The post-Fukushima period is generating oceans of data, but much of it is useless. These women generate their own, but also want more solid data than the government has been willing to provide.
Don’t get me wrong: These women are pissed! (My word not theirs.) And they have every right to express that, even in Japan, at least according to its constitution.
I cannot leave Japan without peeling back the layer of sticky rice and sweet bean paste that keeps the victims of Tepco’s iodine, cesium and strontium on their feet. Continue reading
Fukushima, April 2011
Some who read yesterday’s post from Temporary Housing near Koriyama, Fukushima Prefecture are probably still unhappy with me! The idea that small reductions in radiation exposure are any kind of “solution” flies in the face of what we know: there is no safe dose of radiation. We say: “No cure, only prevention!”
The women that I met on my first day here have no choice. Elders (60+), many have moved 4 or 5 times since they were forced to leave their homes in March 2011; some report when they reached the first Evacuation Center that their contamination levels were so high they pegged the monitors. Now most of their husbands are gone, their children have jobs in the big cities now, they are alone. For one reason or another, they need the support they get by staying where they are. Where they live now is unrestricted but still radioactive to varying degrees, well above where I live. When the evacuation order is lifted, most will have no choice but to return to houses that while “reduced” in radioactivity are not clean. Continue reading
Today’s post is by Dr. Ian Fairlie, reposted with permission from his blog here.
In 2013, I discussed several epidemiological studies providing good evidence of radiogenic risks at very low exposure levels.
A powerful new study (1) has been published in Lancet Haematology which adds to this evidence. However the study’s findings are perhaps even more important than the previous studies, for several reasons.
First, as stated by the authors, it provides “strong evidence of a dose-response relationship between cumulative, external, chronic, low-dose, exposures to radiation and leukaemia”. Continue reading
Part of the massive Sellafield nuclear complex in the U.K. Photo from Greenpeace UK.
The issue of whether children living near nuclear reactors are more susceptible to childhood leukemia has long been a controversial issue, especially in Europe, where numerous studies have found significantly increased risk for leukemia among children living near reactors.
In 1990, a particularly noted report (the Gardner report) found the risk of leukemia among children near the U.K.’s Sellafield facility to be seven times higher than for children living away from nuclear facilities.
Here in the U.S., the controversy has been far less conspicuous, despite a few similar studies around selected reactors, perhaps because the nuclear industry has been more successful at quashing such studies as soon as they appear. Continue reading
A new scientific study from IPPNW/PSR finds that the official UN report understates health effects from the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster
We are posting here a statement from International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)and their U.S. affiliate Physicians for Social Responsibility, which today released a major and important critique of the official UNSCEAR study on the health effects of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. This is the most comprehensive and scientific critique of that study yet published, and merits wide public distribution. A link to the full study is provided at the bottom of this post.
Today, physicians from 19 affiliates of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) published a critical analysis of the Fukushima report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). The efforts made by UNSCEAR committee members to evaluate the extensive and complex data concerning the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe are appreciated. The report shows that the Fukushima nuclear disaster was not a singular event, but is an ongoing catastrophe; that it is not confined to Fukushima Prefecture, but affects people all over Japan and beyond; and that it constitutes the largest single radioactive contamination of the ocean ever recorded. Continue reading