Through the beginning of time and structure of thought, the perceived world that has unfolded before human vision has been a collection and cluster of atoms, molecules and compounds. While branching into philosophy streams and theories since time immemorial, these breakdowns of matter have brought itself into a core aspect of existence itself – via the notion of microscopic particles (extremely tiny) stacking onto itself, leading to the merging of the macroscopic world (our world). This has further led to similar concepts in the narrative of the evolution of the sciences since the late 19th century. Life forms are predisposed to absorb materials from the environment, which leads to the conclusion of harmful substances being absorbed into the absorption pathways of animate beings (living creatures).
Absorption pathways are simply external (penetration through the skin and body tissue), or internal (as may be the case of ingested/consumed contents finding their way into the bloodstream) streams. As the field of the sciences grew and evolved their focuses, the proper identification and classification (grouping) of what may be called harmful for living creatures came forward. From the many identified matter (or elements) that this has brought into public knowledge, are uniquely occurring naturally occurring Radionuclides, whose presence in extremely low (also called trace) quantities leads to disastrous effects on the living world, especially humans.
That said, this evolution in natural science and identification of Radionuclides (or broadly Radioactive elements) is not a newly found concept. Widespread and low-level contamination (impurity) of the environment from human-made sources can be found as far back as Roman times, approximately 2000 years before current times. This is the time when lead and silver mining and smelting (extraction of metals) were carried out in several major places in Europe. Even before that, with events from Ancient Greece, pitchblende specimens (a form of mineral with trace quantities of Radium – radioactive) rich in their radioactivity were used in pottery for colouring. Similar records of the use of uranium for colouring glass and in ceramic as early as the first century A.D. China.
The early 20th Century saw the birth of Medical radionuclide production technology finding its usage in medicine, both in diagnosis and therapy. However, its destructive potential was soon realised in the Cold Era of World War II, where nuclear fission was weaponized and the fierce stage between the Allied (West and Russia) and the Axis (Germany-Italy-Japan) nations began; which ultimately led to the Partial Test Ban Treaty in 1963 which significantly deterred further release of radioactive material released into the atmosphere.
In recent years, radionuclides have paved their way into accelerating human society and its development. Their applications in vast avenues and fields have provided usages in medical diagnosis, nuclear power generation, criminal investigation, space exploration, et cetera. However, the potential risks accompanying the same require proper handling and disposal of the radioactive waste to prevent harm to the environment and human health.
Nature of Radionuclides
In current standards, the modern world consists of about 1300 forms of different radionuclides, originating partly from natural sources, and partly anthropogenically produced. Of the lot, natural radionuclides are generated through activation of stable isotopes via cosmic radiation or their origin attributed during the creation of the universe. The latter, also called as primordial radionuclides, include (40K) and isotopes of Uranium (238U) and Thorium (232Th) which later gives rise to several daughter nuclides, namely (but not limited to) 226Ra, 228Ra, 222Rn, 210Pb, et cetera.
Apart from these, artificial radionuclides have been brought to existence via a consequence of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. Collectively also referred to as ‘fission and activation products’, the Global fallout of these fission products during the Cold Era of World War II involved the deposition of 3H, 137Cs, 65Zn, 90Sr, 89Sr, et cetera. While at present, the only sources of radionuclide release are from nuclear power and reprocessing plants (NPP), very high emissions of such isotopes may results from rare circumstances of NPP fallouts and accidents such as the one in Fukushima Daiichi (Japan) in 2011, or Chernobyl (Ukraine) in 1986.
One of the primary reasons that dictates the importance of radionuclides and their effects as an environmental contaminant is their physical half life. Building upon the same, for artificial radionuclides, their radiological importance is a result of corresponding radio-toxicity, radiation type (𝝰, 𝛃, 𝛄), bio-availability and behaviour within the food-chain. In parallel, natural radionuclides, despite their short half-lives, are of high radiological importance due to their continuous production and because of their permanence in terms of their constant level in the environment. Another significant factor may be attributed to the close chemical similarity to nutrients (137Cs – Potassium; Sr, Ra – Calcium) which causes a large uptake in the food nutrient chain.
On-ground effects
What probes concern onto the aforementioned implications is the entrapment in terms of alternatives of consumption. Every naturally soil-borne edible commodity has prevalence of radionuclides in idiosyncratic trace quantities. This follows a trend in terms of general trace amounts observed globally, with the Global East housing the least radionuclide percentage (with local exceptions).
The question thereby arises of these local exceptions which usually are from regions housing nuclear power plants and higher even values from locations of nuclear power plant disasters. Whilst a concept of lower reported values have surfaced from some locations, estimates still outlook towards the basic nuance of danger levels being higher in the regions.
Christopher Busby reported that the Ukrainian Ministry of Health, despite its optimistic beginnings against handling of the infamous Chernobyl disaster went on to warn its readers against consuming local milk, berries, or mushrooms, in a pamphlet stated:
“Dear Comrades! Since the accident at the Chernobyl power plant, there has been a detailed analysis of the radioactivity of the food and territory of your population point. The results show that living and working in your village will cause no harm to adults or children.”
