To the Editor,
Dr. Caldicott's position on nuclear power is deceptive and seriously flawed, and you should be very careful when publishing her material.[1]
First, global warming is not exacerbated by the nuclear fuel cycle when the energy to run it is generated by nuclear power as it is in France, which is 80% nuclear and 20% hydroelectric. That should also be our goal in the United States.
Second, nuclear spent fuel does contain dangerous isotopes, but what Dr. Caldicott fails to mention is that there is reprocessing technology that will allow for using the spent fuel to generate additional energy, leaving only fission products that will be radioactive for 200 years and that can be contained easily for that period of time.
Third, the morbidity and mortality of continuing on with fossil fuel combustion are staggering relative to the morbidity and mortality of nuclear power.
Although I appreciate Dr. Caldicott's concerns, I have little faith in her scientific analysis, and I encourage publishers, such as yourself, to examine her material very carefully.
Sincerely,
Philip Carlson, MD
Radiologist and Internist
Footnotes
Readers are encouraged to respond to Paul Blumenthal, MD, Deputy Editor of MedGenMed, for the editor's eyes only or for possible publication via email: pblumen@stanford.edu
References
- 1.Caldicott H. Nuclear power is contraindicated as a solution to global warming because of nuclear mutagenesis. MedGenMed. 2006;8:45. Available at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/548018 Accessed December 4, 2006. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
