites that the epidemiological examination of radiation risk has been the subject of bias and cover-up at a very high level. It is also clear to these people that the reassurances they are given by the organisations who are paid to protect their health are worthless. If the truth about radiation and health is to be discovered, then accurate mortality and incidence data must be discovered, and statistical and epidemiological analysis should be undertaken by environmental groups funded by government, as well as by establishment groups. However, in recent years regional Cancer Registries have intensified restrictions on releasing incidence data, withholding figures which, according to their own Guidelines, ought to be available on request. The notable exception is that in 1995 the Wales Cancer Registry released its entire small area cancer incidence database to Green Audit – an event which was followed swiftly by closure of the WCR and a complex of data destruction and denial which COMARE signally failed to investigate in an even handed fashion.

There is not a level playing field in this debate. On one side there are small independent environmental research groups working under difficult conditions with inadequate information being attacked by the establishment and funded at a pathetic level by groups of local citizens. On the other side are the weighty government organisations with budgets of millions of pounds and departments full of qualified researchers.

It is to be welcomed that the opposition or ‘dialogical’ approach to examining risk in this area has now been accepted and partly put into practice in the new CERRIE committee. This approach has the capacity to deal with the scientific advice problem. However, the affair of breast cancer near Bradwell shows that there is a large trust deficit remaining in this area, associated with the internal operations of SAHSU, the Cancer Registries and COMARE. This is not an isolated affair: similar attacks, denials, cover-ups and shenanigans have occurred following Green Audit studies of cancer on the Welsh and Irish coasts and near Hinkley Point and Oldbury nuclear power stations. There is also the problem of the funding of citizen groups who wish to have an independent analysis of the situation, and the release of data to these groups to make such studies possible. The present situation is unacceptable.7

Sources:

  1. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://llrc.org/llrc/health/subtopic/bradrep5.pdf
  2. ibid page 2
  3. ibid page 2
  4. ibid page 3
  5. ibid page 8
  6. ibid page 10
  7. ibid pages 10-11

9 thoughts on “Not just increasing breast cancer rates among mature women but now ‘terrifying and almost unbuildable’ – Sizewell C nuclear power station does not seem to worry Scottish Labour”

  1. HOW MANY UNIONISTS LIVE AND WORK IN THIS AREA

    AND ARE THEY PREPARED TO SACRIFICE ALL OF THEIR SUPPORTERS

    TO A HORRIBLE AGONISING DEATH FROM SIZWELL

    Like

    Reply

  2. A common condescending dismissal of such statistical data analyses such as that quoted is: ‘A correlation is not a cause’.

    The philosopher, David Hume, was correct in giving this caution. However, when there is a statistically significant correlation it is a pointer that that it is worth examining this issue in more detail to try to identify if there is a causal link.

    With regard to radiation, there is now a lot of findings about its effects on body tissues and plausible explanations of the physical and biochemical processes involved. The fact that people working in facilities which utilise radioactive materials and electromagnetic radiation wear protective clothing at all times, have to shower at the end of shifts, are permitted to work for only time limited periods and are regularly monitored for radioactivity in their bodies indicates an acceptance that there is a causal link.

    What we have in the Essex study is people who are living close to the nuclear plant who do not wear protective clothing who have a higher than normal incidence of cancer compared to the general population. Studies have indicated that radiation levels in areas around nuclear facilities are higher than elsewhere. So, as there is a concomitant relationship between radiation levels and the incidence of cancers the activities of power station is the cause of these cancers.

    In Clydebank, women whose husbands worked with asbestos in the shipyards had as high rates of mesothelioma as their husbands and this according the asbestos company owners and their heartless lawyers ‘proved’ that asbestos was not the cause of the men’s illness, because their wives, ‘who were not working with asbestos’ got ill, too.

    But the wives WERE working with asbestos – they were washing by hand their husbands’ working clothes, releasing asbestos fibres into the air and breathing them in.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  3. “Sizewell C nuclear power station does not seem to worry Scottish Labour”…..