On 2 March 2012, Katherine Harmon in “Health – Scientific American” wrote this article-title:
“Japan’s s post-Fukushima earthquake health woes go beyond radiation effects. Heart disease and depression are likely to claim more lives than radiation after the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear accident, experts say. Some public health experts agree that the radiation fears were overblown, and comparing with the effects of the radiation exposure from Fukushima the number of expected fatalities are never going to be that large and in terms of the health impact, the radiation is negligible, the radiation will cause very few, close to no deaths.”
Yet under-reported incidents are a common factor of such large-scale events. The following is an excerpt from a review corroborated by Sebastiano Venturi:
“Recently (2020), Hauptmann and other 15 international researchers from 8 nations and from Institutes of Biostatistics, Registry Research, Centers of Cancer Epidemiology, Radiation Epidemiology, U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI), International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and Radiation Effects Research Foundation of Hiroshima, conducted a study. They investigated definitively through meta-analysis the damage resulting from the “low doses,” that have affected the survivor populations of the atomic bomb explosions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and also in numerous accidents of nuclear plants that have occurred in the world. These scientists reported in JNCI Monographs: Epidemiological Studies of Low Dose Ionizing Radiation and Cancer Risk, that the new epidemiological studies directly support excess cancer risks from low-dose ionizing radiation.”
In conclusion, a notion may be derived leaning against these three tribes of narratives. The historical delineations allow us to garner the assumptions of industrialization which has allowed birth to certain radionuclides, which accelerate production and inversely affect our health. Notion of the near 1300 radionuclide forms which probe into the animate body and finally the implication of politics which has closely sheathed the facts. Whilst global agencies and intergovernmental organizations closely work to seep into educating the local bodies on the same, multiple governments are notorious for their maligning of released reports under their own biases. Lastly, a general demeanor of monitoring farm origins (in terms of geography) and farming techniques would be an easy solution, the realistic solution is minor cognizance, attention to consumed items and a retrospection into the growing ideal of modernization and development in the world. Individual emancipation of occasional worldly pleasures may contribute a minor ounce in promoting the slow-down of these increasing risk levels.
References:
1. S C Sheppard and W G Evenden. “Review of effect of soil on radionuclide uptake by plants”. In: (1987), p. 116.
2. Kevin J.R. Rosman, Warrick Chisholm, Sungmin Hong, Jean Pierre Candelone, and Claude F. Boutron. “Lead from Carthaginian and Roman Spanish mines isotopically identified in Greenland ice dated from 600 B.C. to 300 A.D.” In: Environmental Science and Technology 31.12 (1997), pp. 3413–3416. Issn: 0013936X.
3. Ingmar Grenthe, Janusz Drożdżynński, Takeo Fujino, Edgar C Buck, Thomas E Albrecht-Schmitt, and Stephen F Wolf. “Uranium”. In: The chemistry of the actinide and transactinide elements (2006), pp. 253–698.
4. Edward R Landa and Terry B Councell. “Leaching of uranium from glass and ceramic foodware and decorative items”. In: Health physics 63.3 (1992), pp. 343–348.
5. Syed M Qaim. “The present and future of medical radionuclide production”. In: Radiochimica Acta 100.8-9 (2012), pp. 635–651.
6. G Stöcklin, SM Qaim, and F Rösch. “The impact of radioactivity on medicine metallic”. In: Radiochimca Acta 70.Supplement (1995), pp. 249–272.
7. Friederike Strebl, Sabine Ehlken, Martin H Gerzabek, and Gerald Kirchner. “Behaviour of radionuclides in soil/crop systems following contamination”. In: Radioactivity in the Environment 10 (2007), pp. 19–42.
8. Yuichi Onda, Keisuke Taniguchi, Kazuya Yoshimura, Hiroaki Kato, Junko Takahashi, Yoshifumi Wakiyama, Frederic Coppin, and Hugh Smith. “Radionuclides from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in terrestrial systems”. In: Nature Reviews Earth and Environment 1.12 (2020), pp. 644–660. issn: 2662138X.
9. George Shaw. Radioactivity in the terrestrial environment. Elsevier, 2007.
10. Hauptmann, M., Daniels, R. D., Cardis, E., Cullings, H. M., Kendall, G., Laurier, D., … & Berrington de Gonzalez, A. (2020). Epidemiological studies of low-dose ionizing radiation and cancer: summary bias assessment and meta-analysis. JNCI Monographs, 2020(56), 188-200.
11. Busby, C. (1995). The wings of death: nuclear pollution and human health. Green Audit (Wales).
12. Venturi, S. (2021). Cesium in biology, pancreatic cancer, and controversy in high and low radiation exposure damage—scientific, environmental, geopolitical, and economic aspects. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(17), 8934.
13. Brown, K. (2019). Manual for survival: A Chernobyl guide to the future. Penguin UK.