Thyroid cancer, fracking and nuclear power

Other, more subtle sources may also be contributing to hiked thyroid cancer rates, like leaking nuclear power plants and hydraulic fracturing, both of which contaminate air, soil and groundwater with radiation and other nasty chemicals.

Indeed, remarking on this, Mangano (who recently co-authored a controversial study with toxicologist Janette Sherman suggesting a link between Fukushima fallout and US cancer deaths numbering from 14,000 to 20,000) said:

Iodine-131, or I-131, is a radioactive isotope produced by nuclear fission. 

Radiation isn’t released into the environment only via nuclear plants and bombs. Geologist Tracy Bank found that fracking mobilizes rock-bound uranium, posing a further radiation risk to our groundwater. She presented her findings at the American Geological Society meeting in Denver last November.

Because of some 65 hazardous chemicals used in fracking operations, former industry insider, James Northrup, calls it a “dirty bomb.” With 30 years of experience as an independent oil and gas producer, he explains:

What’s underground seeps into our groundwater.

Thomas House and his wife have become ill since New Dominion, LLC began drilling for oil and gas behind their home in Wellston, Oklahoma. He’s tested the water for barium and strontium, and indoor air quality for BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes and styrenes).

Though none of the levels exceed EPA standards, he insists the drilling operations are causing their illness.

“We have been getting sick from headaches, nose bleeds, rashes, vomiting, burning eyes, and breathing problems for the last year,” he told me.

House is reliant on the Veterans Administration for health care, but it refuses to test him for BTEX poisoning. 

NCI says that the main sources of radiation exposure are X-rays, nuclear fallout and radiated food and drinking water. The Centers for Disease Control reports that women are three times more susceptible to thyroid cancer than men, with white women being most susceptible. Rather than noticing any symptoms, most often, they discover a lump on their neck.

The good news is that 95 percent of thyroid cancer is successfully treated.

The bad news is that radiation exposure is also coming from our food and water supply.

For over a year, a Houston news station has been reporting on a governmental cover-up of radiation in drinking water. KHOU says that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality under-reported radioactive contaminants in drinking water for over 20 years.

But not just Texas authorities, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has also low-balled radiation stats by simply not looking for specific radioactive elements, which can be more common and more dangerous than, say, Strontium-90.

Eventually, Texas shut down two of Houston’s water wells shown to be radioactive.

From an investigative series by the Associated Press last year, we learned that 75 percent of US nuclear power plants leak radioactive materials. Documents from 48 of 65 commercial nuclear power sites showed that radioactive tritium leaked – often into groundwater – in concentrations exceeding the federal drinking water standard, and sometimes at hundreds of times the limit. 

The global fallout from Fukushima’s nuclear meltdown means our food and water absorbed radioactive fallout. But, we also see an increasing number of earthquakes from fracking operations that further threaten nuclear plants, which are old, leaking and “brittle” (AP’s word).

Information compiled by Treehugger last year showed that of the 104 commercial nuclear power plants and 34 nuclear research stations, many sit in seismically active locations.

Though earthquake risk in Texas is considered very low, last October, Atascosa County saw a rare 4.8 magnitude quake centered 130 miles from the South Texas Project nuclear power plant. The temblor originated in Fashing Field, a highly productive oil and gas field. One company, Momentum Oil and Gas, is producing 3.8 million cubic feet of gas per day from the field.

Many states that normally had very low seismicity have seen an incredible upswing in earthquake frequency with the advent of hydraulic fracturing, which the feds have long known about. As far back as 1966, federal authorities suspected the fracking-earthquake link so strongly that they shut down Rocky Mountain Arsenal’s 12,000-foot injection well after several quakes rattled Denver.

In 1981, researchers suggested that mobile pressure dynamics could explain epicenters some ways distant from such wells.

Ohio recently shut down two fracking waste injection wells after a New Year’s Eve earthquake, and last November New York imposed a statewide moratorium. Ohio has two nuclear power plants (both on Lake Erie) and New York has five, operating six reactors.

Ohio’s 5.0 earthquake on January 31, 1986 that rocked eleven states and Ontario, Canada was centered 11 miles south of the Perry Nuclear Plant. Researchers suggested the quake was induced by fracking, writing in 1988:

Not only preexisting fractures, but new ones created by the massive surge in earthquake swarms also present a risk. As modern horizontal fracturing techniques are employed, earthquake frequency goes up.

From 1900-1970, Arkansas experienced 60 earthquakes. After fracking operations picked up in the mid-1970s, that number jumped exponentially. Per the Advanced National Seismic System, in 2010 alone, Arkansas felt over 700 earthquakes; in 2011, it endured over 800.

The number of quakes in 2010 and ’11 represents a 2,400% increase over the number of quakes in the first 70 years of the 20^th century, before horizontal fracking began. With that spike in frequency, is it any wonder that a new fault has opened up in Arkansas? Geologists say the new fault shows a history of 7+ magnitude earthquakes.

Though the 2001-2005 thyroid incidence data reveals that Arkansas has the lowest incidence of thyroid cancer of all 45 states surveyed, that may change should the new fault become seismically active and damage the state’s two 40-year-old nuclear reactors.

Of note, Arkansas’ nuclear reactors are run by Entergy, which operates eleven others including 40-year-old Vermont Yankee (strontium-90 found in nearby fish last August) and New York’s nearly 40-year-old Indian Point (failed inspection and sought over 100 safety exemptions last year).

Pennsylvania is another strong fracking state, vulnerable to earthquakes originating within or outside its borders. It also houses nine nuclear reactors at five locations. A swarm of small earthquakes occurred near Dillsburg from 2008 until early 2011, reports the state’s Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources.

Dillsburg is 16 miles from Three Mile Island, which still operates one nuclear reactor.

Last August, most of the east coast felt a 5.8 magnitude quake whose epicenter was just 11 miles from two reactors at the North Anna nuclear power plant in Virginia. Both 30-year-old reactors had to be shut down. RT reports:

Radioactive particles damage bones, DNA and tissue, including the thyroid. Water softeners, ion exchange, carbon filters or reverse osmosis water-treatment systems can be installed in the home to reduce concentration levels. The National Sanitation Foundation certifies various products for efficacy in reducing or eliminating particular contaminants.

To reduce or eliminate radiation from food and water, see this compilation of articles recommending various techniques, including washing your vegetables in bentonite clay.

A more proactive way to protect the water supply is to decommission nuclear power plants and ban hydraulic fracturing, lest your hometown ranks among the 10 Most Radioactive Places on Earth.

*When the CDC surveyed states for thyroid cancer in its landmark 2001-2005 study, it neglected to publish data for Maryland, Mississippi, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

8 Comments on "Thyroid cancer, fracking and nuclear power"

BillT on Sun, 29th Jan 2012 3:20 am 



We are killing ourselves so we can drive to Walmart in our SUV and play video games all day when we are not in front of the propaganda machine (TV).

dsula on Sun, 29th Jan 2012 2:14 pm 



What is better, a long life in misery or a short life in comfort, happiness and abundance?

DC on Sun, 29th Jan 2012 3:51 pm 



dsula, are you trying to imply a long life w/o say…frak gas and private for-profit nuclear power would be misery? Care to qualify that? There are many accounts that people lived into there 70’s and 80’s in the Roman Empire. I have not read any accounts they were any more or less ‘miserable’ than we are today.And not a leaky decrepit nuke station to be seen, Nor do I understand how happiness is related to consumption.

I dont use nuclear power, or frak-gas(that im aware of!) nor am I much of a ‘comsumer’ these days. If I were to feel unhappy, its not because I long for more ‘stuff’. I leave that to people that love debt and shoddy designed to fail ‘goods’ cranked out by China and our toxic industries.

Windmills on Sun, 29th Jan 2012 5:04 pm 



The author gets quite liberal with the interpreations. I especially like the bit about quoting the largest sources of radiation exposure, and then refusing to discuss most of them that don’t support the preconceived conclusions. I don’t mean to say there aren’t real issues needing solutions here, but crusading like this skews objectivity and causes one’s credibility to start circling the toilet drain. No mention of periodic table of the elements stew that comes out of coal plants? No mention of the air currents that carry that to the eastern states? No mention that coal plants release three times as much radiation as nuclear plants? Of course not. That would interfere with our ulterior motives, wouldn’t it? Tsk tsk.

BillT on Mon, 30th Jan 2012 3:17 am 



Windmills…just what are our great grand kids going to go to keep from being killed by the radiation still being pumped out by our ‘stored’ spent fuel rods and stuff? When they do not have the money/resources to handle that stuff any more? And there are thousands of them all over the world that will rust and release all of that toxin into the system for thousands of years.

Nuclear energy is the most expensive, deadly energy we have ever come up with if you factor in the thousand or so years of necessary care and expense.

BillT on Mon, 30th Jan 2012 3:21 am 



BTW Windmills, your tsk tsk should be aimed at your own stupidity. It is more than the radiation released today, it is all that will be released in the next 1,000 plus years. Nature will take care of the carbon released easily, but it is not easy for it to take care of the concentrated radiation from spent fuel or radiated equipment. Do you live near a reactor? I bet not. Do you own stock in a nuclear company, I bet so.

Windmills on Mon, 30th Jan 2012 3:40 pm 



You lose both your bets. I live in Arizona, down wind of the Palo Verde nuclear station. And since I’m a teacher in a Republican anti-education state, I don’t have the money to invest in anything. The problems you mention are political and social, not technical.

Windmills on Mon, 30th Jan 2012 3:43 pm 



I think my main contention here is for people trying to take a stand on a public health issue to lose the hysteria. Be objective, not screechy and biased like the author, and you’ll gain more traction with a wider audience. If he can’t make his point without distorting and misrepresenting the facts, perhaps the author doesn’t have a very good point.