    Scottish Labour do what they are telt ……because it is Labour HQ who are in charge…..and there is no actual “Scottish” Labour…..they are only referred to as being the “Scottish” contingent of Labour because they stand as candidates , of a UK party, in elections, who then hope to be elected in a “Scottish” parliament……

    They use “Scottish” as part of their title to con voters in Scotland into thinking that they will work for Scotland….they will not….they will only work for Labour HQ…..

    That then includes them ‘allowing’ and so letting Labour HQ impose upon Scotland “terrifying”, “phenomenally complex” and “almost unbuildable” Nuclear power stations and then also Scotland being forced to store , as in house, their UK weapons of mass destruction …..whether we want them or not….because we , Scotland, are also expected to do what we are telt by all UK political parties , including Labour HQ, when they become the UK government(s)……….simples…..or rather not so simples….for us in Scotland.

    Liz S

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  4. O/T

     A former ‘Scottish’ Labour councillor who quit the party amid a row over “racist” comments has joined Reform UK….sounds about right….(she was suspended last year by Labour but then she quit Labour, was an Independent, and now sits as an unelected Reform UK Councillor…..wow Reform UK are rising….within Scotland….thanks to defections from various levels of politicians……from both Labour and the Tory party).

    Her name ?

    Audrey Dempsey….I need to know more on this…so I will check on the BBC website as it is already, as a political story, on the website of STV News….

    Here goes…..it’s on there…Hurrah…as of 13 minutes ago…but already it is the 4th article on their Scotland main page….the 4th from 13 minutes ago…what ?

    It is not on their BBC Scottish Politics page…this…checks bloody notes….political story……as the BBC regards it as another scandal to be filed under…………

    #WheeshtForLabour

    She, Dempsey, had “incorrectly claimed there had been a rise in “racist attacks on white children and teachers” …..

    Well incorrect apparently but what seems most correct is the “rise” in those politicians willing to promote “racist attacks” via their theories and non existent realities , who then decide to join Reform UK from their former established so called mainstream parties , like the Tories and the Labour party….a home from home really ….when one also listens to both Labour and the Tories and their also targeting, via their othering of non white people, who are asylum seekers…..thus legitimising Reform UK’s disgusting language and policies on immigrants to their UK.

    Now 25 minutes old this article on the BBC website…and it is still…for now…the 4th article on main Scottish page….it will descend further….soon….and then be gone…as only #SNPBAD articles have a prolonged life on the BBC website……to verify this check out the various #SNPBAD articles still on their Scottish Politics page from days ago…..yet no room for this latest Labour political scandal on their Scottish Politics page.

    Liz S

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Same day…it’s now 13.41pm and re my above comment at 11.21am….this article is now the 5th article on the main Scottish page….so already down one place after being on that page for 1 hour only……

      However it is now also on the Scottish Politics page – top story (so far)….but really….for how long will it be top story on that page ?

      BTW on both pages the headline is “Councillor who made ‘white racism’ claim joins Reform” so………

      #NoPartyNameYetAgain….as in once more……..

      #WheeshtForLabour

      So as a commentator on here the other week stated….are they, the BBC, reading this (and other comments too on social media) as post our critique then miraculously, former things which were missing on their website articles, suddenly appear.

      (Last week they, the BBC , initially omitted the –Labour– party name in a headline on their website – who they, the BBC, referred to as being simply a “Fife Councillor jailed for grooming and sex offences against a young girl”)

      Ah but today with Councillor defection story to Reform UK then once again their headline omits the party name….as in “Councillor who made ‘white racism’ claim joins Reform”….oh dear.

      So one step forward and then one step back (again) as the BBC’s old and bad habits are seemingly way too hard to break when communicating political news in and to Scotland……

      So it should be “Former Labour Councillor who made ‘white racism’ claim joins Reform”…..

      Liz S

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  8. Pingback: Does Douglas Alexander want to go back to the bad old days of Labour with far more crime, old folk too scared to walk home in the dark, infected blood supplies, fewer affordable homes, the toleration of sex worker rapes, increasing drug deaths, more derel

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.