[fusion_builder_container type=”flex” hundred_percent=”no” equal_height_columns=”no” menu_anchor=”” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” class=”” id=”” background_color=”” background_image=”” background_position=”center center” background_repeat=”no-repeat” fade=”no” background_parallax=”none” parallax_speed=”0.3″ video_mp4=”” video_webm=”” video_ogv=”” video_url=”” video_aspect_ratio=”16:9″ video_loop=”yes” video_mute=”yes” overlay_color=”” video_preview_image=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” padding_top=”” padding_bottom=”” padding_left=”” padding_right=””][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ layout=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” border_position=”all” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding_top=”” padding_right=”” padding_bottom=”” padding_left=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” center_content=”no” last=”true” min_height=”” hover_type=”none” link=”” border_sizes_top=”” border_sizes_bottom=”” border_sizes_left=”” border_sizes_right=”” first=”true”][fusion_text columns=”” column_min_width=”” column_spacing=”” rule_style=”” rule_size=”” rule_color=”” hue=”” saturation=”” lightness=”” alpha=”” content_alignment_medium=”” content_alignment_small=”” content_alignment=”” hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” sticky_display=”normal,sticky” class=”” id=”” margin_top=”” margin_right=”” margin_bottom=”” margin_left=”” fusion_font_family_text_font=”” fusion_font_variant_text_font=”” font_size=”” line_height=”” letter_spacing=”” text_transform=”” text_color=”” animation_type=”” animation_direction=”left” animation_color=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_delay=”0″ animation_offset=”” logics=””]
On June 7th, the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) expired. The Senate passed an expanded version of the act earlier this year, but the Speaker of the US House of Representatives failed to bring it to a vote. This failure marked a critical shift in the US’s outlook towards shouldering responsibility for the harms of the nuclear age, including from atomic testing in New Mexico and Nevada from 1945 to 1992. By not extending RECA, the US Government underscored a glaring shortcoming in the nation’s acknowledgment and assistance for the long-term impacts of nuclear testing. This decision provides an impetus for discussions of the broader consequences of nuclear testing conducted in the US, which have left irreversible scars on the land and its people.
According to a 1997 press release from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), testing at the Nevada National Security Site, formerly known as the Nevada Test Site, exposed American children to 15-70 times more radiation than what the government had previously reported. This finding reflects the exponentially larger scale at which downwind communities, both near and far, were impacted by these tests on US soil. The radiation exposure resulted in a significant increase in the incidence of thyroid cancer, particularly in children, due to their higher consumption of milk. Cows grazed in radiation-contaminated pastures and as a result, their milk contained high concentrations of iodine-131 and strontium-90, radioactive isotopes that accumulate in the thyroid. This is one of many examples of how radiation fallout impacted those downwind from the tests.
The health consequences of radiation exposure experienced by the downwind communities, either during the tests or due to environmental contamination over time, left lasting scars on entire communities that continue to affect individual’s well-being today. Many individuals witnessed multiple family members across different generations develop deadly cancers such as thyroid and lymphoma. In an interview for the KAWC in 2021, Laura Hanley, an attorney who processed RECA claims, despondently referred to the widespread cases of medical complications due to radiation exposure as “death mile.” Hanley was referring to the devastation of whole families and neighborhood communities.
In acknowledging the extreme physical and emotional burden of the health consequences of radiation exposure, it is important to recognize that these consequences have also led to adverse and less understood impacts on the economic well-being of these regions. While it is understood that the treatment of individuals in these regions furthered the financial insecurity of families who underwent treatment; what is less studied is how this impacted workforce capacity and thus the resulting economic vitality in these regions. In establishing a closer study of these economic consequences, progress can be made toward better acknowledging and more comprehensively shouldering the economic burden affected families face.
It is important to note that any effort to study and effectively respond to the economic burden affected families face must also better acknowledge the mounting burden of direct financial costs associated with necessary medical treatment, which was unmatched by any financial coverage provided through RECA. Under RECA, individuals in certain counties downwind from the Nevada National Security Site were eligible for a one-time, lump sum of $50,000. However, beyond the fact that RECA is no longer in effect, its coverage did not shoulder most of the cost of healthcare treatments, especially for those who do not have health insurance.
Principal Investigator of the Radiation Exposure Screening and Education Program (RESEP) Dr. Laura Shaw is one of many calling out this shortcoming of RECA and underscoring the need for more expansive coverage. In particular, Dr. Shaw highlights that the true costs of treatment for cancers developed as a result of radiation exposure amount to around $150,000. Her remarks are backed by the National Cancer Institute, which additionally notes that this cost only pertains to the treatment of one type of cancer when, in reality, many can face more than one cancer over their lifetimes.
The economic fallout from nuclear testing conducted in the US reflects the additional long-term financial strains imposed on downwinders, in addition to the physical and emotional detriment caused by radiation exposure. Establishing a comprehensive study of these socioeconomic impacts will provide an essential tool in forwarding a readoption and expansion of RECA to address the gaps in its coverage and the indirect long-term costs posed to affected communities.
[/fusion_text][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]