Higher background radiation levels were also linked to a life expectancy about 2.5 years longer than those living in areas with relatively low levels.
A BIRD SITS on a radiation sign at the uranium ore dump near the town of Mailuu-Suu, Kyrgyzstan.
(photo credit: PAVEL MIKHEYEV/REUTERS)
Higher background radiation levels lead to lower levels of
some cancers and may extend life expectancy, according to a new study by
Ben-Gurion University (BGU) of the Negev and Nuclear Research Center Negev (NRCN) published in the Biogerontology journal in January.
The
higher radiation levels were linked to lower levels of lung, pancreatic
and colon cancers in both men and women and lower rates of brain and
bladder cancers in men. People living in areas with with relatively high
background radiation had a life expectancy about 2.5 years longer than
those living in areas with relatively low levels. The higher life expectancy may be linked to the lower cancer mortality rates found in areas with higher background radiation.
The
study was conducted by using the US Environmental Protection Agency's
radiation dose calculator to retrieve data from 3,129 US counties,
cancer rate data from the US Cancer Statistics and life expectancy data
from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University
of Washington Medical Center.
Background
radiation is an ionizing radiation that exists in the environment from
natural sources, including radiation from space and terrestrial sources.
Background radiation
fluctuates between 92 to 227 millirem per year in the US, according to
BGU. A millirem is one thousandth of a Roentgen Equivalent Man (REM), a
measure of the health effect of low-level ionizing radiation on the
human body.
The
scientists stated that the findings indicate "clear beneficial health
effects in humans" related to higher background radiation, adding that
the linear no-threshold (LNT) paradigm, which assumes that any exposure
to ionizing radiation is risky, should be reevaluated.
The
researchers stressed that hundreds of billions of dollars are spent
each year to maintain extremely low radiation levels based on the LNT
paradigm which their findings indicate may not be necessary. They
suggested setting a threshold level, instead of operating on the
assumption that any amount of radiation is bad.
