Lifetime Cumulative Limit of Internal Radiation from Food to Be 100 Millisieverts in Japan

That's the formal recommendation of the experts on the government's Food Safety Commission.

External radiation is not counted in this number, as opposed to their draft plan in July which did include external radiation, and it is in addition to the natural radiation exposure (by which is meant pre-Fukushima natural).

The experts on the Commission didn't rule on the radiation limit for children, leaving the decision to the Ministry of Health and Labor as if the top-school career bureaucrats in the Ministry would know better.

Yomiuri and other MSMs are spinning it as "tightening" the existing provisional safety limits on food.

From Yomiuri Shinbun (10/27/2011):

食品中の放射性物質による内部被曝(ひばく)の健康影響について検討してきた内閣府の食品安全委員会は２７日、食品から受ける生涯の累積線量の上限をおおよそ１００ミリ・シーベルトとする答申をまとめた。

The Food Safety Commission under the Cabinet Office has been deliberating on the health effect of internal radiation exposure from the radioactive materials in food. On October 27, it submitted its recommendation to set the upper limit on lifetime cumulative radiation from food at 100 millisieverts.

厚生労働省はこれを受け、個別の食品ごとに定める具体的な規制値の検討に入る。福島第一原発の事故後に急きょ設けられた暫定規制値よりも厳しい内容となる見通しで、文部科学省の放射線審議会の検討を経て、新たな規制値が決まる。

On receiving the recommendation, the Ministry of Health and Labor will start setting the detailed guidelines for each food items. They are expected to be stricter than the provisional safety limits set right after the Fukushima I Nuclear Plant accident. The Radiation Commission under the Ministry of Education will review the guidelines to be set by the Ministry of Health and Labor, and the new safety limits will be formally decided.

　食安委は、７月にとりまとめた答申案では、空気中の放射性物質による外部被曝も含めて「生涯１００ミリ・シーベルト」を目安にしていた。しかしその後に寄せられた一般の意見や指摘を踏まえ、現状では外部被曝の影響は小さいとして、食品による内部被曝に限定した。

According to the draft of the recommendation in July, the Food Safety Commission was aiming at setting "100 millisieverts lifetime limit" that would include the external radiation exposure from the nuclides in the air. However, based on the opinions from the general public, the Commission decided that the effect of external radiation exposure was small and focused only on internal radiation exposure from food.

　仮に生涯を１００年とした場合、単純計算では年間１ミリ・シーベルトが上限。現行の暫定規制値では放射性セシウムだけでも年間５ミリ・シーベルトを上限としており、新たな規制は、現行の暫定規制値よりも厳しくなるのは必至だ。

If we suppose one's lifetime is 100 years, then 1 millisievert per year would be the maximum. The current provisional safety limit assumes the upper limit of 5 millisievert per year with radioactive cesium alone. So the new regulations will inevitably be stricter than the current provisional safety limits.

　なお、子どもの被曝については「大人よりも影響を受けやすい」と指摘したものの、具体的な数値は示さなかった。子どもへの影響を規制値に反映するかどうかについて、食安委は「厚労省などで検討すべき内容」と説明している。

In addition, the Commission pointed out that children "are more susceptible to the effect of radiation", but it didn't cite any specific number for children. The Commission explained that it would be up to the Ministry of Health and Labor and other agencies to discuss" whether the effect on children should be reflected in the new safety limits.

Oh boy. So many holes in the article.

First, I suspect it is a rude awakening for many Japanese to know that the current provisional safety limits for radioactive materials in food presuppose very high internal radiation level already. The Yomiuri article correctly says 5 millisieverts per year from radioactive cesium alone. The provisional safety limit for radioactive iodine, though now it's almost irrelevant, is 2,000 becquerels/kg, and that presupposes 2 millisieverts per year internal radiation. From cesium and iodine alone, the provisional safety limits on food assume 7 millisievert per year internal radiation.

(The reason why the radioactive iodine limit is set lower than that for radioactive cesium is because radioactive iodine all goes to thyroid gland and gets accumulated in the organ.)

