Radiation and Cancer in Idaho (Boise, Emmett: 2013, how much, homes)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We've been researching the heck out of a move to Idaho for the past 8 months, and will be visiting in a few weeks to check out the area for homes. Idaho seems to be a great fit for us.
Unfortunately, it was brought to our attention this past week that Emmett (the town we were hoping to land in) has extremely high cancer rates due to the radiation testing in the 50's and 60's. We're in our 30's, so I think we should steer clear of the majority of the problems that come with being raised in the area, but we do plan on having children and would hate to increase their chances for cancer and other radiation related diseases.
Does anyone know if the effects are still lingering around Idaho? Specifically, is it still in the ground water & soil, are there still increased risk rates for cancer in the state because of this? Also, it looks like there is a nuclear waste site about 70 miles south of Boise, which is a little concerning. I know the internet isn't always full or truthful information, so I would like to get some local opinions about this. We really love Idaho, but want to make sure it is safe before we buy a home there.
Thanks in advance for and information you can provide!
There are many nuclear sites and many more old nuclear accident and event sites all over the intermountain west. Nuclear stuff has been falling, leaking, evaporating, and mixing into the dirt in Idaho and all it's surrounding states since the very beginnings of the atomic age.
The west still has many nuclear missile silos, designated waste depositories, and lingering contamination from the Pacific to the west side of the plains states, and beyond. Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, California, Texas, Arkansas, and Oklahoma all have old nuke stuff within them.
But so do New York, Maine, Lousiana, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, and states far away from Idaho.
How much a person worries about the possibility of cancer is up to them. Since the nuclear industry did spread all over, it's hard not to find an area that has never been touched.
I won't poo-poo anyone's health concerns. If a person feels that a possible nuke threat is of greater concern than ground water that has been contaminated with chemicals or naturally occurring poisons, or air that is opaque, that is their right. The fact is, I believe, few places are left that have never been contaminated with something.
Idaho has good clean water in most areas, excellent air quality, and a history of long-lived residents. Past that, what a person's worries about what could possibly happen is up to them.
For most folks looking to move here, the day-to-day concerns of finding a good job, finding happiness, finding security, or finding a beautiful spot in which to live are the most important.
If the past nuclear related possibilities concern you greatly, look to another place where you won't worry.
Last edited by banjomike; 08-25-2013 at 03:14 PM..
I won't poo-poo anyone's health concerns. If a person feels that threat is of greater concern than ground water that has been contaminated with chemicals or naturally occurring poisons, that is their right. The fact is, I believe, few places are left that have never been contaminated with something left in the U.S.
I totally agree. I am concerned with the aquifer in Idaho, as the government initially said it wouldn't be affected for 80,000 years but a study in 1995 said 30 years. HUGE discrepancy. Unfortunately, there are few parts of the world not affected by nuclear or any other contaminate that could be a health concern. It just doesn't exist. It's a balance, for sure between worrying about all the things that have been affected by human meddling of one sort of another and just doing the best you can in the ways that you actually do have control over.
banjomike - Thank you for your reply! I completely understand that no matter where you live, there will always be some kind of contamination. I don't know if I should be thankful or regretful for all of the information out there on the internet. I guess if you research something enough online you're bound to be freaked out of everything within a few minutes! I've lived in California my whole life and had no idea about the number of nuclear facilities within 1 hour of where we live.
GypsyMama2 - The aquifer is very concerning to us as well. I'm more of a right winged, gun toting, big business person myself, as apposed to a green party environmental fanatic, but this concerns me greatly. I have a few emails out the some cancer centers in the Boise area and will let you know what we find out.
Idaho seems like the perfect pace to raise a family, but this is a little scary when you start to look into it.
I totally agree. I am concerned with the aquifer in Idaho, as the government initially said it wouldn't be affected for 80,000 years but a study in 1995 said 30 years. HUGE discrepancy. Unfortunately, there are few parts of the world not affected by nuclear or any other contaminate that could be a health concern. It just doesn't exist. It's a balance, for sure between worrying about all the things that have been affected by human meddling of one sort of another and just doing the best you can in the ways that you actually do have control over.
A little knowledge is just that- a little.
I read somewhere that all ground water in Colorado is contaminated with sulphuric acid and the arsenic the acid dissolves. And i know for a fact that Rocky Flats, just uphill from Denver was a contaminated nuclear site.
Does either scare me enough to ever write off Colorado as a place to live? No. Not until I have learned much, much more about the state than I do now. I'm a cautious man, but I know I don't know very much about all the places in this world I don't live in. I'm also old enough to know the internet is only a good first source, and seldom the best or most neutral in planning a major life change.
If your concerns are truly worrisome, I suggest using the net to find the accurate source material. Don't trust anyone's second-hand or anecdotal information. Cancer hot spots do exist, but there are many causes for cancer, not just one.
As far as idaho's ground wather goes: there are more than one aquifers here. Only an accurate hydrology study will provide you with good information as to how, or if, they interconnect.
One of the articles I found mentioned Iodine-131 specifically, which has a half-life of 8.5 days, and after 3 months it is negligible. Of course, if you had exposure to it during that timeframe, it will affect your health for years to come. A half century later though, I am not worried about it.
We've been researching the heck out of a move to Idaho for the past 8 months, and will be visiting in a few weeks to check out the area for homes. Idaho seems to be a great fit for us.
Unfortunately, it was brought to our attention this past week that Emmett (the town we were hoping to land in) has extremely high cancer rates due to the radiation testing in the 50's and 60's. We're in our 30's, so I think we should steer clear of the majority of the problems that come with being raised in the area, but we do plan on having children and would hate to increase their chances for cancer and other radiation related diseases.
Does anyone know if the effects are still lingering around Idaho? Specifically, is it still in the ground water & soil, are there still increased risk rates for cancer in the state because of this? Also, it looks like there is a nuclear waste site about 70 miles south of Boise, which is a little concerning. I know the internet isn't always full or truthful information, so I would like to get some local opinions about this. We really love Idaho, but want to make sure it is safe before we buy a home there.
Thanks in advance for and information you can provide!
Check with the ID Health Dept. I admire your interest in wanting to know more facts. I'll be impressed when you post the links and/or contact person for others to contact as well.
I've lived in the PNW my whole life so if this region dooms me to cancer, I guess so be it at this point.
That being said, if you look at cancer rates by state, the CDC has four categories and Idaho is in the second lowest one. So there's that bit of positive news.
I've lived in the PNW my whole life so if this region dooms me to cancer, I guess so be it at this point.
That being said, if you look at cancer rates by state, the CDC has four categories and Idaho is in the second lowest one. So there's that bit of positive news.
Good point, and I'm moving from Washington to Idaho and according to this CDC map, Idaho has lower cancer rates than the state I've lived in my whole life until now: US Cancer Statistics: An Interactive Atlas
Cancer isn't all about nuclear testing of course, or Iowa & Kentucky wouldn't be some of the states with the highest incidences of cancer.
Idaho does show up on the high end with Leukemia incidence (for example), but then again so is Washington, Minnesota, Maine, etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.