No. Radiation Exposure Will Not Give Your Baby Superpowers
From lights and stoves to phones and cars, electric power is the driving force behind the global economic, social, and political structure. Without it, entire societies would crumble. However, how is it that this electricity is produced? Nuclear energy produces about 11 percent of the worlds energy from about 450 nuclear power reactors (Nuclear 2018). Not only is nuclear power used to produce electricity, but it is also utilized in weapons, medical technology, and even to heat up food in microwaves. This power source is one that almost everyone encounters on a daily basis. Proponents advocate for its use because it is able to produce large amounts of carbon-free energy, which is helpful to the environment and surrounding communities. Unfortunately, there is a darker side to nuclear energy. Compared to other, traditional methods of energy production such as: natural gas, and other fossil fuel burning plants, the actual process of producing nuclear energy does little to impact air and water quality through carbon-based pollution; however, the radiation exposure risks associated with the production of nuclear energy do pose risks to the environment and human health, specifically to those who are pregnant.
From early on, I remember being fascinated with how a microwave works. Whenever food would be heating, I would intensely stare into the machine, watching my food magically warms. Because I couldn’t see the energy source, I thought it was magic. The food and plate would be hot, but the microwave itself would not. Yet, it seemed that almost every time I would do so, my mother would scold me and say that “looking into the microwave will cause cancer”. While I was too young to truly understand what the disease was or how it functioned, I knew that it was not good. Now that I am older, I find myself remaining to be naïve and inquisitive about certain things. Does the radiation in microwaves cause cancer, what about cell phones or computers, if my child is exposed will they become the next superhero? While the evidence answering in the affirmative to the prior sentence my be negligible, one fact remains absolute: I may lack a strong understanding of chemistry and physics, but even the most ignorant of people can understand that over exposure to radiation can cause cancer by mutating cellular genetics (NRC).
While everyone is exposed to daily radiation, overexposure from specific sources can be catastrophic. Nuclear energy is an efficient way of producing carbon-free energy; however, with this power source comes the risk of a nuclear meltdown. A nuclear meltdown is when the core unit experiences damage from overheating. One of the problems with nuclear reactions is that they cannot be simply turned off with the flick of a switch. They involve other catalyzing reactions to slow the process. If the heat generated by a nuclear reactor is not regulated by the cooling systems, the uranium fuel has the potential to reach its melting point. At this point, the radioactive fuel can contaminate the cooling fluid. Because the radioactive fuel can reach an excess of 5,189 degrees Fahrenheit (Zielenski 2011), whenever it contacts the coolant, the coolant becomes superheated and expands extremely rapidly. This rapid expansion of steam results in a steam explosion (Board 1975). These massive explosions damage the integrity of the entire facility, especially the containment units. Nuclear power facilities are designed to contain as much radiation as possible, yet if the structure is compromised, so is its containment integrity.
Whenever a meltdown occurs, the radioactive fuel within the reactor breaches the containment unit and radioactively contaminates surrounding substances, such as particulate dust-like matter. If a containment unit is breached and this dust or other matter becomes exposed to the atmosphere, this is collectively known as nuclear fallout (Kunkel et al 2012). The problem with fallout is that it is not stationary, and its effects can impact global populations. The risk of becoming exposed to nuclear radiation via fallout is far greater than that of looking into a closed and running microwave.
Pregnancy can be one the happiest and magical times of a person’s life. The thought of bringing new life into the world can be exhilarating. Yet pregnancy can also be a scary time. Unfortunately, pregnancies are vulnerable to a plethora of harms which can cause developmental and physical defects in the child. A pregnancy is most vulnerable during the first 12 weeks following conception (Ulrich 2016). During this first trimester the baby’s major systems and organs begin to form and it begins to grow and take on a familiar human-like figure. Some of the harms that can affect a baby during this period are radiation. Radiation harms the cells by interacting and harming DNA (Little 2003). DNA is the basis for how a cell operates and if its damaged it can cause the cell to operate abnormally or even result in cell death.
