Last updated 15:57, Wednesday, 05 March 2008

THE link between heart diseases among nuclear workers and their exposure to higher levels of radiation at Sellafield and the other BNFL plants is disturbing, if not shocking.

This is because we are told there is no proof medically of a definite cause and that anyone has actually died among the 60,000 nuclear worker studied, around half of them at Sellafield. It is merely an association showing that workers with the highest levels of occupational radiation exposure have had a higher risk (in the past) of dying from circulatory disease than those with the lowest levels of exposure.

This is hardly reassuring to the families of those workers who have spent most of their lives in the more hazardous areas of Sellafield in particular. We can imagine the site will be busy with calls for further information at the very least and the Sellafield management has made resources available to deal with concerns and provide reassurance wherever necessary.

There do not appear to be too many concerns at this stage, judging by the tentative link drawn by the local researchers at Westlakes Scientific Consulting, which is because the association dates back to before the 1980s when radiation doses were generally a lot higher. We are assured there is no perceived risk since those days.

Prospect, the union representing most workers in the nuclear industry, say it would be wrong for things to be sensationalised and quite rightly point to smoking, diet and any number of lifestyle factors as having a more likely cause and effect.

The findings are so inconclusive as not to cause alarm as in the cases of the on-going “body parts” investigation and the previous studies which attempted to draw an association between Sellafield discharges and childhood leukaemia.

What is beyond doubt is that on “the balance of probabilities” there is a link between workers’ radiation exposure and cancer deaths in the nuclear industry and many millions of pounds have been paid out (since 1982) to benefit affected families.

This is dealt with by a very successful compensation agreement and the new “heart” findings to be looked at closely by the experts who manage the scheme to see if there is any scope for widening the remit.

This is not an unreasonable request, coming a time when the nuclear industry needs all the local community support it can muster and, in fairness, does its best to support the community.