Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP logoLink to Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP
. 2021 Mar;22(3):801–809. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2021.22.3.801

Radiological Impact of Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests at Mururoa and Fangataufa Atolls to Populations in Oceania, South America and Africa: Comparison with French Polynesia

Vladimir Drozdovitch 1,*, Florent de Vathaire 2,3, André Bouville 4
PMCID: PMC8286683  PMID: 33773544

Abstract

Objective:

To evaluate the potential radiological impact of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted in 1966-1974 at Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls on populations in Oceania, South America and Africa.

Methods:

Results of measurements of total beta(β)-concentrations in filtered air and 131I activity concentrations in locally produced cow’s milk in Oceania, South America and Africa after the tests were compared with those in French Polynesia. Radiation doses due to external irradiation and thyroid doses due to 131I intake with milk by local populations were also compared.

Results:

Higher total β-concentrations in filtered air, 131I activity concentrations in locally produced milk and radiation doses to local population were, in general, observed in French Polynesia than in other countries in the southern hemisphere. However, for specific years during the testing period, the radiological impact to South America was found to be similar or slightly higher than that to Tahiti. The resulting thyroid doses in the considered countries were lower than those in French Polynesia with two exceptions: thyroid doses due to 131I intake with cow’s milk for 1-y old child in 1968 were higher in Peru (0.35 mGy) and in Madagascar (0.30 mGy) than in Tahiti (0.25 mGy). However, the populations outside French Polynesia received doses lower than those from the natural sources of radiation.

Conclusion:

According to the current knowledge in radiation epidemiology, it is very unlikely that nuclear fallout due to French nuclear tests had a measurable radiological and health impact outside French Polynesia.

Key Words: Nuclear weapons, radiation, monitoring, Iodine-131, cancer

Introduction

In July 1962, France decided to move its nuclear tests from Reggane and Taourirt Tan Afella in the south of Algeria to the atolls of Mururoa and Fangataufa of the Tuamotu-Gambier archipelago in French Polynesia. The first atmospheric nuclear weapons test took place four years later, on 2 July 1966, i.e. 3 years after the Partial Test Ban Treaty was signed on 5 August 1963 by the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States. A total of 41 atmospheric tests, excluding 5 safety tests, and of 147 underground tests were performed in these atolls, the last one taking place in 27 January 1996.

Because local radioactive fallout of atmospheric nuclear tests can, in some situations, contaminate areas up to several thousands of kilometres from the test site (Bouville, 2020), this decision faced a strong opposition from the populations of neighbouring countries. This opposition continued during the entire period of the tests, included calls for boycott of French products (Holdstock, 1995), culminated with the sabotage of the Greenpeace Rainbow Warrior ship by the French Army on 10 July 1985, and with the announcement, of the resumption of the tests by Jacques Chirac on 13 June 1995 (Danielson, 1993; Willis, 2006).

Australia, New Zealand and some countries in South America (Argentina, Brazil) set up radiation monitoring laboratories in order to collect information on radioactive fallout following the tests and to document their potential impact on neighboring populations. During the atmospheric nuclear weapons tests period, these laboratories, as well as the French ones based in French Polynesia and in other French Overseas territories (French Guiana, Madagascar, New Caledonia, Réunion, Wallis and Futuna) as well as in South America (Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru), collected information on radioactive contamination of the environment that was regularly sent to the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (RF, 1967-1975).

In the framework of a case-control study on differentiated thyroid cancer risk factors in French Polynesia, we have documented the nuclear fallout, the radiation dose to the thyroid gland (Drozdovitch et al., 2008), and the resulting effects on thyroid cancer on French Polynesia (de Vathaire et al., 2010). This first study was based on French scientific reports to UNSCEAR, which provided, for several localities in each of the archipelagos of French Polynesia, total beta(β)-activities in filtered air, total gamma(γ)-activities in local foodstuffs, as well as 131I and 137Cs concentrations in fresh cow’s milk produced in Tahiti, and a few results of measurements of exposure rates and deposition densities in Gambier, Tuamotu atolls and Tahiti. Nevertheless, for reasons of national security during this period, these reports included only summarized data that impacted the credibility of the results (Tubiana and Aurengo, 2007; Pitrou, 2015).

Thanks to the decision of French Government to declassify in 2013 all original reports of the radiation protection services in charge of radiation monitoring during the atmospheric nuclear tests, we were able, in the framework of an extension of the case-control study on thyroid cancer risk factors, to perform a more documented estimation of the magnitude of the radioactive fallout throughout French Polynesia and of the thyroid radiation doses received by French Polynesians (Drozdovitch et al., 2020; Drozdovitch et al., 2021).

Nevertheless, up to now, no publication has documented the health impact of French nuclear tests on the populations of neighboring countries, in particular of Oceania (Cook Islands, Fiji, New Caledonia, Samoa, Tonga, Wallis and Futuna), New Zealand and Australia located at distances from 2,150 to 6,900 km to the west of the nuclear test sites in French Polynesia, and of South America (Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, French Guiana, Peru) located at distances from 6,600 to 9,700 km to the east of the nuclear test sites. We took therefore the opportunity of these investigations to evaluate the radiation exposures of these populations in order to better understand their potential health impact.

