New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Cold War Weapons Testing Increased Human DNA Mutation Rate

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The Cold War ended more than a decade ago, but scientists continue to assess its effects. From 1949 to 1956, a series of aboveground Soviet atomic tests at the Semipalatinsk nuclear facility in Kazakhstan exposed the local population to varying doses of ionizing radiation. Now, some 40 years later, researchers have discovered a significant increase in the genetic mutation rates of several generations of families that lived nearby. The findings appear in the current issue of the journal Science.

Researchers led by Yuri Dubrova of the University of Leicester analyzed blood samples collected from three generations of some 40 families in Beskaragai, a rural district neighboring the Semipalatinsk site. Specifically, the group looked at so-called minisatellite DNA¿short, repeating sequences sprinkled throughout the genome that are prone to mutation. Comparisons of the heritable mutation rates in these people with those of a nonirradiated, but similar population in Kazakhstan revealed considerable differences. The team found a nearly 80 percent increase in the mutation rate in individuals directly exposed to the radioactive fallout. Even the children of affected individuals showed a 50 percent mutation rate increase over their nonirradiated counterparts. The mutation rates declined steadily after the 1950s, however.

The health consequences of such elevated mutation rates, if any, remain unknown. The study does suggest, though, that the 1963 Moscow treaty banning atmospheric nuclear testing spared a number of people from further genetic mutation.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe