Bronco Lane.
The National Academy of Sciences 7th report published in 2006 discusses the health of populations living near nuclear power facilities. Lists 16 ecological studies and 3 case-control studies on populations that live near nuclear facilities. Overall the best judgement is of no increased risk.

By the very nature of the problem “random controlled trials” are not possible. Whereas case-control studies usually have small numbers and therefore low statistical power. While “Randomized intervention trials (RIT) on humans, that is irradiating otherwise healthy subjects are ethically objectionable. Even to contemplate such an experiment is totally abhorrent.

So let us consider some of the factors to be taken into account when forming a scientific judgment.
• The selection of cases and controls. Randomisation is rarely possible in the selection process. Thus “selection bias" may be unavoidable, but every effort should be made to reduce this bias.
• The study area (such as distance in km from a geographical landmark is arbitrary.
• The Period of study is arbitrary.
• Ecological studies do not include data on individual exposure. A Surrogate exposure maybe a fixed distance from a power plant. It is assumed that every body living in a geographical area has the same exposure level assigned to that region.
• It is known that radiation emission from nuclear power stations are very low indeed please refer to UNSCEAR 2000 Annex C vol 1:182-188.
• Most studies do not confirm individual disease outcomes. There is known to be error in mortality reported from death certification, or in public health surveillance programs. Questionnaire studies introduce their own series of bias. For instance memory bias or badly framed questions etc. Cancer registries are usually a good source for data on incidence rates.
• Studies over prolonged periods need to take into account migratory population movements.
• Confounding and interactive factors such as smoking, alcohol intake, social class, Infective illness, dietary factors, genetic factors, other environmental hazards; all have to be carefully evaluated.
• Expert statistical input is required at all stages from study design, execution and reporting.

[To be continued].

Broncho Lane [Continued].

If we agree that a meta-analysis of several RIT studies is not possible or even desirable in this area. We are in agreement that there is no available gold standard. On the other hand the lowest level for evidence is uncontrolled anecdotal observations from biased reporters.

In brief we are forced to make a judgment call on inconclusive data such as ecological studies and small sized non random case-control studies. In this way the reader is helped, if there is knowledge that the work was published in reputable scientific journals.
There is always reader bias in our evaluation of the scientific reputation of the authors and in the reputation of their affiliated institutions. One other matter I am limited in my ability to examine documents in languages other then English.

You may be interested to read in yesterdays posting on the UIC site that a survey of 1150 persons living within 16km of USA power plants indicated strong support for nuclear energy. Over 90% thought it important for future energy supplies.

An editorial in the current Weekend Australian is also favourable to nuclear power.

Finally, you are correct in recognising my strong personal bias against the various anti-nuclear advocacy groups. This may be as you claim “blinkered.”

The following quotations are attributed to the late Nobel Laureate Richard Feynman.

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.”

"Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out

Bronco Lane

Scepticism is a requirement when being fed glowing reports on the safety of nuclear by the industry which has the most to gain.

A recent video titled "Something in the Air - Kwinana Pollution," is accessible by googling those words.

Kwinana is a heavy industrialised suburb in Western Australia where citizens are constantly bombarded with hazardous and carcinogenic stack emissions. The regulators remain in complete denial, despite the fact that the Health Department's graph revealed that Kwinana residents have the highest rate of cancer in the state.

Interestingly, after viewing the cancer graph, community members requested a copy, however, that graph somehow became "lost."

Luckily, the highly respected Dr Woollard was able to substantiate the cancer figures and had this to say:

"They (regulators) are in absolute denial with their heads in the sand. This is disgraceful!"

Dr Michio Kaku, is a Professor of physics, the world's leading authority on Einstein's Unifield, author of nine books and has published over 70 scientific articles in physics journals. He is a Fellow of the American Physical Society, an honour held by about ten percent of the nation's top physicists. He had this to say:

"A few years ago, I was in Los Angeles debating a senior engineer from the Bechtel Corporation on the $2 billion nuclear plant at Diablo Canyon where the reactor was installed backwards by accident. The containment annulus containing the sensitive emergency core cooling systems was installed 180 degrees backwards which made two plants now back to front.

"The nuclear industry became the laughing stock of the world. But that's not all that's backwards. The heads of the utilities are screwed on backwards also where they are putting expediency before the health and safety of the people of this country."