Materials and Methods

Radiation monitoring

Radiation monitoring in Oceania, South America and Africa during the 1966‒1974 time period of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests in French Polynesia was conducted in:

– New Zealand, Cook Islands, Fiji, Samoa, and Tonga by the National Radiation Laboratory (NRL, New Zealand);

– Australia by the Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee (AWTSC, Australia);

– Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru by national organizations of these countries in cooperation with French authorities (Coulon et al., 2009);

– French overseas territories, French Guiana, New Caledonia, Réunion Island, Wallis and Futuna, and Madagascar.

Radiation monitoring included, among others, measurements of total β-concentrations in filtered air and 131I activity concentrations in locally produced cow’s milk, which are the most relevant to the estimation of thyroid doses to populations, as well as precipitation, daily or weekly, at some monitoring stations. Figure 1 shows the geographical distribution of the fallout monitoring network in Oceania, South America and Africa during the time period of the atmospheric nuclear tests in French Polynesia. Monitoring stations in Oceania and Africa were located west / south-west of the nuclear test sites on Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls in French Polynesia at distances ranging from 2,150 km (Rarotonga, Cook Islands) to 16,100 km (Antsiranana, Madagascar), while the monitoring stations in South America were located east of the test site at distances from 6,600 km (Lima, Peru) to 9,700 km (Cayenne, French Guiana). Except for Cayenne and Bogotá, located at a latitude of about 5o latitude North, all monitoring stations are situated in the southern hemisphere, although Quito is very close to the equator (0.18o latitude South).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Geographical Pattern of Network for Fallout Monitoring in Oceania Islands (OC), New Zealand (NZ), Australia (AU), South America (SA) and Africa (AF) during the Period of Atmospheric Nuclear Tests in French Polynesia (FP).

Radiation monitoring in French Polynesia and in other French overseas territories during the 1966‒1974 was conducted by two organizations: the Joint Radiological Safety Service (Service Mixte de Sécurité Radiologique, SMSR), which was in charge of the radiation measurements in the physical environment (exposure rates, concentrations in air and water, and deposition on the ground), and the Joint Biological Control Service (Service Mixte de Contrôle Biologique, SMCB), which was in charge of the radiation measurements performed in the biological environment (plants, vegetables, fruit, milk, milk products, animals from the terrestrial and aquatic environments) (Coulon et al., 2009; MDF, 2009). A more detailed description of the radiation monitoring network in French Polynesia can be found elsewhere (Drozdovitch et al., 2020).

Table 1 compares the numbers of measurements that were done in Oceania (NRL, 1966-1974; Bonnyman and Duggleby, 1967-1969; Gibbs et al., 1967-1969; RF, 1967-1975; AWTSC, 1971-1974), South America and Africa (RF, 1967-1975) with those done in French Polynesia (Drozdovitch et al., 2020) during the monitoring period. The number of measurements of total β-concentration in air that was done in French Polynesia is similar to that in Oceania, 7,526 vs. 9,018, respectively and much higher than that in South America (933 measurements) and in Africa (279 measurements). The number of measurements of 131I activity in cow’s milk is much lower for French Polynesia than for Oceania, 482 vs. 12,449, and for South America (1,118 measurements), because cow’s milk in French Polynesia was only produced in Tahiti.

Table 1.

Number of Measurements Done in Oceania, South America, Africa and French Polynesia in 1966-1974

Country Number of measurements done in Total
1966 1967 1968 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
Total β-concentration in air Fiji 184 242 280 327 275 202 212 267 1,989
Samoa – 121 148 167 148 103 112 136 935
Wallis and Futuna – – – – 16 12 12 14 54
Tonga – – 145 165 149 101 112 136 808
Cook Islands 181 – – – – – – 134 315
New Zealand a 538 362 442 667 594 367 403 546 3,919
New Caledonia 21 21 21 24 15 12 12 7 133
Australia b, c 790 12 112 – – – – – 914
South America 89 85 76 99 82 59 60 83 633
Africa 40 41 42 48 30 24 24 30 279
French Polynesia d 1,096 220 1,175 1,188 992 856 938 1,061 7,526
131I activity in cow’s milk Fiji 5 9 33 49 49 36 42 60 283
Samoa 6 18 30 45 41 25 36 45 246
New Zealand e 378 137 303 366 377 249 231 380 2,421
New Caledonia – 15 35 3 – 11 21 28 113
Australia c, f 1,392 648 454 592 536 288 244 396 4,550
South America 31 110 115 264 132 204 91 171 1,118
Africa 4 20 45 8 5 25 32 5 144
French Polynesia g – 64 68 74 89 13 44 130 482
Open in a new tab

a, Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch in 1966-1968. Hokitika was added in 1970; b, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Townsville, Perth in 1966 and 1968; Melbourne in 1967; c, Number of measurements was estimated based on reported number of collection stations, duration of monitoring period and frequency of sample collection; d, Multiple locations, see Drozdovitch et al. (2020) for details; e, Auckland, New Plymouth, Wellington, Greymouth, Christchurch, Dunedin and Invercargill; f, Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Hobart-Launceston, Sydney, Brisbane, Rockhampton and Malanda; g, Tahiti.

Time of arrival of fallout

The radioactive clouds produced by the nuclear explosions usually extended vertically to the highest levels of the troposphere. They were then transported by the local winds, which at Mururoa and Fangataufa generally blew toward the East and were affected by high-pressure anticyclonic zones located to the North and to the South. The bulk of the radioactive clouds, named here ‘primary’, consequently blew between 10º and 40º of latitude South in the general direction: South America → Africa → Australia → South Pacific. However, parts of the radioactive clouds, under the influence of the high-pressure systems, were extracted from the ‘primary’ clouds, changed direction, and in some cases, led to ‘secondary’ clouds that moved to areas west of the nuclear test sites, where most of the atolls and islands of French Polynesia and Oceania are located. Figure 2 shows typical trajectories of ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ clouds in the southern hemisphere following atmospheric nuclear weapons tests at Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Typical Trajectories of ‘Primary’ and ‘Secondary’ Clouds in the Southern Hemisphere that Moved to Areas from the Nuclear Test Sites Following Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Test at Mururoa and Fangataufa Atolls

Taking the test Aldebaran as a typical example, the ‘primary’ cloud reached the western coast of South America 5 days after the test, the western coast of Africa 10 days after the test, Australia 14 days after the test, and New Zealand 16 days after the test; the ‘primary’ cloud completed its first pass around the world in about 20 days (RF, 1967); in addition, three ‘secondary’ clouds were generated: (1) the first one, formed before the ‘primary’ cloud reached South America, led to the contamination of the South Pacific Islands 11 to 13 days after the test, (2) the second one, generated before the ‘primary’ cloud reached Africa, resulted in fallout over the north-eastern part of Brazil 12 days after the test and in French Guiana 17 days after the test, and (3) a third one, formed while the ‘primary’ cloud was in the proximity of Australia, led to the contamination of Réunion Island and Madagascar 17 days after the test. It is remarkable that the ‘primary’ cloud reached Australia and New Zealand, located about 28,000 km away from the test site along the route taken by the ’primary’ cloud, just a few days before the first ‘secondary’ cloud arrived in the South Pacific Islands, located at much closer distances of about 4,000 km from the test site; along the same lines, the contamination of the monitoring stations located in Africa (Réunion Island and Madagascar) occurred a few days after the ‘primary’ cloud reached Australia and New Zealand, although these countries are about 22,000 km apart along the route taken by the ’primary’ cloud.

For most monitoring stations, the mode of the distribution of the times of arrival (TOA) of fallout was in the 10–to–19.9 days bin, with an average frequency of 50% and a range from 35 to 75%. There were five exceptions: Chile and Bolivia, where the modes were in the 5–to–9.9 days bin, and Australia, New Zealand, and French Guiana, where the modes of the distributions were greater than 20 days. For Tahiti (French Polynesia) and Santiago (Chile) the percentage of tests with TOA≤5 d was greater than 20%, thus resulting in smaller average TOAs for these locations than for any other monitoring station considered in this paper.

Dose estimates

Radiation doses due to external irradiation and intake of 131I with cow’s milk were estimated for the population of Australia by AWTSC (1971-1974) and Gibbs et al., (1967-1969). Thyroid doses due to 131I intake with cow’s milk to 1-y old child in South America and Africa were estimated by RF (1967-1975). Thyroid doses to 1-y old children in New Zealand were extracted from UNSCEAR (1977).

For Fiji (Suva), Samoa (Apia), Tonga (Tongatapu) and Cook Islands (Rarotonga) thyroid doses were estimated in this study for adults and 1-year old children for the following pathways of exposure:

– Inhalation of 131I and of short-lived radioiodine isotopes (132I, 133I and 135I) and radiotellurium (132Te) with contaminated air;

– Ingestion of 131I with fresh cow’s milk;

– External irradiation from radionuclides deposited on the ground and other materials.

A detailed description of the methods used to calculate thyroid doses for the populations of these islands can be found elsewhere (Drozdovitch et al., 2021). Behaviour and age-specific consumption rates of cow’s milk by residents of Fiji and Samoa were assumed to be the same as those for population of Tahiti (Drozdovitch et al., 2019).

Results

Time-integrated total β-concentration in air

Table 2 compares the time-integrated total β-concentrations in air measured in Oceania, South America, and Africa (NRL, 1966-1974; RF, 1967-1975) following atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted at Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls in 1964-1974 with those measured in Tahiti (French Polynesia) (Drozdovitch et al., 2020). The lowest β-concentrations in air were observed in the southern hemisphere in 1972 and 1973 following nuclear test series with low fission yield. The highest total β-concentrations in air were observed, in general, in Tahiti for each year of testing. Time-integrated total β-concentrations in air in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and Cook Islands were found, in most years, to be less than those in Tahiti by factors from 50 to 200. This factor varied, for most years and monitoring locations, from around 100 to 1,100 for New Zealand, from 10 to 800 for South America, and from 5 to 550 for Africa. The smallest values of the factor were found for the testing campaigns of 1968, 1970, 1971 and 1973.

Table 2.

