Could the open air testing of A- and H-bombs in the 40's and 50's be connected to the rash of lung cancers in non-smokers who were 15 years and under during that time?
Asked by
skfinkel (
13542
)
January 27th, 2009
I just saw a program about Oppenheimer and the making of the bombs. One has to wonder about the air quality on the developing lungs of those born between 1945 and when they finally began testing underground. Epidemiologists?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
3 Answers
Interesting. I would imagine that the dose and proximity to the location of the tests would be key. In addition, one likely culprit in the development of lung cancers in non-smokers is second hand smoke. Since smoking was (and continues to be) so prevalent in the 40s and 50s, I would venture to say that second-hand smoke is as likely (if not more so), than radiation.
One way to get a general idea of this is to try to find data on non-smokers born between 1930 and 1948 (aboveground testing in the US anyway stopped in 1963), and try to find a correlation with geography. The highest cases should be downwind of nuclear test sites, and the lowest cases should be in areas less affected.
This map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_fallout_exposure.png would be a useful source for this. I’m not finding a source for 2nd hand smoke cancer rates, but I’m sure one’s around.
It’s an interesting hypothesis, but I’d suspect 2nd hand smoke in that age group over fallout.
There is the whole controversy surrounding the 1956 movie The Conqueror.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