So while proponents are singing the praises of the "new age nuclear technology" they remain silent on the scores of accidents in this industry, a result of human error. No technology in the world can compensate for human error or corruption, particularly when the industry is rife with lucifers, dunderheads and unethical governments and corporations!

If Labor is to POTECT AND SERVE then it must reconsider Nuclear

This article http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/governments-latest-poll-shock/2007/08/26/1188066918904.html suggests Labor could win the November election on the basis of a government prepared to invest in infrastructure and education, for the days beyond the resources boom, ie. Peak-Oil.

One aspect of education is science and in particular the science of THERMODYNAMICS.

Added to the three reasons I have already stated for Labor embracing nuclear power:

* The second-law-of-Thermodynamics states that energy gradients create order and thus intelligence. Take away energy sources from that gradient and things like order and prosperity in human civil systems vanish. And given the recent experience of Rwanda's warlords, we all KNOW what will happen in our large cities around PeakOil. ONLY BASELOAD Nuclear power can take up the shortfall of our current energy requirements when petrol hits
the magical $10/litre. Peter Garrett especially take note.

* Pebble-Bed-Reactors are the only option and Labor must consider coal industries pose greater (utah mine, emphysema) numerical threats. !Begin a safe, secure and PROFITABLE PBR industrial behemoth industry in Australia!. Given dire future circumstances, PBR industries must remain regulated to avoid undesirable private-profit-leakage jeopordising our future .

* Russia is currently selling small naval reactors to nations for small cities. This is our market and I reiterate:

.It is not possible for radionuclides to leak from ceramic Pebbles so they cannot be used for bombs.
.They can't leak radiation as a poison and
.They can't let the Uranium recongregate to create a reactor meltdown.
.When GEOTHEMAL power finally gets 'up', pebbles can be safely dumped at sea in secure deep-sea geological subduction zones.

Pebbles ARE SAFE.

*To PROTECT and SERVE, Labor will need to have 'deterrence'. to Preventing foreign nations with multicultural enclaves taking key-installations and our nuclear bounty is priority#1. You cannot achieve this with conventional armies. They're totally dependent on oil.

Don't let us down Labor with short sighted NIMBY paranoia. Its time to take the reins, PROTECT and SERVE.

I must admit that since I have come onto this opinion site apart from listening arguments the extreme right wing who do have their axe to grind because of profit, weapon defence to protect that profit, control the replacement for black gold. I do not ever hear the arguments for nuclear from a work mate, a neighbour, a relative or friend. This is why The Nationals have convinced John Howard to promise a referendum because every local member of parliament or senator that I have asked would you campaign for a nuclear reactor in our electorate and the answer is certainly not. Anti Green if you go into google and type in a word with cancer any word it will give you a true indication to say if there is a link. Right my first word say (whey cancer) good an anti cancer agent, (Broccolli Cancer) good again. Right now (Nuclear Cancer) whoops the cause. O'k (Uranium Cancer) Oh No Utah and the Navajo Indian this is what I mean when you know that Governments are blinkered just as they were with tobacco and asbestos, Formaldehyde, DDT, Wood Presevatives, lead in paint etc. It was only due to progressive people campaigning to shame governments that these known killers were legislated against. Those that are for Nuclear Power please do your research on Strotium B 90 and those that have experienced close contacts with Nuclear Power Australia has not experienced the suffering yet and I only hope that we will always have a Government that will not put us through that experience. Dickie you are a precious person it is a relief that we do have people like yourself that is helping to educate those that do not realise.

If Australia dug out all its Uranium ore and produced not PBR but filthy Russo style mini nuclear fuel and reactors we still would not cause as much suffering as Road Carnage.

The Aussy love affair with their cars hides such great ugliness that none of us wish to see or feel. Over 1000 deaths each year and 5 times that number of horrific injuries. Year in year out.

And more important, the human world has not yet seen the kind of carnage that PeakOil will bring. The World Wars and Stalin's terror were a walk in the park by comparison to what is about to come unless we develop an interim nuclear strategy to maintain national and to a significant extent, global ORDER through creation and maintenance of a replacement, clean, baseload power source for oil and coal.

Time is running out .... petrol prices are being artificially held low for now .... the clock is TICKING.