Radiated on purpose as an infant in the 1950's, cancer developed years later
Comments
-
The only one I'm familiar with is the Hempelmann Cohort study. You could Google it, if you're not already aware of it.
1 -
I was radiated in 1944 as an infant for "enlarged thymus". I asked my parents about it many years ago in the 70s when a tv show explained that children who were radiated in that manner had a 1 in 4 chance of developing thyroid cancer later in life. My father said I had 2 or 3 treatments. In 1997 I was diagnosed with breast cancer as the result of an annual mammogram. It was aggressive and so was the way I chose to treat it: lumpectomy, chemo, radiation and 5 years of Tamoxifen. I had an opportunity to talk with a breast cancer researcher at an all day event hosted annually by Duke University. He believed that the infant radiation could have been related since in a tiny baby the chest wall isn't far from the thymus. This weekend I will celebrate 25 years since the surgery. I developed a skin cancer on my leg (unrelated) 4 years ago that was successfully treated with Mohs surgery.
1 -
I keep wondering why there has been no class action lawsuit. I never heard about this until my parents got that notification in the laste 70's and told me. I had all sorts of benign breast tumors as a teenager and finally agressive breast cancer when I was in my 30's. I survived that and then had breast cancer again, very agresssive again, back in 2014. I'm healthy now but I
I've had respitory stuff, earaches as a kid, my DRs at both Cedars Sinai in Los Angeles and UCSF in San Francisco have said that it's all from that radiation I had as a baby. Never (so far) had any thyroid issues...but everything else.
1 -
Thanks for sharing your story. It's likely that the '70s TV show, to which you referred, was "60 Minutes." I saw that show and had recalled my parents telling me my thymus had been radiated (1953), when I was an infant, because it was diagnosed as having been enlarged. That being the case, or so they thought, could put me at risk of SIDS. I went to my doctor after having seen that 60 Minutes episode and was told I had a golf ball-sized tumor on my thyroid. A biopsy showed it was malignant and I was promptly scheduled for a thyroidectomy. I've seen, on this and other related forums, that we're still not "out of the woods" in our senior years. I'm 69 now and people in their 60s and older have reported cancers of the salivary glands, throat, breast, lymph glands and neck/chest skin. Oddly, my three older siblings, born in 1944, 1945 and 1950, did not have their thymus glands treated like I did in 1953. I wonder if that was because the equipment necessary to do that treatment was not yet owned by our local hospital. I firmly believe medical facilities prescribe tests and treatments based on whatever equipment they've purchased, not based on potential benefit for specific patients. In any event, I recommend that you—and all of us who were victimized by this bogus science—remain vigilant about possible cancer occurrences in the area of the neck and chest.
0 -
Thanks for posting your story. Yes, it seems very odd that you haven't been found to have thyroid cancer, but you've surely had your share of terrible issues from the misguided thymus irradiation. Like you, I've long wondered why no legal action has been pursued, at least not to the best of my knowledge. I suspect the defense would be that medical professionals were doing the best they could with information available at that time, that they were acting in all good faith in the best interests of the infants and their parents. However, I recall having read that the negative affect of poverty and related stressors on development of certain glands and organs in young children was discovered in the 1920s. Marie Curie died of radiation exposure in 1934. Medical professionals knew better. I believe that even to this day they routinely employ radiation in tests and treatments in a cavalier and irresponsible way. And the damaging health effects are, or will continue to be, suffered for decades to come.
0 -
There are many websites that present information on the misguided radiation treatment of babies' thymus glands. The Hempelmann Cohort study seems to have been the most comprehensive and now readily available. Start here, perhaps... https://cardiooncologyjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40959-018-0027-0
0 -
That's a brutal medical history. Radiation, in the hands of medical professionals, has caused far more damage than it has promoted health, in my opinion. And we continue to hear a familiar refrain from them: "The levels used are minimal and absolutely safe." Think twice, long and hard, before consenting to have treatments and tests involving radiation.
0 -
It has been a few years since I responded to your original 2018 post. I'm not concerned about what seems like some sort of obstruction in the back of my throat. I fear the possibility of all sorts of other health issues stemming from my thymus irradiation in 1953. Your story is heart-wrenching and there are too many others who have suffered needlessly, due to the misguidedness of medical professionals with radioactivity in their toolbox. They used a dangerous tool to repair something that wasn't even broken and caused untold injuries and deaths. There's simply no nice way to state it and no sensible spin to excuse it.
0 -
Yours is a very interesting story. This photo, I found recently, is of a baby's thymus being misguidedly and unnecessarily radiated. Gives me chills. Such equipment did not appear to deliver "therapeutic" radiation treatments with pinpoint accuracy. Surely, from the looks of it, resulting health issues could surely include one's tongue, neck, chest and any organ in the vicinity. Regardless of how many years have passed since a procedure like this, we're never going to be "out of the woods." Be vigilant.
0 -
For those who may be wondering what radiating a baby's thymus looked like, I recently found this rather chilling photo. Brace yourself.
0 -
Hi..I’m a new member with an old story! In 1955, Sherman Oaks, Ca…at about age 6 months, I had several ionizing radium treatments on my upper left shoulder area to “stop” a skin hemangioma from spreading onto my face.
My mom told me the radium treatments were unsuccessful so a dry ice procedure was applied to my shoulder, ultimately stopping the spread.
Fast forward 19 years to 1974 and papillary thyroid cancer is discovered in my neck..was caught early so only half of my thyroid was removed. 2nd half of thyroid was taken out in 1978. Fast forward another 25 years and I have breast cancer, stage 1, again caught early 🙏🏻 requiring lumpectomy and 7 weeks of radiation, no chemo. Our family members generally are not predisposed to getting cancer..I’m the only one and at age 68 am extremely grateful to be “cancer-free!” I truly suspect both malignancies were environmentally-exclusive.
My question for the forum is has anyone with a similar history such as mine had any unusual and/or unexplained skin rashes that they suspect could possibly be related to radium treatments from long, long ago? Any input is greatly appreciated!!
1 -
Welcome to the CSN, although I'm sorry about the circumstances that brought you here. I didn't have a hemangioma like you, but I did have radiation "treatment" as a baby. In my case, it was for a supposedly "enlarged" thymus, but I strongly suspect, based on a considerable amount of online research I've done, that the adverse long-term results of radiation treatment of infants is sadly similar. I could make the same assumption based solely on feedback (posted here and via email) I've received. In a nutshell, anyone who received radiation treatment as an infant will ever be "out of the woods." They, and you, should remain relentlessly vigilant. I've had several skin cancer spots, well into my 60s, on my neck and get an annual checkup with a dermatologist who has no doubt they were caused by the radiation very early in my life. Other people in this forum, who had radiation treatments in the head/neck area for various reasons as young children, have been diagnosed with various cancers in the same bodily vicinity into their 70s. And I'm sure, back in the 1950s, doctors insisted the treatment was "perfectly safe," which is still what they're telling people of all ages, 70, 80, 90 years later. I believe, at this point in my life, that radiation used by medical professional for diagnosis and treatment, has and will continue to cause more instances of cancer than it has prevented or cured. Be relentless with your checkups and extremely cautious about recommended radiation strategies. Thanks so much for sharing your story!
0 -
Like you, I've wondered the same thing, but my wonderings are increasingly being replaced by certainty. The routine use of radiation in diagnostic imaging and cancer treatment, often accompanied by a fear-inducing "just to make sure" from doctors, is unconscionable and unacceptable. The history of physical radiation damage, medical and industrial, is long enough and horrifying enough to make us doubt, if not entirely dismiss, its long-term efficacy. Thanks very much for your post. This is a topic not to be ignored at any age.
0 -
Hi everyone. Just got done reading all this valuable info. My husband was a toddler back in late 50s and had a birthmark removed via cobalt treatments. He had no thyroid function at all and takes meds for it. He has had problems with his sinuses and has had surgery. He is 71 years old. I believe he said his mother held him on her lap while he got the treatments, and she died a few years ago from pancreatic cancer. I am afraid that he just found a lump on his chest wall. We will be having this checked asap, but that is what prompted me to do some research.
1 -
You may have already seen the CDC webpage that describes in general terms, how radiation was used in the 1940’s and 1950’s. It may or may not be helpful. I was born in 1950 and spend much of my infancy and early toddlerhood’s and it of the hospital with infections. Iwas treated with radiation for chronic mastoid infections. At age 40, I had a thyroid tumor that my endocrinologist felt was the result of my radiation exposure. It is not just the total amount of radiation exposure, but also the age of the child. The cohort studies are difficult to do with this population-children, military, wide variety of exposures and accumulation of exposures. So sad. Thought to be a good treatment, but over time-even many years, continues to be destructive.