Radioactive fallout and its lasting effects are a main source of radiation exposure to pregnant mothers. Following the nuclear meltdown of the Chernobyl Power Plant in what is now Ukraine, evacuees of the surrounding area were exposed to over 100msV of radiation, which is much higher than usual, background radiation (WHO 2006). Radiation was leached into the atmosphere following the collapse of the containment units. The radioactive pollution rose several kilometers into the atmosphere. Because the radiation was elevated to these heights, atmospheric wind currents caused the radiation to spread globally and caused effects of this meltdown to be geographically wide-spread and not localized to the area surrounding the power plant. This specific incident represents how wide-spread the fallout from a nuclear powerplant meltdown can reach.
Chernobyl is not the only incident involving a nuclear meltdown that the world has witnessed. In March of 2011 a large earthquake generated a tsunami hitting the east coast of Japan. While the effects of the tsunami were devastating, the most tragic impact was the damaging of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station which was locating on the coast. The damage caused the power station to lose is core cooling capacity and, like the Chernobyl disaster, caused the fuel pellets to melt, resulting in a meltdown (Reich & Goto, 2015). Unlike Chernobyl Fukushima was located along the coastline, not inland. This factor is far more detrimental to the environment than the geographic location of Chernobyl. The radioactive contimanation is now susceptible to the ocean currents as well as atmospheric. After the meltdown occurred, radioactive fallout including Cesium-137, seeped into the ocean and was leaked into the atmosphere. Similar the atmosphere, the ocean is not stagnant and has currents. These currents transported and circulated the radiation all around the globe. While radiation was seen globally, the most prominent areas were along the Pacific Seaboard and seas closest to it. With each particle that was radioactive came the risk of fish exposure. Because fish are the main source of food for many countries, following the disaster, pregnant women were advised not to consume saltwater fish from the Pacific Ocean. (Chen et al. 2015).
Recently, Russia announced that it will be launching a floating nuclear power plant to power “remote industrial plants, and port cities, and to offshore has and oil platforms” (Chappell 2018). While the mobility this ship provides offers flexibility with carbon-free energy availability, it is a disaster waiting to happen. Greenpeace officials have even described the massive ship as a “Chernobyl on Ice” (Haverkamp & Alimov 2018). They warn that 32 years after the world’s worst nuclear contamination incident, people seem to have forgotten that due to radioactive contamination, food had to be destroyed, milk taken out of consumption, and “that for more than two decades, reindeer… sheep… and wild boar… had to be slaughtered” (Haverkamp & Alimov 2018). As previously discussed, the more proximal a plant is to water, the greater of an impact a meltdown could have. So Russia has taken this advice to heart by choosing to make a floating nuclear power plant. Since it only took over 30 years to build a containment facility around Chernoblyl, I’m sure it would take less than a week to contain a nuclear meltdown and radioactive waste leakage on a ship which has sunk to the bottom of the ocean. All and all, Russia should just build a land-based power facility instead of a floating Chernobyl.
Unfortunately, nuclear meltdowns are not the only way pregnant people can be exposed to radiation. The testing of nuclear weapons, has profound affects on global ecology. Following a weapons test, plant and animals become exposed to high levels of radiation, which increase the risk of people consuming radioactive food and experiencing the negative health affects of it. These effects were directly seen in the Bikini Atoll, an Atoll where the United States conducted nuclear tests. It was found that after these tests, burns, hair loss, and other signs of radiation poison were immediately seen in the people who populated surrounding islands. In the years following, the citizens of the islands also saw an increase in cancer rates. Even today, the bananas which naturally grow on the island are not edible. Because of the high amounts of radiation exposure, the potassium within the bananas and their trees became radioactive (Guyer 2001) While everyone was exposed to this radiation, mothers and fathers who were pregnant or planning to become pregnant were more susceptible to this exposure and experienced more impactful effects. Mothers living in the Marshall Islands experienced high doses of radiation which resulted in one third of children being stillborn (Smith & LaDuke, 2015). Additionally, the consumption of radioactive food by mothers and infants also poses an increased risk of cancer and associated diseases to children. Although nuclear testing is banned by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban treaty, not all nations abide by its rules, rouge nations such as North Korea continue to test their weapons risking exposure to pregnant woman and increasing the risk of developmental and physical deficits as well as risking stillbirth.
A reoccurring theme throughout radiation exposure and its effect on pregnancy is the subject’s proximity to the epicenter of radiation and the duration of exposure. These factors have a huge impact on the extent of DNA mutation. Going out for a few hours and getting a sunburn is a very mild result of radiation exposure; however, if a person goes out for several hours a day over the period of many years, their risk of skin cancer is greatly elevated. The same situational metaphor is identical to that of radiation exposure stemming from nuclear fallout. Because radiation is prolonged and wide-spread, everyone who is pregnant or planning on becoming pregnant needs to consider the geographic risk of associated with radiation exposure stemming from nuclear meltdowns or nuclear weapons testing living in areas which are far from nuclear power plants, wind patterns which cross these plants, or away from the coast can help reduce the risk of exposure. Additionally, by choosing to follow a diet which is absent of foods which may be susceptible to radiation can also help.
By abiding by these guidelines to limit radiation exposure, the like hood of having a child who has health deficits as a result of such exposure is greatly decreased. Unfortunately, these alternatives are not accessible to all. They require financial flexibility, ability to find another job, and willingness to move and adapt to a new lifestyle. These requirements are hard to meet and extremely exclusive. Additionally, resources necessary to combat radiation exposure are not widely available. Selective foods, medicines, and infrastructure are often available in wealthier, urbanized areas, leaving people in rural regions without the option to radiation-free resources. Primarily, only wealthy individuals are able to afford this type of freedom; however education is key to combating this issue and is a much more affordable and attainable alternative. Campaigns like The BabySafe Project aim to close this gap. So much like my mother told me not to be close to the microwave when it’s running, people should attempt to live as far away from nuclear powerplants and test sites as possible and adapt a lifestyle void of as much external radiation as possible. Doing these things will help ensure the health of your baby and while they might not become the next superhero, you will be a Super Parent.
Board, S. J., Hall, R. W., & Hall, R. S. (1975). Detonation of fuel coolant explosions. Nature,254(5498), 319-321. doi:10.1038/254319a0
Chen, J., Cooke, M. W., Mercier, J.-F., Ahier, B., Trudel, M., Workman, G., … Brown, R. (2015). A report on radioactivity measurements of fish samples from the West Coast of Canada. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 163(2), 261–266. http://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncu150
Haverkamp, J., & Alimov, R. (2018, April 26). 32 years after Chernobyl, next up, a Chernobyl on ice? Retrieved from https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/16149/32-years-on-chernobyl-on-ice/
Lelievald, J., Kunkel, D., & Lawrence, M. G. (2012). Global risk of radioactive fallout after major nuclear reactor accidents. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 12(9), 4245-4258, doi: 10.5194/acp-12-4245-2012
Little JB. Principal Cellular and Tissue Effects of Radiation. In: Kufe DW, Pollock RE, Weichselbaum RR, et al., editors. Holland-Frei Cancer Medicine. 6th edition. Hamilton (ON): BC Decker; 2003. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK12344/
Nuclear Power in the World Today. (n.d.). Retrieved April 14, 2018, from http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/nuclear-power-in-the-world-today.aspx
Radiation Exposure and Cancer. (n.d.). Retrieved April 14, 2018, from https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/health-effects/rad-exposure-cancer.html
Reich, M. R., & Goto, A. (2015). Towards long-term responses in Fukushima. The Lancet,386(9992), 498-500. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)61030-3
Smith, A., & LaDuke, W. (2015). Conquest: sexual violence and American Indian genocide. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Ulrich, F., & Petermann, F. (2016). Consequences and Possible Predictors of Health-damaging Behaviors and Mental Health Problems in Pregnancy – A Review. Geburtshilfe Und Frauenheilkunde, 76(11), 1136–1156. http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-118180
Zielinski, S. (2011, March 15). What Is A Nuclear Meltdown? Retrieved February 16, 2018, from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-is-a-nuclear-meltdown-45835261/