Time-Integrated β-Concentration in Air Measured in Oceania, South America, Africa and French Polynesia in 1964-1974

Year Testing period a Monitoring period a Time-integrated β-concentration in air (Bq s m-3)
Fiji (Nadi) Fiji (Suva) Samoa (Apia) Wallis and Futuna Tonga
(Tongatapu)		 Cook Islands (Rarotonga) New
Zealand b 		New
Caledonia (Nouméa)		 French Polynesia (Tahiti)
1966 03/07-05/10 01/07-31/12 8.1×105 – – – – 3.4×105 1.2×105 2.7×105 9.6×106
1967 06/06-03/07 01/06-30/09 1.5×105 1.5×105 4.4×105 – – – 3.4×104 8.6×104 7.1×106
1968 08/07-09/09 04/07-30/11 4.7×105 5.7×105 6.4×105 – 3.8×105 – 8.8×104 3.0× 105 1.4×106
1970 16/05-07/08 16/05-31/10 2.8×105 3.3×105 5.7×105 – 3.2×105 – 9.8×104 1.8×105 1.1×106
1971 05/06-14/08 04/06-31/10 2.7×105 3.5×105 9.1×105 1.9×105 3.6×105 – 1.3×105 1.6×105 1.8×106
1972 25/06-27/07 20/06-30/09 1.3×104 1.8×104 1.1×104 3.1×103 1.6×104 – 1.0×104 9.4×103 1.6×105
1973 21/07-28/08 12/07-31/10 1.4×104 1.8×104 9.2×105 3.3×105 3.2×104 – 5.7×103 2.0×103 1.2×106
1974 16/06-14/10 17/06-31/10 2.9×105 3.1×105 2.8×106 1.6×106 3.3×105 1.2×106 5.0×104 1.5×105 5.5×107
Total 2.3×106 1.7×106 6.3×106 2.1×106 1.4×106 1.5×106 5.4×105 1.2×106 7.7×107
Year Testing period a Monitoring period a Time-integrated β-concentration in air (Bq s m-3)
Ecuador (Quito) Peru (Lima) Colombia (Bogotá) Chile
(Santiago)		 Bolivia
(La Paz)		 French Guiana (Cayenne) Madagascar (Antsiranana) Réunion Island
(Saint-Denis)
1966 03/07-05/10 01/06-31/12 9.2×104 1.8×106 7.0×104 1.8×106 – 2.7×105 5.5×105 3.0×105
1967 06/06-03/07 01/06-31/12 4.0×104 3.6×105 1.9×104 2.4×105 – 6.7×104 1.3×105 1.1×105
1968 08/07-09/09 01/06-31/12 1.8×105 7.2×105 1.6×105 6.2×105 – 2.7×105 3.4×105 2.9×105
1970 16/05-07/08 01/05-31/12 7.2×104 1.9×106 5.8×104 6.9×105 9.3×105 1.0×105 1.9×105 2.4×105
1971 05/06-14/08 01/06-31/10 5.3×104 9.0×105 1.3×105 6.7×105 3.5×105 5.8×104 1.4×105 2.2×105
1972 25/06-27/07 01/06-30/09 8.3×103 1.3×105 7.1×104 3.7×105 3.9×104 3.6×103 4.8×103 1.2×104
1973 21/07-28/08 01/07-31/10 4.7×103 – 1.2×104 3.2×105 2.4×105 9.3×103 2.9×103 1.3×104
1974 16/06-14/10 01/06-31/10 1.4×105 5.3×105 6.9×104 3.8×105 1.1×106 2.3×105 1.9×105 1.0×105
Total 5.9×105 6.3×106 5.9×105 5.1×106 2.7×106 1.0×106 1.5×106 1.3×106
Open in a new tab

a, Dates are given for New Zealand, which are +1 day to French Polynesia dates; b, Average for Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch in 1966-1968, for Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Hokitika in 1970-1974

These results could be expected, because of radioactive decay of radionuclides, as well as dilution and depletion of radioactive clouds during their transfer over distances of 1,000 km (between Tahiti and Rarotonga), 3,400 km (between Tahiti and Fiji), 4,300 km (between Tahiti and Wellington, New Zealand), and remarkable distance, from 6,600 km to 16,100 km, between test site and monitoring locations in South America and Africa.

131 I activity concentration in locally produced cow’s milk

Table 3 compares the time-integrated 131I activity concentrations in cow’s milk locally produced in 1966-1974 in Oceania (NRL, 1966-1974; Bonnyman and Duggleby, 1967-1969; Gibbs et al., 1967-1969; AWTSC, 1971-1974), South America, Madagascar, and French Polynesia (RF, 1967-1975). Results for Réunion Island (Saint-Denis) are not shown as 131I activity concentrations in milk were reported for all measurements to be less than the limit of detection, which was typically 0.6-0.7 Bq L-1.

Table 3.

Time-Integrated 131I Activity Concentration in Cow’s Milk Locally Produced in Oceania, South America, Madagascar, and French Polynesia in 1964-1974

Year Time-integrated 131I activity concentration in locally produced cow’s milk (Bq d L-1)
Fiji (Suva) Samoa (Apia) New
Zealanda 		New
Caledonia (Nouméa)		 Australiaa Ecuador (Quito) Peru
(Lima b)		 Colombia (Bogotá) Chile (Santiago) Bolivia (La Paz) Madagascar (Antsiranana)c French Polynesia (Tahiti)
1966 210 150 18-43 –d 56-410 93 220 – 150 – 480 520 e
1967 41 230 0.56-11 23 14-380 < LD 180 15 35 – 77 240
1968 150 130 5.4-29 < LD f 29-170 20 150-370 g 56 – – 240 190
1970 130 240 7.6-46 130 32-210 < LD 30-280 h 33 91 440 – 490
1971 92 250 1.9-16 96 13-200 < LD 110 i 28 190 89 240 650
1972 2 0.64 <0.074-1.5 < LD 1.9-6.3 < LD < LD i 10 70 14 < LD 40
1973 11 39 0.22-1.9 < LD 1.3-10 < LD – 11 18 180 < LD 410
1974 96 150 4.6-25 < LD 13-91 48 580 i 10 78 110 – 2400
Open in a new tab

a, Range of values measured in monitoring stations; b, Lima unless otherwise indicated; c, Zebu’s milk; d, No measurements were reported; e, Estimated based on reconstructed fallout; f, Less than limit of detection; g, Range of values measured in Lima, Arequipa and Tacna; h, Range of values measured in Lima, Huancayo and Arequipa; i, Arequipa.

