Working with radiation induces smaller but more aggressive cancer cells leading to tumours further challenging Labour and Tory plans to force nuclear energy on Scotland

In Science Daily, yesterday, the above.

Readers know well, the agenda here is always to explore and downsides of UL Labour’s nuclear energy plans for Scotland.

What follows is a good example of how to work with AI.

It asked: Does this research have any implications for the safety of nuclear energy production?

26 seconds later – No.

Nuclear safety research addresses entirely different topics (e.g., reactor physics, thermal-hydraulics, severe accident progression, probabilistic risk assessment, materials performance under irradiation, or long-term geological disposal of waste). Nothing in the described findings or methods applies to those domains.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/10/261013015835.htm

I almost gave up but my inner Cairn Terrier got up and said: Might working with radioactive materials increase these risks?

25 seconds and at first nothing but then:

In the context of the tetraploid/smaller-cell findings from the Virginia Tech research you referenced earlier, radiation is relevant because it can induce tetraploid and polyploid cells. Some of these can survive, undergo depolyploidization, and generate progeny that may contribute to tumor heterogeneity, treatment resistance, or recurrence. Laboratory work has shown radiation-induced polyploid giant cancer cells that can later produce smaller, proliferating daughter cells.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304383525005877

Earlier posts here highlighting risks to nuclear workers:

How UK Labour might follow the Trump Administration ‘doing something horrifying to workers at nuclear facilities’
Second major research study finds ‘much higher’ rates of common cancers in nuclear plant workers to further undermine Labour’s energy strategy

Discover more from Talking-up Scotland

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 thoughts on “Working with radiation induces smaller but more aggressive cancer cells leading to tumours further challenging Labour and Tory plans to force nuclear energy on Scotland”

  1. Don’t forget the Libs below is from Jamie Stone.
    My party’s policy is to support small modular reactors,
    Highland council, the local authority, is just the same as the other councils we have heard about. It is keen to get a new reactor, an SMR, at Dounreay.

    This is who runs HC Scottish National Party (SNP) Group and the Highland Independent Group. I don’t think the SNP are in favour so is Stone telling lies.
    Below is from Hansard
    https://www.parallelparliament.co.uk/mp/jamie-stone/debate/2026-10-14/commons/westminster-hall/nuclear-energy-scotland

    Like

    Reply

    1. “Don’t forget the Libs below is from Jamie Stone”.

      Jamie Stone the amateur pantomime Dame.

      Educated at Gordonstoun, where both Prince Philip and King Charles also attended as boys.

      His “Nuclear” spoken contributions in the HOC include the debates on:

      Nuclear Energy: Scotland on 14 October 2026

      Small Modular Reactors: Jobs on 7 July 2026

      Draft Nuclear Safeguards (EU Exit and Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 on 17 June 2026

      Clean Energy Projects on 21 January 2026 where his contribution was this:

      “When it comes to clean energy, I think we are all delighted to see that a new nuclear power plant will be constructed in Wales. Does the Minister agree that it is worse than a crying shame—in fact, it is a disgrace—that the Scottish Government set their face totally against any nuclear developments in Scotland, such as at Dounreay in my constituency”?

      I think the real “disgrace” here is Jamie stone supporting and defending the imposition of some potential nuclear power developments being built within Scotland.

      Mind you Stone also contributed to the debate on “English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill” on 2 September 2025 and his contribution in that debate was this:

      ” Madam Deputy Speaker, you many wonder why a Scot would make an intervention at this point in the debate. May I advise the right hon. Lady to look north, to Scotland, to see how this should not be done? The Scottish Government have centralised powers, taking them right away from communities such as mine. That is how we should not do it. This is a cautionary tale”

      I suggest the real “cautionary tale” here is in voting for Jamie Stone as a Lib Dem in Scotland, then as a voter you will always see people like him put another nation’s (England) interests before Scotland’s – given that he also supports Nuclear in Scotland means that he has scant regard for the health and welfare of the people who live within Scotland .

      What is Jamie Stone’s suggestions for , or opinion on, Nuclear waste and where it should be dumped ?

      On 6 February 2007 the BBC did this article:

      “UKAEA admits to illegal dumping”

      “The operator of a nuclear complex in Caithness has admitted illegally dumping waste and allowing radioactive particles to be flushed into the sea. The UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) pleaded guilty to four charges under the Radioactive Substances Act at Wick Sheriff Court. They relate to activities at Dounreay between 1963 and 1984. Sheriff Andrew Berry has deferred sentence after hearing from the fiscal and UKAEA’s solicitor. Fiscal Alistair MacDonald told the court that the cost of dealing with the particles would be borne by taxpayers. For UKAEA, solicitor David Stewart said it was accepted that the events should not have occurred. He also said that the industry had moved on, learning from its mistakes of the past. UKAEA’s court appearance followed a report to the procurator fiscal by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa).
      The company admitted illegally dumping solid nuclear waste in a landfill site at Dounreay and three charges of allowing fragments of irradiated nuclear fuel to enter the plant’s liquid effluent discharge pipe into the Pentland Firth”.