1 -
So sad, indeed, @shewhowatches. Thank you for sharing that web link. Yes, I've read many professional and organizational articles online regarding the ongoing and, in my opinion, unconscionable use of ever-increasing levels of radioactive material in medical testing. And there are many more articles that include historical perspectives on the use of radioactivity, along with compelling warnings. Yet, medical professionals insist the risks are minimal and the fears unfounded. Doctors, today, recommend tests involving radioactivity as routinely as dentists recommend flossing. Only the profit is much greater for the medical tests, while flossing, to my knowledge, has never caused cancer. I strongly suspect there are many people in the fall and winter of their lives who are facing cancer diagnoses after having had radiation treatments as young children. I was very fortunate that my parents told me the story of my treatment, received when I was a baby, so I knew the right questions to ask. Best wishes as you continue to sort out this issue and pursue the right and reasonable care! [Edited by CSN Support Team]
0 -
Another difficult story to read, @lpammysnowball. I'd like to give the medical profession a pass on the use of radiation. I'd like to believe they didn't have a clue about the dangers it posed, especially when treating preschoolers in the 1950s. I'd like to believe we weren't just being used as guinea pigs for experimentation. In the early 1900s, however, there was considerable evidence that radioactivity posed threats to human health. Yet, still today, physicians are routinely recommending tests, such as nuclear stress tests, that require increasingly appalling amounts of radioactivity while claiming they only use "small amounts" that are "relatively safe" and "worth the risk." Google "nuclear stress test radiation risk," for example, and you can read all day. My continual indignation about this topic, however, does nothing to solve the problems you've already incurred, nor the stress and sadness I assume it has caused. Illnesses have an immeasurable ripple effect on loved ones. Thanks so much for sharing your story, as well as for your interest in gaining awareness of this issue. I wish you and your husband the best. Be strong as you advocate for his health! [Edited by CSN Support Team]
0 -
I just found this main forum/thread on infant irradiation. Will repost from a smaller one:
-------------------------
Born in 1955, I too was irradiated as an infant for enlarged thymus and sinus issues. Soon thereafter, the medical establishment stopped this barbaric practice after realizing that ALL healthy babies have thymuses larger than the cadavers of orphaned infants that were originally used to study infant anatomy (orphaned infants back then were typically unhealthy/malnourished). I've never had cancer, but some weird disorders that I wonder about; that's why I'm here. I’ve looked for support groups for irradiated infants, but this is the only one I've found. I’ve always had low blood pressure, cold body temp and extremities, low energy, erectile dysfunctions, metabolic/digestion issues, etc. I wonder how many other victims have similar issues.
-------------------------
Very glad to find this group and this very large/long thread on infant irradiation treatments of the past. While I have not read its entirety, I have already gotten some very good information. While I’ve never had cancer, I’m setting up an appointment with an endocrinologist right away! Thank you all so much!
1 -
Another difficult story to read, @lpammysnowball. I'd like to give the medical profession a pass on the use of radiation. I'd like to believe they didn't have a clue about the dangers it posed, especially when treating preschoolers in the 1950s. I'd like to believe we weren't just being used as guinea pigs for experimentation. In the early 1900s, however, there was considerable evidence that radioactivity posed threats to human health. Yet, still today, physicians are routinely recommending tests, such as nuclear stress tests, that require increasingly appalling amounts of radioactivity while claiming they only use "small amounts" that are "relatively safe" and "worth the risk." Google "nuclear stress test radiation risk," for example, and you can read all day. My continual indignation about this topic, however, does nothing to solve the problems you've already incurred, nor the stress and sadness I assume it has caused. Illnesses have an immeasurable ripple effect on loved ones. Thanks so much for sharing your story, as well as for your interest in gaining awareness of this issue. I wish you and your husband the best. Be strong as you advocate for his health! Email, if you wish: wrwoolley at gmail.com.
@kodsgy I'm afraid I can't definitively lay the problems you mentioned at the feet of the medical professionals who prescribed and/or administered your thymus radiation, but I'd absolutely check in with an endocrinologist asap. I do know the thyroid regulates metabolism, so your other issues might well be in play if something is amiss with your thyroid.
0
Discussion Boards
- All Discussion Boards
- 6 CSN Information
- 6 Welcome to CSN
- 121.6K Cancer specific
- 2.8K Anal Cancer
- 446 Bladder Cancer
- 308 Bone Cancers
- 1.6K Brain Cancer
- 28.5K Breast Cancer
- 395 Childhood Cancers
- 27.9K Colorectal Cancer
- 4.6K Esophageal Cancer
- 1.2K Gynecological Cancers (other than ovarian and uterine)
- 13K Head and Neck Cancer
- 6.3K Kidney Cancer
- 671 Leukemia
- 791 Liver Cancer
- 4.1K Lung Cancer
- 5.1K Lymphoma (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin)
- 234 Multiple Myeloma
- 7.1K Ovarian Cancer
- 56 Pancreatic Cancer
- 487 Peritoneal Cancer
- 5.4K Prostate Cancer
- 1.2K Rare and Other Cancers
- 534 Sarcoma
- 719 Skin Cancer
- 646 Stomach Cancer
- 190 Testicular Cancer
- 1.5K Thyroid Cancer
- 5.9K Uterine/Endometrial Cancer
- 6.3K Lifestyle Discussion Boards