Mortality and cancer incidence 1952–2017 in United Kingdom participants in the United Kingdom’s atmospheric nuclear weapon tests and experimental programmes

• Published in: Journal of radiological protection Vol. 42; no. 2
• Main Authors: Gillies, Michael, Haylock, Richard G E
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England IOP Publishing 23.02.2022
• Subjects: cancer incidence; Humans; Incidence; Male; mortality; Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced - etiology; nuclear weapon tests; Nuclear Weapons; radiation; Risk; United Kingdom - epidemiology; United Kingdom; mortality; radiation; cancer incidence; nuclear weapon tests
• ISSN: 0952-4746; 1361-6498
• DOI: 10.1088/1361-6498/ac52b4

This study examines the mortality and cancer incidence experience among men who took part in the United Kingdom's atmospheric nuclear weapon tests between 1952-67. A cohort of 21 357 servicemen and male civilians from the UK who participated in the tests and a group of 22 312 controls were followed between 1952 and 2017. Analyses of mortality and cancer incidence were conducted. The overall mortality rate in the test participants was slightly higher relative risk (RR = 1.02, 90% CI 1.00-1.05, = 0.04) than that in the control group. This difference was driven by similar increased risks for both all cancers combined (RR 1.03, 90% CI 1.00-1.07) and all non-cancer diseases (RR = 1.02, 90% CI 1.00-1.05). Leukaemia excluding chronic lymphatic incidence showed evidence of being raised relative to controls (RR = 1.38, 90% CI 1.10-1.75, = 0.01). Leukaemia risks were driven by increased risks for chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) (RR = 2.43, 90% CI 1.43-4.13, = 0.003). Among non-cancer outcomes only cerebrovascular diseases showed increases in participants relative to controls. UK nuclear weapon tests participants have lower mortality rates compared to the national population although rates are slightly (2%) higher than in the study control group. Variation in background characteristics, that could not be accounted for in the analysis (e.g. smoking habits, diet), are a possible explanation for this difference. For leukaemia evidence of increased risk in the early years after the test has generally continued to diminish with time although for CML risks have persisted. There was some evidence that participants had higher mortality rates from cerebrovascular diseases than those in the control group. Assuming recorded radiation exposures (generally very low) are a true reflection of actual exposures then it is unlikely that any observed health effect will have been caused by radiation exposure.