Concerns over a recent cancer study conducted by the U.S. Air Force are sparking calls for an independent review. Lawmakers, veterans, and health experts are now demanding that the military revisit its findings and take stronger action to ensure the safety of those who serve — particularly those assigned to missile bases.
The Air Force missile cancer study, initially launched in response to reports of elevated cancer rates among missileers, concluded earlier this year. But many believe that the study’s methods lacked transparency, independence, and depth. Now, a growing number of voices are calling for a full redo — this time by an outside agency not connected to the Department of Defense.
The concern began with alarming patterns observed among former missileers — Air Force personnel who manage and maintain intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), often while stationed underground for long shifts. Over the years, veterans and their families reported higher-than-normal cases of cancers, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma, thyroid cancer, and other blood-related diseases.
Missileers work in tightly sealed, concrete-encased capsules deep underground, surrounded by cables, electronic systems, and radar equipment — all of which could expose them to elevated levels of radiation or harmful chemicals. These conditions sparked fears that something in the missile environments could be harming airmen’s health.
Following years of mounting concerns, the Air Force began an internal review to examine whether these suspicions had merit. The findings were released earlier this year — but instead of easing worries, the report raised even more questions.
The Air Force’s study acknowledged a “statistical cluster” of cancers among missile community members but stopped short of confirming a direct cause. According to officials, while there was a slightly elevated number of cancer cases in the community, the data was not strong enough to claim a direct environmental link.
Critics, however, say the report didn’t go far enough.
Many lawmakers and veterans believe that the study:
The study’s perceived shortcomings triggered immediate backlash. Several members of Congress quickly voiced support for a more rigorous, independent examination.
Senator Jon Tester (D-Mont.), chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, has been among the most vocal critics of the study. In a recent statement, he said:
“The people who’ve worn our nation’s uniform deserve the truth. If there’s even a chance that their service exposed them to cancer-causing agents, we need an investigation that’s thorough, transparent, and independent of the same command structure that could be implicated.”
Other lawmakers echoed this sentiment, including Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) and Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.), who emphasized the need for a third-party review to avoid conflicts of interest.
They argue that only an outside, impartial agency — such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or the National Institutes of Health (NIH) — can provide the level of credibility and transparency that military families deserve.
Beyond Congress, former missileers themselves are stepping forward.
Some have shared personal stories about their health battles — and those of their fellow airmen. One widely circulated account comes from a retired officer who served at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana. He recounted how several of his fellow crew members had developed rare forms of cancer within a few years of service — an unusual pattern for such a young and healthy population.
Their concerns were often dismissed or ignored by officials, leading to frustration and a sense of betrayal.
A group of veterans recently formed an advocacy network to pressure the Department of Defense to take their concerns seriously. They are calling not only for a new study but also for better healthcare access, screening programs, and long-term health tracking for missileers.
Health experts argue that an effective and trustworthy study must include the following:
Experts say that only with these conditions in place can the military and the public trust the findings.
This controversy taps into a much larger conversation about environmental exposures in the military. From burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan to Agent Orange in Vietnam, the U.S. military has a long and troubling history of exposing service members to toxic substances — and then being slow to acknowledge the consequences.
Just in the last few years, Congress passed the PACT Act to provide benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances overseas. Now, advocates say it’s time to do the same for those who served here at home — especially those working under hazardous conditions in missile silos.
Lawmakers fear that if this issue is swept aside, more veterans could be left without the care and recognition they deserve.
Pressure is building. In July 2025, a bipartisan group of senators sent a formal request to the Department of Defense, urging them to approve an independent investigation into the Air Force missile cancer study. The request is currently under review.
If granted, the new study could begin as early as fall 2025. Veterans groups are hopeful but cautious.
In the meantime, several lawmakers have proposed legislation that would:
These proposals aim to ensure that those who served in some of the most secretive and demanding jobs in the military are not forgotten or overlooked.
The demand for an independent redo of the Air Force missile cancer study is about more than numbers and statistics. It’s about trust — and ensuring that the people who risked their lives to defend the nation are not quietly dismissed when they fall ill.
As the U.S. continues to invest heavily in its nuclear arsenal, thousands of airmen will continue to work in or around missile fields. Their safety — and the lessons learned from past mistakes must be a top priority.
The call for a new, transparent, and independent study is not just justified. It’s urgent.
Read Next – Lawmakers Vote to Name Opera House After Melania Trump
The University of Pittsburgh, commonly known as Pitt, has maintained its position as 32nd among…
Troy University has been recognized by U.S. News & World Report as one of the…
Salisbury University has recently been recognized as one of the best colleges in the United…
In a significant development, Hamas has announced that it will release all remaining hostages held…
In a recent statement, President Trump urged Israel to “immediately stop” bombing Gaza, emphasizing his…
U.S. financial markets experienced notable movements as Treasury yields ticked higher and crude oil prices…