The time-integrated 131I activity concentration in cow’s milk produced in Australia (Malanda), Peru (Lima, Tacna and Arequipa), Chile (Santiago), Bolivia (La Paz) and Madagascar (Antsiranana) in some years during 1966-1972 was similar or even higher than that produced in Tahiti. In 1973-1974, the time-integrated 131I activity concentration in cow’s milk produced in Tahiti was found to be higher than the concentrations in other monitoring stations in the southern hemisphere by factors from 2.3 to around 1900.

Radiation doses to local populations

Table 4 compares annual doses due to external irradiation to population of Australia (AWTSC, 1971-1974) and thyroid doses due to 131I intake with cow’s milk for 1-y old child from Australia (Gibbs et al., 1967-1969; AWTSC, 1971-1974), New Zealand (UNSCEAR, 1977), South America and Madagascar (RF, 1967-1975) with those from Tahiti (Drozdovitch et al., 2021). Thyroid doses due to 131I intake with cow’s milk, which were taken from AWTSC and RF reports, were calculated for daily consumption of cow’s milk by 1-y old child of 0.7 L for Australia, South America and Madagascar; daily consumption of cow’s milk for Tahiti was 0.37 L (Drozdovitch et al., 2019).

Table 4.

Comparison of Annual Radiation Doses from Atmospheric Nuclear Weapon Tests Conducted at Mururoa and Fangataufa Atolls in 1964-1974 to populations of Australia, New Zealand, South America, Africa and French Polynesia

Year Whole-body dose (mGy) due to external irradiation Thyroid dose (mGy) due to 131I intake with cow’s milk for 1-y old child
Australia a,b French Polynesia (Tahiti) c Australia b New Zealand b Ecuador (Quito) Peru d Colombia (Bogotá) Chile
(Santiago)		 Bolivia (La Paz) Madagascar (Antsiranana)f French
Polynesia (Tahiti)
1966 4.4×10-3 0.032 0.43 0.17 0.03 0.03 – 0.05 – 0.2 0.69
1967 1.0×10-3 0.02 0.1 0.05 <0.01 0.1 0.02 0.04 – 0.09 0.32
1968 2.8×10-3 9.5×10-3 0.16 0.08 <0.05 0.35 <0.05 – – 0.3 0.25
1970 3.3×10-3 0.015 0.15 0.08 <0.01 0.03 e <0.01 0.05 0.15 – 0.65
1971 7.1×10-3 0.012 0.13 0.05 < 0.02 0.05 e < 0.02 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.87
1972 < 1.0×10-3 3.6×10-3 3.0×10-3 0.05 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 <0.01 <0.01 0.053
1973 3.0×10-4 0.01 8.0×10-3 0.05 <0.01 – <0.01 <0.01 0.08 <0.01 0.55
1974 5.3×10-3 0.34 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.24 e <0.01 0.03 0.05 – 3.2
Open in a new tab

a, Estimates without account to shielding properties of buildings and environment; b, Country-wide population-weighted average dose; c, Estimates accounting for the shielding properties of buildings and environment; d, Lima unless otherwise indicated; e, Arequipa; f, Due to consumption of zebu’s milk.

Doses due to external irradiation to population of Tahiti were found to be higher than those in Australia by factor from 1.7 in 1971 to 64 in 1974 (Table 4). It should be noted that doses due to external irradiation for population of Australia were estimated without account for shielding properties of buildings and environment which would reduce exposure by factor from 2 (rural areas) to 3 (urban areas).Thyroid doses due to 131I intake with cow’s milk for 1-y old child were also found to be the highest in Tahiti, except in 1968 when dose for Tahiti residents (0.25 mGy) was lower than that for Antsiranana, Madagascar (0.30 mGy) and for Peru (0.35 mGy). However, in general these thyroid doses were very low.

Table 5 compares the thyroid doses from different exposure pathways calculated in this study for a representative 1-y old child and a representative adult who resided in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Cook Islands and Tahiti after test Centaure on 17 July 1974. Total thyroid doses due to all pathways to population of Tahiti was higher than those to population of islands in Oceania by factor varying from 20 to around 750. The highest thyroid doses in Oceania were estimated for population of Samoa; however, these doses were less than those in Tahiti by factor of 20 and 35 for to 1-y old children and for adults, respectively.

Table 5.

Comparison of Thyroid Doses for 1-y Old Child and Adult Person after Test Centaure on 17 July 1974

Parameter Fiji (Suva) Samoa (Apia) Tonga
(Tongatapu)		 Cook Islands (Rarotonga) French
Polynesia (Tahiti)
Time-integrated total β-concentration air (Bq s m-3) 9.2×104 2.3×106 7.0×104 8.1×105 5.5×107
Time of arrival H+4d H+4d H+9d H+3d H+56h
Precipitation Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Deposition density (Bq m-2):
Total 5.7×103 4.1×104 4.3×103 5.0×104 3.4×106
131I 250 1.8×103 350 1.7×103 9.5×104
Time-integrated 131I activity concentration in fresh cow’s milk (Bq d L-1) 38 130 – – 2,300
Thyroid dose to 1-y child (mGy) due to:
Inhalation of 131I and short-lived 132I, 133I, 135I, 132Te 5.4×10-4 0.013 5.3×10-4 4.3×10-3 0.28
Ingestion of 131I with fresh cow’s milk 0.051 0.17 – – 3.1
External irradiation 9.6×10-4 6.3×10-3 1.3×10-3 6.7×10-3 0.39
Total 0.052 0.19 1.8×10-3 0.011 3.8
Thyroid dose to adult (mGy) due to:
Inhalation of 131I and short-lived 132I, 133I, 135I, 132Te 2.1×10-4 5.2×10-3 2.2×10-4 1.6×10-3 0.1
Ingestion of 131I with fresh cow’s milk 5.1×10-3 0.018 – – 0.31
External irradiation 8.0×10-4 5.4×10-3 1.1×10-3 5.7×10-3 0.33
Total 6.1×10-3 0.028 1.3×10-3 7.3×10-3 0.97
Open in a new tab

Thyroid doses received outside French Polynesia by children born during the French atmospheric nuclear test period were lower than 1 mGy. Annual effective doses from the natural sources of radiation (cosmic rays and terrestrial radiation) were estimated to be around 1.7 mSv to populations of Oceania and even higher to populations of South America (UNSCEAR, 2010). Therefore, the potential health impact of doses lower than 1 mGy from the French atmospheric nuclear tests has to be related to results of the largest pool of cohorts that aimed to evaluate the effects of low radiation doses (<100 mGy) to thyroid during exposure in childhood (Lubin et al., 2017). In this pool, a mean dose of 2 mGy has been associated to an increase of 0.4 case in a group of 9,464 subjects cumulating 367,606 person years of follow-up, corresponding to an excess of 1 case of thyroid cancer in 100,000 persons in 10 years.

Discussion

To the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to evaluate the potential radiological impact of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted in 1966-1974 at Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls on populations in Oceania, South America and Africa. This evaluation is based on the analysis of the results of measurements of total β-concentrations in filtered air and of the 131I activity concentrations in locally produced cow’s milk, as well as radiation doses due to external irradiation and thyroid doses due to 131I intake with milk by local populations in different countries in the southern hemisphere. However, there are two factors that complicate the analysis:

1. For the three monitoring stations in South America that are located in the 10-40o latitude South band (La Paz, Lima, and Santiago) where the ‘primary’ cloud was generally found, the average TOAs were shorter than those for all monitoring stations in Oceania, except for Tahiti, although their distances to the test sites were greater, except for Australia. This is presumably due to the fact that the air contamination at those three monitoring stations was generally due to the ‘primary’ cloud, blowing from East to West, whereas the air contamination in Oceania was usually due to ‘secondary’ clouds blowing from West to East. The time-integrated β-concentrations in air, summed for all years of atmospheric testing, are greater in La Paz, Lima, and Santiago than in any monitoring station in Oceania, except for Tahiti and Samoa (Table 2). For specific years or specific time periods, the time-integrated air concentrations in Tahiti were even lower than those in La Paz, Lima, or Santiago. For example, the total β-concentration in air was almost twice higher in 1970 in Peru (Lima) and in 1972 in Chile (Santiago) than that in Tahiti during corresponding years.

2. For a given test and a given, or similar, TOA, the total β-concentrations in air could vary substantially from a location to another. Taking as an example the test Pallas, detonated on 18 August 1973, ‘secondary’ clouds led to the contamination of part of Oceania. Practically the same total β-concentrations in air were measured in Samoa and Tahiti, with maximums of about 4 Bq m-3 and 1 Bq m-3, respectively. However, these concentrations were much lower than those measured at Raivavae (110 Bq m-3) and Tubuai (170 Bq m-3) on 22 August 1973. It seems reasonable to assume that the air contamination at the 4 monitoring stations was due to 3 separate air masses that moved in the same general direction: (1) the ‘Tahiti’ air mass, with a peak of contamination around 21 August 1973 (0.85 Bq m-3), (2) the ‘Samoa’ air mass, with a peak of contamination on 23 August 1973 (4.3 Bq m-3), and (3) the ‘Raivavae-Tubuai’ air mass, resulting in a peak of contamination on 22 August 1973 (>100 Bq m-3).

In comparison to Tahiti, higher time-integrated 131I activity concentrations in cow’s milk could be expected for some locations in South America because of the typical trajectories of the ‘primary’ cloud. However, they were not expected for Australia. The high 131I activity concentrations in milk observed for Madagascar can be explained by the fact that milk from zébu was monitored. Lower zebu’s milk productivity, 0.8‒1.4 L d-1, in comparison with that for cows (Guillermo, 1949) resulted in much higher 131I activity concentrations in zebu’s milk than in cow’s milk.

Our study provides a comprehensive analysis of the available information on the radioactive contamination of the environment collected in Oceania, South America and Africa during the testing period in French Polynesia. There are, however, some limitations in this study. First, the available results of radiation monitoring in some countries were less detailed than those available for French Polynesia. Second, measurements of radioactive contamination were not reported for some locations, especially during the first years of the testing period (see Tables 1‒3). These limitations resulted in an incomplete evaluation of the radiological impact of the French nuclear tests to the populations of some countries; however, to the best of our knowledge, these limitations do not change the overall conclusions of the study.

In conclusion, published results of radiation monitoring in Oceania, South America and Africa during the 1966-1974 time period of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests at Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls provided independent validation of radiation measurements done during the same time period in French Polynesia. The total β-concentrations in filtered air measured in French Polynesia were, in general, higher than those monitored in other locations in southern hemisphere by factors varying from 10 to 800. 131I activity concentrations in locally produced milk and radiation doses to the thyroid glands of local population were also higher in French Polynesia for most years at most monitoring locations in the southern hemisphere. However, for some years during the testing period, the total β-concentrations in filtered air and 131I activity concentrations in locally produced milk in South America were found to be similar or slightly higher than those measured in Tahiti. Thyroid radiation dose received outside French Polynesia by children from fallout after French nuclear tests were lower than 1 mGy. The health effect of French atmospheric nuclear weapons tests at Mururoa and Fangataufa on populations outside French Polynesia, which received doses lower than the ones from the natural source of radiation, is, if existing, very low, i.e. about 1 case of thyroid cancer in 10 years in 100,000 persons.

Author Contribution Statement

The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: V. Drozdovitch, A. Bouville; data collection: F. de Vathaire, A. Bouville; analysis and interpretation of results: V. Drozdovitch, F. de Vathaire, A. Bouville; draft manuscript preparation: V. Drozdovitch, F. de Vathaire, A. Bouville. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM, Paris, France), Fondation de France (Program Cancer and Environment 2016), AVIESAN (Plan Cancer Program: Cancer and Environment 2015), and by Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, NIH (Bethesda, MD, USA). The authors are grateful to Dr. N. Gentner and Ms S. Cueto-Habersack for their efforts to locate reports of Australia and New Zealand to United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). Special thanks are to Miss O. Drozdovitch for assistance with preparation of the figures. The authors are also grateful to Dr. Frederic Poirrier, Head of the Département de Suivi des Centres d’Expérimentations Nucléaires (DSCEN) for providing access to de-classified reports of French Ministry of Defence and Dr. Gilles Soubiran from the Centre Hospitalier de Polynésie Française (CHPF) for his permanent assistance with the studies in French Polynesia.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee. Fallout over Australia from nuclear weapons tested by France in Polynesia from May to August 1970. Report AWTSC No.1. Maribyrnong, Australia: Defense Standard Laboratories; 1971a. [Google Scholar]
  2. Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee. Fallout over Australia from nuclear weapons tested by France in Polynesia from June to August 1971. Report AWTSC No.3. Brunswick, Australia: Defense Standard Laboratories; 1971b. [Google Scholar]
  3. Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee. Fallout over Australia from nuclear weapons tested by France in Polynesia during June and July 1972 Report AWTSC No 5 Canberra. Australia: Australian Government Publish Service; 1972. [Google Scholar]
  4. Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee. Tests Safety Committee (1974a). Data on levels of radioactivity in Australia 1971-1973. UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1451. New York: United Nations: 1974a. [Google Scholar]
  5. Atomic Weapons Tests Safety Committee. Data from the Australian fallout monitoring programs. UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1497. New York: United Nations: 1974b. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bonnyman J, Duggleby JC. Iodine-131 levels in milk in Australia during the period July-December, 1966. Aust J Sci. 1967a;29:402–6. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bonnyman J, Duggleby JC. Iodine-131 concentration in Australian milk resulting from the 1967 French nuclear weapons tests in Polynesia. Aust J Sci. 1967b;30:223–6. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bonnyman J, Duggleby JC. Iodine-131 concentration in Australian milk resulting from the 1968 French nuclear weapons tests in Polynesia. Aust J Sci. 1969;31:389–92. [Google Scholar]
  9. Bouville A. Fallout from nuclear weapons tests: Environmental, health, political, and sociological considerations. Health Phys. 2020;118:360–81. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Coulon R, Arnould C, Bory P, Ducousso R, Sarbach J. Environmental monitoring associated with nuclear testing in French Polynesia. Radioprotection. 2009;44:281–307 (in French). [Google Scholar]
  11. Danielson MT. Problems in paradise: The case of Tahiti. INSTRAW News. 1993;19:47–52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Drozdovitch V, Bouville A, Doyon F, et al. Reconstruction of individual radiation doses for a case-control study of thyroid cancer in French Polynesia. Health Phys. 2008;94:418–33. doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000299293.06218.88. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Drozdovitch V, Bouville A, Tetuanui T, et al. Behavior and food consumption pattern of the French Polynesian population in the 1960s-1970s. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2019;20:3667–77. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.12.3667. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Drozdovitch V, de Vathaire F, Bouville A. Ground deposition of radionuclides in French Polynesia resulting from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests in Mururoa and Fangataufa atolls. J Environ Radioact. 2020;214-215:106176. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2020.106176. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Drozdovitch V, Bouville A, Taquet M, et al. Thyroid doses to French Polynesians resulting from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests: Estimates based on radiation measurements and population lifestyle data. Health Phys. 2021;120:34–55. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001262. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Gibbs WJ, Moroney JR, Stevens DJ, Titterton EW. Fallout over Australia from nuclear weapons tested by France in Polynesia from July to October, 1966. Aust J Sci. 1967;29:407–17. [Google Scholar]
