Scientific Studies

For several decades, mainstream scientists have been demonstrating through a number of independent scientific studies that a claim by a small group of activists about a substance called Strontium-90 is clearly false.

Recently, another false study about levels of Strontium-90 was released and debunked by scientists. The study claimed that Strontium-90 was found to be higher in baby teeth of children in three counties in Pennsylvania born after the 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant. Because the activists' assertions focus on baby teeth, their claims generally have become known as the "Tooth Fairy project."

The same activist organization also claimed that an earlier study in Suffolk County , N.Y. , near Brookhaven Nuclear Laboratory, showed a "nearly identical" increase in incidences of childhood cancer and increases in theStrontium-90 found in baby teeth.

Scientists have continuously dismissed Strontium-90 claims as scare tactics and "junk science," contributing nothing to finding the real causes of cancer. They are, instead, seen as obvious attempts to manipulate the public without any basis in science.

These claims, however, have never stood up to scientific scrutiny. One major fact they ignore about Strontium-90 is that it primarily comes from fallout from former nuclear weapons testing around the world, rather than from nuclear power plants.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) operates a nationwide network for monitoring radioactivity in the environment. The agency's measurements indicate that although Strontium-90 levels have declined since atmospheric nuclear weapons testing ended, the radioisotope is still detected in the environment, especially in milk, so one would expect to find it in baby teeth.

The EPA stated:

• "Nuclear power plant emissions of Strontium-90 are inconsequential compared with other man-made sources and should be undetectable in deciduous teeth."
• At Oyster Creek, "there was no evidence of excess mortality from childhood leukemia or for any other form of cancer in any age group below 40."
• The Chicago Tribune asked the chief of the Division of Epidemiological Studies at the Illinois Department of Health to investigate these claims. The division, after reviewing the data, discounted the claims. As a result, the paper labeled the organization's manipulation of data "fishy," and editorialized:
• "Critics only lose credibility by stoking fears with trumped-up statistics purporting to show a link between nuclear plants and illness. The case is a dud."

Other independent findings have included: