Britain's Dirty Cities More Dangerous Than an A-bomb
Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower
Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss
DrugReporter:
Why Are We Locking Up Traumatized Veterans for Their Addictions Instead of Offering Them Treatment?
Penny Coleman
Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon
Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton
Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman
Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive
Media and Technology:
Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh Stoking GOP Civil War
Eric Boehlert
Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler
Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker
Reproductive Justice and Gender:
"Precious" Star Claims the Spotlight
Emily Wilson
Rights and Liberties:
Hard to Believe: 73 U.S. Kids Sentenced to Life Without Parole at 14 or Younger, and All Are Black
Liliana Segura
Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley
Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders
Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten
World:
Afghanistan Is Worse Off Than Ever, Thanks to the Sham Army We're Propping Up
Chris Hedges
Air pollution in major cities is potentially more damaging to health than being exposed to the radioactive fallout of an atomic bomb, according to a report published this week.
The study suggests that high levels of urban air pollution cut life expectancy by more than the radiation exposure of emergency workers sent into the 19-mile exclusion zone around the Chernobyl disaster.
Millions of people were exposed to dangerous levels of radiation when the former Soviet nuclear power plant in what is now the Ukraine exploded on 26 April 1986. But the latest findings suggest that the consequences of radiation exposure suffered by survivors of the incident, or the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan by the US in 1945, may be less damaging than previously thought.
Although 30 people died immediately in the two explosions at Chernobyl and up to 16,000 deaths have been linked to the radiation plume that spread across Europe, the research found that moving from Inverness to London could have a worse effect on your health than moving to Chernobyl.
The study follows a report last month from The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, which said air pollution was responsible for 24,000 premature deaths in Britain every year. Sir John Lawton, chairman of the commission, said the Government had consistently failed to tackle rising levels of chemicals in the atmosphere of cities.
Other findings showed that women living in areas of higher pollution were at greater risk of heart disease and death, while children living within 500 metres of motorways suffered more permanent lung damage and lower life expectancy, probably because of their greater exposure to pollutants in vehicle fumes.
Jim Smith, a scientist at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, who carried out the research, assessed the health risks faced by those at Chernobyl directly after the explosion and those who set up home in the exclusion zone afterwards. He compared them with air pollution, obesity and passive and active smoking.
He concluded the Chernobyl group absorbed radiation equivalent to more than the amount emitted during 1,200 chest x-rays, which was likely to cause one extra death in a hundred by increasing the risk of cancer.
The health risks associated with air pollution and passive smoking appear more severe. Pollution in central London increased mortality due to heart disease by 2.8 per cent compared with Inverness, Britain's least polluted city, while living with a smoker increases mortality by 1.7 per cent, the study found.
Writing in the journal BMC Public Health, Dr Smith said: "It is well known that radiation can potentially cause fatal cancers in people, even at relatively low doses. But our understandable fear of radiation needs to be placed in the context of other risks.
"The immediate effects of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs led to approximately 210,000 deaths. However, radiation exposures experienced by the most exposed group of survivors led to an average loss of life expectancy significantly lower than that caused by severe obesity or active smoking."
However, Dr Smith said his calculations were limited by the fact that they excluded wider social and lifestyle factors, which could have an impact on health.
See more stories tagged with: united kingdom, public health, radioactive, climate
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »
Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.