      As to Jamie Stone, well it seems that you can take the boy out of Gordonstoun but you cannot take Gordonstoun out of the man.

      Also as an aside , a Pantomime Dame (Jamie’s wee sideline) is often considered as being a character who is brash , brash as in speaks without a filter, so then with Jamie at WM it is a case of his political contributions imitating his ‘artistic’ side.

      That , as a behaviour and position, is not good for Scotland, but instead it helps to aid those various HQ parties at WM , and also all of the other ‘Proud Scots but’ house Jocks, to then keep defending and supporting Britain (England) First.

      Liz S

      Like

      Reply

  2. Not content with trying to force Nuclear upon Scotland, it may also be a case of forcing more drilling of oil and gas upon those of us who oppose the further continuation of fossil fuels being used for energy , this would be via new Oil and Gas fields being potentially given the go ahead by Burnham’s Labour UK government.

    As it is being reported that “Burnham – Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas decisions coming ‘shortly'”.

    Well now that the heatwaves and wild fires are no longer a threat within the UK State , as our very hot summer is over, then now may be regarded by the government as the most opportune moment for them to give the ‘green’ light on the very much non ‘green’ solution to energy.

    Where will that leave Labour’s 2024 , much heralded by them, Green revolution ?

    Another non starter perhaps , just like GB Energy Ltd that promised so very much and yet now has delivered so little, indeed it’s impact is negligible.

    Maybe that’s why many of us doubt Burnham’s promises for “deeper devolution”, or rather a new kind of planned Labour evolved devolution that we, within Scotland, never voted for.

    Which as an announcement, he , Burnham, decided that the best time to come up to Scotland to speak upon it was during the SNP Party Conference.

    This was, for Burnham, an opportune moment for his political intervention , that was, as a political intervention, clearly timed to try to take the spotlight away from the SNP and onto him and his plans for devolution.

    Now that is suspect, and it also kind of makes you question his true character, in him being so very sneaky in doing this , as in to time this political announcement at such a obviously inopportune , that is an inappropriate moment.

    So then we had no Scotland included, as a visit, in Burnham’s recent UK Listening Tour , as apparently Burnham did not want to listen to us the people of Scotland.

    However now we get Burnham coming up to Scotland , not to listen to us, but to tell us what he and his UK government wants and needs to do to our devolution in Scotland.

    That is that Scotland the country is to be aligned with what is happening, and will happen further, in English regions.

    “Deeper devolution” in Scotland ?

    Is that not just a ploy to stem the rise of support for independence in Scotland ?

    How about Burnham giving that £200 million to Scotland via the National Wealth Fund, money that was promised to Grangemouth by the Labour UK government, of which Douglas Alexander was also a part of as the SOS against Scotland.

    Apparently, as yet, “not a single penny of the £200 million pledged for Grangemouth through the National Wealth Fund has been spent or committed yet”.

    In October “Freedom of Information (FOI) responses from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) confirmed that £0 of the fund has been deployed or allocated to projects in Grangemouth”.

    “The £200 million package was originally announced by the UK Government in February 2025 following the wind-down of crude oil refining at the site”.

    Meanwhile in other news : “The UK government had stepped in to take major steelworks in England into public ownership to protect national steel supply and safeguard thousands of jobs”.

    So instead of Burnham coming up here to tell us what we actually need and what we should actually want, how about him supporting Scottish industry more than his predecessor did (as in the same predecessor – Starmer – who chose the very same person as SOS against Scotland, Douglas Alexander after dumping Ian Murray) .

    Of course the SOS position in the UK government is simply a role that is actually defined as being WM’s man in Scotland , with that person doing the bidding of his or her masters at HQ.

    I mean where the Hell were Ian Murray and Douglas Alexander as SOS against Scotland, when Grangemouth Oil Refinery was abandoned and betrayed by their Labour UK government ?

    Forget about words , it’s action Scotland needs.

    Unfortunately the only action we get with any UK government within Scotland is the kind that seems to benefit mostly them as a UK government , also any other actions taken by any UK government seems to benefits others more than Scotland , and as for Scotland, well as per, it is always a case of us not seeing nor gaining any benefits for us within their UK State.

    That is why independence is the best and the only solution for Scotland, as things for us in Scotland can only get far worse if we stay within their UK State.

    Liz S

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply