Flying and cancer

[237SJ]

I`m so sick and tired of hearing of my (flying) colleages dying of cancer. Tonight I have just heard of yet another one (in his 40s) who has died. I`m quite shocked as he was of my era and I knew him. I sometimes wonder when it will be my turn as I am sure that my life will be shortened due to flying. I know tests have been done on flying staff and I know for a fact that the results were "lost" but is there any research out there that that can quantify the negative effects of radiation etc?

[Mamyalynne]

There have been many studies undertaken, mostly in the USA, not sure that any concrete evidence has yet been proven.

[vulcan]

Scroll down to question 5, it lists some of the papers written about this subject.
http://hps.org/public...ommercialflights.html

[Buenchico]

This link puts the radiation dose from flying into context:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15288975

[237SJ]

I think you`re right about a lack of concrete evidence mamya. Years ago, an airline (which shall remain nameless) was approached by a body of people who wanted to do medical research on their crew. 50 long haul crew were recruited to be wired up, blood tested and generally investigated for one month. The results were going to be collated by a military hospital (who shall also remain nameless). When the results were due to be released, the military hospital was accused of losing the results. A union decided that they would do the same tests and they duly recruited 50 crew to go through the same tests. They "hid" the results. The results were so bad that they concluded nobody should fly for longer than 5 years and they didn`t want the Company to get hold of that information because they could use it to put people on short-term contracts.

[237SJ]

Thanks for the links. I was typing my answer out as they were being posted. I don`t think it is just about radiation though. Working through the night (and going through time zones) sleep deprivation and other issues come into play. I simply think that at the end of the day, not enough is known about the effects of flying frequently. Much more research needs to be done.

[Buenchico]

Proving that a particular style of working might not get you very far anyway, 237SJ.

There's plenty of evidence that working 'regular nights' knocks two years off someone's expected lifespan, whereas working 'rotating shifts' can decrease life expectancy by between two and five years. I doubt that such evidence will result in employers abandoning shift work!

Commercial pilots (and air crew) are likely to suffer the same problems as 'shift workers', plus they'll experience very slightly higher levels of radiation (but no more than someone who lives above granite, e.g. in Glasgow). It would be hard to show that they're at any greater risk of cancer than any other workers.

[237SJ]

Thing is Chris, that shift workers work at night and sleep during the day. For example, my nurse friend goes to work at about 7pm at night so she sleeps for about 7 or 8 hours in the day. If I go to work at night, I don`t sleep during the day so I have been up for 12 hours before I even get to work (and my shift and be anything up to 15.5 hours) After that duty, I will sleep for about 3.5 to 4 hours and make myself get up again (to avoid jetla
g). When I get home from work it is quite common for me to have been up for 24 hours (having gone through 7 or 8 time zones) but I will still only sleep for 3.5 to 4 hours. I think it is the sleep deprivation that is a killer and bad for the health.

[what..the?]

just read your posts and then started doing my own research on the risk of cancer if living on a solid slate bed rock if any??? still not sure if added risk radiation but came across this.

Air travel
Air travel exposes people on aircraft to increased radiation from space as compared to sea level, including cosmic rays and from solar flare events.[38] Software programs such as Epcard, CARI, SIEVERT, PCAIRE are attempts to simulate exposure by aircrews and passengers.[38] An example of a measured dose (not simulated dose), is 6 μSv per hour from London Heathrow to Tokyo Narita on a high-latitude polar route.[38] However, dosages can vary, such as during periods of high solar activity.[38] The United States FAA requires airlines to provide flight crew with information about cosmic radiation, and an ICRP recommendation for the general public is no more than 1 mSv per year.[38] In addition, many airlines do not allow pregnant flightcrew members, to comply with a European Directive.[38] The FAA has a recommended limit of 1 mSv total for a pregnancy, and no more than 0.5 mSv per month.[38] Information originally based on Fundamentals of Aerospace Medicine published in 2008.[38]

http://en.wikipedia.o...ki/Ionizing_radiation

[237SJ]

Thanks what -the. We have a system at work where I can check my radiation sv levels. I am always within the safe levels. I am not sure how anyone can estimate the safe levels though and that is my point. Radiation levels can vary a lot. For example, if you work on an aircraft such as the triple seven (which I do) they fly higher (40,000ft+)

[what..the?]

does the device measure the current level or the build up overtime? surely the later is more important.

[237SJ]

It`s not a device but a rolling total. In the UK, airline crew can`t fly for more than 900 hours per year. I am part time now so my max is about 700 hours per year. My sv totals are based on my flying hours.

[scowie]

It may not be the radiation that's the problem, but rather contaminants in the air supply...

http://www.wdr.de/tv/...th_care_providers.pdf