4.6 Editorial Material

Invited Commentary: Ionizing Radiation and Future Reproductive Health-Old Cohorts Still Deserve Attention

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 190, 期 11, 页码 2334-2336

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwab156

关键词

atomic bomb; congenital malformations; genetics; nuclear weapons; perinatal mortality; pregnancy outcomes; radiation effects

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence funding scheme [262700]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Public concern over radiation from nuclear weapons or power plants remains, but relevant data to address these concerns are currently scarce. Studies on reproductive health outcomes in survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings show that although exposure levels were high, the overall effects are still weak.
Radiation from nuclear weapons or power plants has caused great concern among the public-concern that needs to be addressed with the best available data. Among the concerns associated with ionizing radiation are possible serious and far-reaching effects on reproductive health. Relevant data that can be used to address these concerns are scarce. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings of World War II and the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine are probably among the most dramatic and important sources of information on health effects, but much of the information is historical, and the exposed cohorts are getting old. In their accompanying article, Yamada et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2021;190(11):2323-2333) revisit data on reproductive health outcomes in survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings during the years after the blasts. Exposure levels were very high, but after Yamada et al.'s reanalysis, effect estimates were low, and the evidence for overall effects on birth defects and perinatal mortality is still weak. The authors acknowledge that their data have limitations and that the generalizability of the findings is limited by the devastating conditions that prevailed in the 2 Japanese cities after the blasts.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据