Skip to main content
Deutsches Ärzteblatt International logoLink to Deutsches Ärzteblatt International
letter
. 2009 Jun 5;106(23):394. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2009.0394b

Correspondence (reply): In Reply

Peter Kaatsch *
PMCID: PMC2712247

The correspondence reflects a part of the wide range of comments that were discussed in the context of our study on nuclear power stations, which was published in international and national peer reviewed journals (1, 2, 3). The aspects presented are therefore not offering us new perspectives. It is important to point out that the statement in the correspondence from the IPPNW—stating that causes other than emissions from nuclear power stations could be eliminated in our study—is based on a misunderstanding. As we have shown repeatedly, we were technically not able to analyze potential factors of influence in our study. There is a fundamental difference between saying that the influence of certain factors cannot be evaluated or that certain factors can be eliminated. In the 2006 study cited by IPPNW (4), we already said that our study cannot be used to investigate general risk factors. It may be true that children have a different sensitivity to radiation than adults. It therefore makes sense to question the existing, approved calculation models for dose estimates and maybe replace these with better models. We are therefore grateful that the German Radiation Protection Commission with its wide expertise on radiation biology and physiology deals with these questions (5)—prompted by our study to no small degree. The suggestion of one correspondent—namely, to examine the bone marrow of children who died from leukemia near power stations—seems attractive but must thankfully fail because of the very low case numbers: in the 5 km radius of the 16 nuclear power plants we studied, 37 leukemias in children younger than 15 occurred over 24 years. Generally, about one fourth of the children die from their leukemia. To conduct such a study, no more than 4 children would be available for the next 10 years—if they all participated. For more detailed information on our study we refer to the detailed documentation from the German Commission on Radiological Protection, which was published in February 2009.

Footnotes

Conflict of interest statement

The authors of the letters and of the reply declare that no conflict of interest exists according to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.

References

  • 1.Kaatsch P, Spix C, Schulze-Rath R, Schmiedel S, Blettner M. Leukaemia in young children living in the vicinity of German nuclear power plants. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:721–726. doi: 10.1002/ijc.23330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Spix C, Schmiedel S, Kaatsch P, Schulze-Rath R, Blettner M. Case-control study on childhood cancer in the vicinity of nuclear power plants in Germany 1980-2003. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:275–284. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2007.10.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kaatsch P, Spix C, Jung I, Blettner M. Childhood Leukemia in the Vicinity of Nuclear Power Plants in Germany. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2008;105:725–732. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2008.0725. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Schulze-Rath R, Kaatsch P, Schmiedel S, Spix C, Blettner M. Krebs bei Kindern in der Umgebung von Kernkraftwerken: Bericht zu einer laufenden epidemiologischen Studie. Umweltmed Forsch Prax. 2006;11:20–26. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Strahlenschutzkommission (SSK) Bewertung der epidemiologischen Studie zu Kinderkrebs in der Umgebung von Kernkraftwerken (KiKK-Studie) Berichte der Strahlenschutzkommission. 2008;Heft 57 www.ssk.de/werke/volltext/2008/ssk0806.pdf. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Deutsches Arzteblatt International are provided here courtesy of Deutscher Arzte-Verlag GmbH

RESOURCES