  17. Gibbs WJ, Moroney JR, Stevens DJ, Titterton EW. Fallout over Australia from nuclear weapons tested by France in Polynesia during June and July 1967. Aust J Sci. 1968;30:217–22. [Google Scholar]
  18. Gibbs WJ, Moroney JR, Stevens DJ, Titterton EW. Fallout over Australia from nuclear weapons tested by France in Polynesia from July to September, 1968. Aust J Sci. 1969;31:383–8. [Google Scholar]
  19. Guillermo M. Madagascar zebu. Review Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine in Tropical Countries. 1949;3:61–75 (in French). [Google Scholar]
  20. Holdstock D. Health consequences of nuclear tests in French Polynesia. Lancet. 1995;346 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Lubin JH, Adams MJ, Shore R, et al. Thyroid cancer following childhood low-dose radiation exposure: A pooled analysis of nine cohorts. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102:2575–83. doi: 10.1210/jc.2016-3529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ministry of Defense of France. The radiological dimension of French nuclear testing in Polynesia, fact finding. Paris: Ministry of Defense (in French); 2009. [Google Scholar]
  23. National Radiation Laboratory. Quarterly report July-September 1966 on environmental radioactivity in New Zealand and results of extended monitoring of fallout from French nuclear tests in the Pacific. Report NRL-F/22. Christchurch. New Zealand: NRL: 1966a. [Google Scholar]
  24. National Radiation Laboratory. Quarterly report October-December 1966 and annual summary on environmental radioactivity in New Zealand and results of extended monitoring of fallout from French nuclear tests in the Pacific Report NRL-F/23. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1966b. [Google Scholar]
  25. National Radiation Laboratory. Quarterly report April-June 1967 on environmental radioactivity in New Zealand and results of extended monitoring of fallout from French nuclear tests in the Pacific Report NRL-F/25. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1967a. [Google Scholar]
  26. National Radiation Laboratory. Quarterly report July-September 1967 on environmental radioactivity in New Zealand and results of extended monitoring of fallout from French nuclear tests in the Pacific Report NRL-F/26. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1967b. [Google Scholar]
  27. National Radiation Laboratory. Quarterly report July-September 1968 on environmental radioactivity in New Zealand and results of extended monitoring of fallout from French nuclear tests in the Pacific Report NRL-F/31. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1968a. [Google Scholar]
  28. National Radiation Laboratory. Quarterly report October-December 1968 on environmental radioactivity in New Zealand and results of extended monitoring of fallout from French nuclear tests in the Pacific Report NRL-F/32. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1968b. [Google Scholar]
  29. National Radiation Laboratory. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1970a. Environmental radioactivity in New Zealand: Quarterly Report April-June 1970, and Pacific area monitoring, 27 July–9 October Report NRL-F/40. [Google Scholar]
  30. National Radiation Laboratory. Environmental radioactivity in New Zealand: Quarterly Report July-September 1970, and Pacific area monitoring, 9 October–31 October. Report NRL-F/41. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1970b. [Google Scholar]
  31. National Radiation Laboratory. Report NRL-F/47. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1972. Fallout from nuclear weapons tests conducted by France in the South Pacific from June to August 1971 and comparison with previous test series. [Google Scholar]
  32. National Radiation Laboratory. Environmental radioactivity: Fallout from nuclear weapons tests conducted by France in the South Pacific during July and August 1973 and comparison with previous test series. Report NRL-F/51. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1973. [Google Scholar]
  33. National Radiation Laboratory. Environmental radioactivity: Fallout from nuclear weapons tests conducted by France in the South Pacific from June to September 1974 and comparison with previous test series. Report NRL-F/53. Christchurch, New Zealand: NRL; 1974. [Google Scholar]
  34. Pitrou I. Nuclear tests in French Polynesia: Need for clarification of the radiological situation. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2015;27:232–3. doi: 10.1177/1010539514548761. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Republic of France. Radioactive fallout after the nuclear explosions in Polynesia, 1967 and 1968. United Nations (in French): UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1276. New York; 1969. [Google Scholar]
  36. Republic of France. Radioactive fallout after the nuclear explosions in Polynesia, May-December 1970. United Nations (in French): UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1381. New York; 1971. [Google Scholar]
  37. Republic of France. Radioactive fallout after the nuclear explosions in Polynesia, June-October 1971. United Nations (in French): UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1407. New York; 1972. [Google Scholar]
  38. Republic of France. Monitoring of radioactivity in 1972. United Nations (in French): UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1444. New York; 1973. [Google Scholar]
  39. Republic of France. Monitoring of radioactivity in 1973. United Nations (in French): UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1485. New York; 1974. [Google Scholar]
  40. Republic of France. Monitoring of radioactivity in 1974. United Nations (in French): UNSCEAR Document A/AC.82/G/L.1521. New York; 1975. [Google Scholar]
  41. de Vathaire F, Drozdovitch V, Brindel P, et al. Thyroid cancer following nuclear tests in French Polynesia. Br J Cancer. 2010;103:1115–21. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605862. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Willis E. French nuclear tests in Polynesia. Med Confl Surviv. 2006;22:159–65. doi: 10.1080/13623690600621179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP are provided here courtesy of West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention

RESOURCES