Medical science has hunted tirelessly for the cause of cancer, spending billions of dollars studying the role of everything from genetics to industrial pollutants, to bacteria, viruses and cosmic radiation. But one highly qualified, highly contentious researcher says the cancer industry has overlooked one obvious source: itself. Dr. John Gofman blames 75% of new cancer cases on ionizing forms of medical radiation from ubiquitous diagnostic tools, including X-rays, computed tomography (CT) scans, mammograms and fluoroscopy.
The 82-year-old professor emeritus of molecular and cell biology at the University of California at Berkeley says many cases of coronary disease can also be attributed to medical radiation. Dr. Gofman's startling claims contradict years of assurances that X-rays and other forms of ionizing radiation are safe, life-saving diagnostic and preventative tools. Indeed, he himself spent years separately studying heart disease and low-level radiation, fields he assumed were unrelated, before stumbling across what he is now convinced is a deadly connection.
In the early '90s, Dr. Gofman started working on a demographic and statistical analysis to consider the effects of medical radiation on an entire population, the first such effort in the world. This past August, his completed 699-page study was published by The Committee For Nuclear Responsibility (CNR), based in San Francisco. It concludes X-rays, CT scans and the like, combined with other risk factors such as poor diet, smoking, abortions and use of birth control pills, have become the major cause of cancer fatalities, and will cause a staggering 100 million premature deaths over the next decade.
Dr. Gofman initially planned to conduct his study by comparing death rates with estimates of the amount of medical radiation received on average by population. However, no such data existed. Instead he compared death rates from 1940 to 1990 in each of the nine census divisions of the U.S. with the average number of medical doctors per 100,000 population. He assumed that since physicians prescribe most X-rays, the number prescribed should be roughly proportional to the number of doctors serving the population.
His research produced an astonishing result. While death rates from almost all other causes declined as physician density increased, death rates from cancer and ischemic heart disease (also known as coronary heart disease) increased in direct proportion to how many physicians there were in a given area.
While Dr. Gofman concedes that X-rays are useful for certain diagnostic situations, he still considers the technology considerably overused. "I won't advise people to stay away from it entirely, because X-rays can help diagnose important diseases, such as tumours. However, the lowest possible dose should be used to get the maximum amount of diagnostic information." Even at lower doses, Dr. Gofman suggests, accumulation of ionizing medical radiation can trigger cancer five to 50 years later. "There is no safe dose," he maintains. "Just one radioactive atom can produce permanent mutation in a cell's genetic molecules, which is cancer."
Dr. Gofman is certainly no solitary crank. He holds a medical degree plus a PhD in nuclear and physical chemistry. He has been a lecturer at the University of California School of Medicine since 1947 and has accumulated a host of other appointments and credits. In the 1970s, he co-invented the VIDA heart monitor, a pocket computer worn by heart patients to detect and signal episodes of cardiac arrhythmias. He also invented a cardiographic electrode still widely used throughout hospitals in the U.S. Early in his career, he co-discovered uranium-233 and was instrumental in isolating the first milligram of plutonium. In the matter of radiation's hazards, however, he stands outside the mainstream. Indeed, his conclusions so enraged British radiologists five years ago that they tried to prevent a documentary on his work by 20/20 Television. A ban on the program was demanded, with The Royal College of Radiologists calling Dr. Gofman's conclusions "unsound, inaccurate, misleading, and unnecessarily alarmist."
Even today, his research is largely met with professional derision. " Radiation safety is not an issue," insists Dr. John Radomsky, president of the Canadian Association of Radiologists. While he has not seen Dr. Gofman's study, he argues the benefits from procedures employing low-level radiation, such as mammography, vastly outweigh any negligible risks. Dr. Joel Fuhrman, a New Jersey physician, argues that cancer is a lifestyle disease, stemming from a fruit and vegetable deficiency and habits such as smoking.
Dr. Gofman himself admits he has been able to convince only a handful of other medical researchers his claims have merit. Still, he maintains, " medical X-rays are not safe and one should have as few as possible, otherwise people are going to keep dying."
Report Newsmagazine
January 22, 2001