I am surprised that Yomiuri even mentioned the 5 millisieverts per year limit from cesium exposure alone. I suspect it is the first time ever for the paper.

Second, the article says the Commission decided to exclude external radiation from the "100 millisieverts" number because of the public opinion. Which "public" opinion are they talking about? Mothers and fathers with children? I doubt it. If anything, the general public (at least those who doesn't believe radiation is good for them) would want to include external radiation so that the overall radiation limit is set, rather than just for food.

Third, and most importantly, if the proposed lifetime limit of 100 millisieverts is only for internal radiation from FOOD, then the overall internal radiation could be much higher. Why? Because, pre-Fukushima, the natural internal radiation from food in Japan was only 0.41 millisievert per year (mostly from K-40), or 28% of total natural radiation exposure per year of 1.45 millisievert (average). Of internal radiation exposure, inhaling radon is 0.45 millisievert per year in Japan, as opposed to the world average of 1.2 millisievert per year.

Now, these so-called experts in the government commission are saying the internal radiation from food can be 1 millisievert per year (assuming the life of 100 years), in addition to the natural internal radiation from food (K-40) which is 0.41 millisievert per year. Then, you will have to add internal exposure from inhaling the radioactive materials IN ADDITION TO radon which is 0.45 millisievert per year.

Winter in the Pacific Ocean side of east Japan is dry, particularly in Kanto. North wind kicks up dust, and radioactive materials in the dust will be kicked up. The Tokyo metropolitan government will be burning away the radioactive debris from Iwate Prefecture (Miyagi's to follow) into the wintry sky. So-called "decontamination" efforts all over east Japan will add more radioactive particles in the air for people to breathe in.

Don't be fooled by this 100-millisievert lifetime number. It's bogus.

************************
For your information, the comparison of natural radiation exposure levels (the world vs Japan), from the Nuclear Safety Research Association Handbook on treating acute radiation injury (original in Japanese; my translation of labels). Japan has (or had) markedly lower radon inhalation than the world average, and much lower external radiation from the ground and from cosmic ray. It makes it all up by overusing the medical X-rays and CT scans, and even the Nuclear Safety Research Association who issued the following table says Japan tends to use too many X-rays and scans and that the medical professionals should make effort not to overuse them.

	Type of exposure	World average （UN Science Commission）		Japan average
Natural radiation	From ground Cosmic ray Ingestion (K-40, etc) Inhaling radon	0.5 0.4 0.3 1.2		0.32 0.27 0.41 0.45
Artificial radiation	Medical	World average	Industrial nations	Japan
	Medical X-ray, CT Dental X-ray Nuclear medicine diagnostics	0.4 0.002 0.03	1.2 0.01 0.08	2.3 0.02 0.03

Tweet

Japan's Extend and Pretend: Let's Raise the Limit on Radiation in Foods and Drinks So That We Can Say They're Totally Safe And Not Pay the Farmers

Mainichi Shinbun (in Japanese; 10:42PM JST 3/25/2011) reports:

Food Safety Commission of the Cabinet decided to raise the current provisional limits of radioactive materials allowed in foods and drinks and has directed Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare to come up with the new safety numbers.

The current provisional limits were set on March 17 by Ministry of Health. They are based on the guidelines by Nuclear Safety Commission. The limit for radioactive iodine is 50 milli-sieverts per year from all foods and drinks, and the limit for cesium is 5 milli-sieverts per year.

Judging by the level of radioactive materials that has fallen on vegetables in Fukushima, the new provisional safety limit would be something like 1,500 milli-sieverts per year for radioactive iodine, and 300 milli-sieverts per year for cesium so that most of the vegetables would be "safely" consumed, and that the government wouldn't need to compensate the farmers as much.

I just can't wait to see the new numbers.

OH WAIT A MINUTE. Provisional? Decided on March 17? Does that mean the government didn't even have the level set for radioactive materials in foods and drinks before that date? Or they had had the level but they raised it on March 17?

Tweet