UNSCEAR: Increase in Cancer Unlikely following Fukushima Exposure

Press release from the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (4/2/2014; emphasis is mine):

UNIS/OUS/237
2 April 2014

Increase in Cancer Unlikely following Fukushima Exposure - says UN Report

Low Risk of Thyroid Cancer Among Children Most Exposed

VIENNA, 2 April (UN Information Service) - Cancer levels are likely to remain stable in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power accident, according to a new UN report released today.

The report is titled Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami, by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR).

It finds that no discernible changes in future cancer rates and hereditary diseases are expected due to exposure to radiation as a result of the Fukushima nuclear accident; and, that no increases in the rates of birth defects are expected.

Nevertheless, it notes a theoretical possibility that the risk of thyroid cancer among the group of children most exposed to radiation could increase and concludes that the situation needs to be followed closely and further assessed in the future. Thyroid cancer is a rare disease among young children, and their normal risk is very low.

"People are rightly concerned about the impact on their health and their children's health," said Carl-Magnus Larsson, Chair, UNSCEAR. "Based on this assessment, however, the Committee does not expect significant changes in future cancer statistics that could be attributed to radiation exposure from the accident," he said.

The findings are based on estimates of the exposure of various population groups - including children - as well as scientific knowledge of health impacts following radiation exposure.

According to the study, the expected low impact on cancer rates of the population is largely due to prompt protective actions on the part of the Japanese authorities following the accident.

The Committee analyzed reported worker doses and also independently assessed doses for some of the workers. The Committee's assessments are broadly consistent with reported doses, but uncertainties remain for exposures during the early phase of the accident. "The Committee concluded that no discernible increase in cancer or other diseases is expected; however, the most exposed workers will receive regular health checks," said Wolfgang Weiss, Chair of the Assessment.

The Committee also evaluated the effects of radiation exposure on both terrestrial and marine ecosystems, finding that any effects would have been transient.

For marine ecosystems, the possibility of effects on flora and fauna was limited to the shoreline area adjacent to the power station and the potential for effects over the long term was considered insignificant.

***

About UNSCEAR

The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), established in 1955, is mandated to undertake broad reviews of the sources of ionizing radiation and the effects on human health and the environment. Its assessments provide a scientific foundation for governments and UN agencies to formulate standards and programmes for protection against ionizing radiation.

More than 80 leading scientists worked on the study analyzing the effects of radiation exposure following the accident at the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power station. Material they prepared was reviewed for technical and scientific quality by its 27 Member States at their annual session in May 2013. All scientists had to declare any conflict of interest related to their participation in the assessment.

The UNSCEAR secretariat is administered by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

* *** *

For more information, contact:

Jaya Mohan
Communications, UNSCEAR
Tel: +43 1 26060-4122
Mobile: +43 699 1459 4122
Email: jaya.mohan[at]unscear.org

http://www.unscear.org/

Watch the webcast of the press briefing on 2 April 2014 at 10:30 CEST at http://www.unis.unvienna.org/unis/en/webcast.html

Link to the 321-page report: http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications/2013_1.html

Tweet

The International Workshop on Radiation and Thyroid Cancer in Tokyo, February 21-23, 2014

The workshop is ongoing, co-hosted by the Ministry of the Environment, Fukushima Medical University, and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency.

Presenters include expert researchers from around the world, including Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, in radiological research and thyroid cancer research.

The link to the English program: http://www.nsra.or.jp/safe/crpph2014/program-e.pdf

The link to the Japanese program: http://www.nsra.or.jp/safe/crpph2014/program-j.pdf


Live webcast in English:



Live streaming video by Ustream

Live webcast in Japanese:



Live streaming video by Ustream

I caught a tweet by a nuclear researcher in Japan viewing the live webcast, in which he mentioned a presentation that the higher intake of natural iodine in Japan than outside Japan through normal diet before the accident was one of the reasons why the ratio of iodine-131 and radioactive cesium in people exposed to Fukushima-origin radiation is different from the ratio of iodine-131 and radioactive cesium in the atmosphere. (I'm assuming the ratio of iodine-131 was much lower in people than in the atmosphere.)

Tweet

(UPDATED) #Fukushima I NPP Accident WAS a Nuclear Disaster Even If No One Died of Acute Radiation Sickness

(UPDATE 2) Further pondering on Dr. Allison's reply, I think Dr. Allison may be confusing the "science" with "natural phenomenon" such as radiation.

Science is a systematic organization of knowledge gained from hypothesizing, speculating, observing, testing. Science is not free of non-scientific intrusion or intervention, and is limited by available technologies to observe and test at any given time in history. The earth going around the sun was a natural phenomenon from the beginning of time, but it was not part of the accepted science, and the proponent was put under house arrest for the rest of his life. That the earth's crust is made up of plates is a fact, but it was not at all part of the accepted Earth science until mid 1960s.

-------------------

(UPDATED with Dr. Allison's reply, at the bottom. 10/15/2013)

===================

That's in my humble opinion, but yet another nuclear expert tells me I'm mistaken.

Probably after seeing the post about the South African nuclear physicist, Dr. Wade Allison, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Oxford, kindly sent me links to support their position, which I thought I might share with you readers:

...not even a significant casualty from radiation. This was expected as soon as figures for the scale of the radiation released became apparent, www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12860842 Much suffering and death would have been avoided if the evacuees had gone home within two weeks. http://www.radiationandreason.com/uploads//enc_RadiationScienceandSocietyOct2013.pdf 

No surprise http://www.radiationandreason.com/uploads//enc_FukushimaGoianiaInternal.pdf 

an international scientific view http://www.radiationandreason.com/uploads//enc_SPUR-1.pdf  with unfiltered public comment  overwhelmingly supportive http://www.radiationandreason.com/index.php?SPUR-RnR 

See also other links at www.radiationandreason.com 

Wade Allison

Wade Allison, MA DPhil
Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Oxford, UK OX1 3PG

"Radiation and Reason"  http://www.radiationandreason.com (Oct 09) ISBN 9780956275615
In Japanese http://goo.gl/9lL5u (July 2011) ISBN 978-4198632182

In Chinese http://www.cptw.com.tw/BookDetail.aspx?BOKNO=11252010 

"Fundamental Physics for Probing and Imaging"  http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-920389-X (Oct 06)

Here's my quick email back to Dr. Allison, though it is highly likely we simply talk past each other:

Dr. Allison, I do not think nuclear technology exists in vacuum. In case of Japan, as in other countries, building nuclear power plants has been the national government's policy. It's been heavily subsidized by the government, with plant builders, operators, and municipalities showered with enormous amount of money and preferential treatment. Regulatory agencies collaborated and colluded with the plant operators to mask technical problems, for decades. Nuclear scientists have been enlisted to "educate" the populace how safe the nuclear power plants are. The populace have been encouraged to use more and more electricity even where cheaper alternatives exist, which in turn has justified more nuclear power plants. Particularly in Japan, nuclear power plants have been made possible only by cheap, subcontracted labor force who operates and maintains the plants, with hardly any medical supervision and with faked cumulative dose. Most people turned the blind eye to that fact, until this accident.

When the shit hit the fan in Fukushima, it was not just the matter of whether anyone died of acute radiation sickness that defined the accident as "nuclear". It was the failure of the national and local government on responding to a rapidly unfolding nuclear accident at Fukushima I NPP. It was the failure of the plant operator TEPCO who couldn't do what it took to contain the accident, as they were more concerned with pleasing the national government and the nuclear regulator. It was the failure of the nuclear regulatory and safety agencies (the latter staffed with nuclear scientists from top universities) to even adequately assess the progress of core melt and the release (intended and unintended) of radioactive materials from the plant that contaminated the wide areas in Tohoku and Kanto and inform the populace intelligently. It was the failure of academia who not only failed to give actionable information to the citizens but ended up exposing the citizens to totally unnecessary, avoidable radiation; Dr. Yamashita gathered Fukushima residents to tell them not to worry, while a fresh batch of dense radioactive plume was descending in Fukushima between March 20 and 23, 2011.

The jury is still out on the long-term effect of low-dose radiation exposure. The plant workers have been exposed to moderate to high dose of radiation over the past two and a half years, and you cannot compare this exposure to a targeted, medically supervised high-radiation treatment.

It was, and is a nuclear disaster politically, socially, academically, psychologically, and for many, personally. To claim Fukushima was not a nuclear disaster just because no one died of acute radiation exposure is nothing but sophistry.

Regards

10/15/2013 Dr. Wade Allison's reply, saying I have a nuclear fear from Cold War (I doubt it, but) and the science is impervious to any political, social, and other types of consideration. In other words, we do talk past each other:

As the story of King Canute demonstrated many years ago, the forces of science (physics/biology/medicine) are uninfluenced by man's intrigues which you describe. These are irrelevant when radiation meets living tissue -- about which almost all is now known. Radiation as a danger is irrelevant to the survival of man, but population, food, water, economic and political stability, and climate stability are not. Of course if nobody can trust anybody else, as you suggest, the population that the world can support would be tiny. That would be destructive for no reason and would result in widespread conflict.

You are still in the grip of the nuclear fear that was Cold War propaganda for which there is no scientific basis. I agree that you are not alone, but scientific reality is not settled by a vote. Science is impervious to questions of shit and fan.

Regards
Wade

Well Dr. Allison, the lesson, if any, from Fukushima nuclear accident is that "the forces of science (physics/biology/medicine)" were and are indeed influenced by man's intrigues. Declaring they are uninfluenced doesn't make it true. So many scientists in nuclear physics, engineering, biology, and medicine have rushed to speak words designed specifically to tell the populace that everything was OK, and their words had nothing to do with hard science. The government scientists conducted the medical survey of the residents in the affected areas in Fukushima, not because they wanted to collect scientific information but because they wanted to calm down the residents.

Instead of scientifically and rationally explain what's been going on, nuclear scientists and their followers on the side of Dr. Allison, label people, like me who raises questions on both sides, as being gripped with irrational nuclear fear. And of course those experts and their followers on the other side label people like me as "nuclear shill". Can't win either way.

Tweet

(OT) South African Nuclear Physicist Declares "There Was No #Fukushima Nuclear Disaster" Because No One Died from Radiation

I remember seeing the similar declaration in the first year of the disaster (which is not a disaster at all according to this physicist), because there was no death from acute radiation sickness. The Guardian's George Monbiot, for example, declared right after the start of the Fukushima nuclear accident that he was now an avid supporter of nuclear energy precisely because of the accident, where "no one has yet received a lethal dose of radiation".

But to read, after more than two and a half years, the same, simplistic and narrowly defined, head-in-the-sand argument that there is no nuclear accident because no one died from radiation sickness is more than I can tolerate in my recovery. Please feel free to read and comment as you like.

The site that carries the article also has an article penned by a Greenpeace founder pushing for GMO rice.

From CFACT (10/12/2013; emphasis is mine):

Physicist: There was no Fukushima nuclear disaster

by Kelvin Kemm

....Let us now ponder the Fukushima nuclear incident which has been in the news again lately.

Firstly let us get something clear. There was no Fukushima nuclear disaster. Total number of people killed by nuclear radiation at Fukushima was zero. Total injured by radiation was zero. Total private property damaged by radiation….zero. There was no nuclear disaster. What there was, was a major media feeding frenzy fuelled by the rather remote possibility that there may have been a major radiation leak.

At the time, there was media frenzy that “reactors at Fukushima may suffer a core meltdown.” Dire warnings were issued. Well the reactors did suffer a core meltdown. What happened? Nothing.

Certainly from the ‘disaster’ perspective there was a financial disaster for the owners of the Fukushima planJapan Tsunami pushes carst. The plant overheated, suffered a core meltdown, and is now out of commission for ever. A financial disaster, but no nuclear disaster.

Amazingly the thousands of people killed by the tsunami in the neighbouring areas who were in shops, offices, schools, at the airport, in the harbour and elsewhere are essentially ignored while there is this strange continuing phobia about warning people of ‘the dangers of Fukushima.’ We need to ask the more general question: did anybody die because of Fukushima? Yes they did. Why? The Japanese governJapan tsunami boatment introduced a forced evacuation of thousands of people living up to a couple of dozen kilometres from the power station. The stress of moving to collection areas induced heart attacks and other medical problems in many people. So people died because of Fukushima hysteria not because of Fukushima radiation.

(Full article at the link)

Fukushima plant workers would be glad to know that all they have been dealing with since the day one of the accident is nothing but nuclear hysteria.

It seems the so-called foreign "experts" featured in the net media fall into two types. One is like this South African nuclear physicist or George Monbiot, who says there was no Fukushima nuclear disaster because no one died of radiation sickness. The other type includes people who continue to assert, without offering any data or evidence, that Reactor 4 is "tilting like Tower of Pisa", or "leaking from the bottom", or "a million people will die from illnesses caused by radiation from Fukushima".

I don't think the truth lies in either of them, but these two extremes continue to get most coverage.

(H/T @Tommi_M_Elo for the article)

Tweet

University of the Ryukus' Paper on Butterfly Mutation in #Fukushima "Highly Suspect, Should Not Be Used to Scare the Local Population", Says Georgetown University Professor

(UPDATE 6/25/2013) A graduate student working under Dr. Otaki sent me a huffy tweet, in which she said, "That comment doesn't mean that professor is right. We have Q&A page that proves him wrong. Here's the link: http://t.co/TrSDu5QvZy" It's in Japanese. From all I can tell, their rebuttal is "Trust us."

Quickly checking her tweets, I'm afraid she is in an "echo chamber" - position for an activist and not a researcher.

Does being published on Scientific Reports magazine mean it is correct and right?

=================================

Remember the blue butterflies in Tohoku region that were supposedly irreparably damaged and mutated by the radiation from the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident? Or so it is claimed by researchers at University of the Ryukyus whose paper was published in Scientific Reports magazine in August last year?

There were several retweets on my twitter page (like this one) about this old story yesterday, with a new incredible twist.

According to people who tweet and retweet, the researchers who did this research telling the world how contaminated Fukushima was and how dangerous the radiation levels were in Fukushima to cause such mutations (never mind that the same researchers had attributed the mutation to temperature before the accident, as none of these people bother to know the details), and what's more, whose paper has been accepted by a peer-reviewed magazine (true) called Nature (not true, just the same publisher), have just been denied funding for their work!

See how the government censors the truth! Let's all donate money to them, so that they can continue this invaluable research!

Having the research funding cut in the middle of a school year is itself incredible (it usually happens at the end of the school year for the funding for the next year, i.e. March), but people are totally buying the story.

Why? Because one of TV Asahi's programs (the same one that didn't know Reactor 4 building was systematically dismantled) reported on the research on May 30 this year after one of the TV stations in Germany (ARD.de) featured it in October last year.

For some reason, anything that comes from Germany is received in Japan as more credible than those coming from other foreign sources like France or the US. BBC is considered more credible than others but less so than Germany's media. Asahi simply uncritically parroted what the researchers said (or what the German TV said the researcher said). So now, for a lot of people in Japan, it is proven as a fact (as accepted by a peer-review magazine, no less) that these butterflies mutated because of the low-level radiation from the Fukushima I Nuke Plant accident. "In such a short time! What will happen to people in Fukushima! I'm scared!" is a typical tweet in reaction.

As far as I was concerned in August last year, the paper was a redux of the Sokal Affair.

On re-visiting the link to their paper, I noticed there was a comment attached to the paper. When I wrote the initial post on the subject on August 17, 2012, the comment was not there.

The comment was by Dr. Timothy J. Jorgensen, on August 21, 2012. Dr. Jorgensen is associate professor of Health Physics and Radiation Protection Program at Georgetown University, and he shredded the paper to pieces.

From the comment section of the paper "The biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue butterfly", Scientific Reports (emphasis is mine):

Dear Scientific Reports editors:

The recent article, The biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue butterfly [Sci. Rep. 2, 570; DOI:10.1038/srep00570 (2012)], has a number of scientific problems that raise serious doubts about the validity of its findings and the conclusions that can be drawn about low dose radiation effects on insects or humans. Although these scientific issues are too numerous to be addressed here, three main problems need to be mentioned for the record.

A major finding of the study is that forewing size was inversely correlated with distance from Fukushima, resulting in the conclusion that radiation from Fukushima had stunted forewing development. However, the more distant butterfly sampling sites were all progressively further south of Fukushima, so that latitude was also changing with the distance. This is a problem because it is well established that the forewing size of a number of insect species is dependent upon the latitude of their microhabitat. This has been extensively studied both in fruit flies (Drosophila subobscura) and butterflies (Pararge aeberia), and the magnitude of the forewing changes found in this study is comparable to these known latitudinal determinants on forewing anatomy (1, 2). The potential latitudinal influences on forewing size were completely ignored in this study. Had the data been adjusted for sampling site latitude, it is likely there would have been no significant forewing findings to report.

The second major problem is that the decreased butterfly survival rates reported to be associated with proximity to Fukushima are claimed to be reproducible in the laboratory with external beam irradiation. This claim stretches credulity since it has long been established that insects, including butterflies (Order: Lepidoptera), are resistant to radiation effects. It takes an average dose of 10,000 mSv to kill a Lepidoptera cell (3), and it requires an average dose of 1,300 mSv to Lepidoptera eggs to reduce their hatch rate by 50% (4). Larval, pupal, and adult forms of Lepidoptera are even more radioresistant (5). The concept that the low environmental radiation exposures (<15 mSv per year) that are being attributed to the Fukushima accident could be killing off butterflies, or any other insect species, is simply not credible. It should further be noted the external radiation doses that were used to reproduce the results from field-collected individuals were 00 times higher than any radiation doses in the field that could possibly be attributed to Fukushima. Thus, it can even be seen from the investigators' own laboratory experimental data that no measurable killing would be expected at the radiation doses that were encountered in the field.

The third major problem regards the time to eclosion (emergence of an adult insect from a pupa). Eclosion times were claimed to be associated with proximity to Fukushima. Yet irradiation has been employed as a pest control measure for a number of insect species for decades (6), and the effects of radiation on various insect biological endpoints have already been well characterized. It typically takes as much as 30,000 mSv of Lepidoptera egg irradiation to extend eclosion times by the 4 to 5 days reported in this study, and similarly high doses are required when irradiation is done in the larval stage (5). It is, therefore, astounding that effects on eclosion of a similar magnitude can be seen at radiation doses that are just a few fold above natural background doses. So the claim that eclosion times were extended due to these environmental radiation exposures is also incredible when compared to the literature. Perhaps it is more plausible that eclosion time of the pale grass blue butterfly, like forewing size, might also be related to microhabitat latitude or temperature. [Average daily temperatures differ by as much as 9 degrees Celsius between Fukushima and Tokyo during April (hatching season).]

There are other inferences from this study's findings that counter established radiation biology tenets, including the notion that radiation can target specific developmental genes for mutation simultaneously in multiple individuals, which is what would be required to explain much of the findings reported in the study. Further, the field dosimetry procedures reported in the methods were inadequate to the task at hand. Namely, it should have been possible to actually measure the 137Cs contamination in the environment, which would have allowed an estimation of the component of the environmental radiation dose that could actually be attributed to the Fukushima accident. Moreover, the investigators should have applied the same sampling and statistical rigor to their environmental radiation dosimetry measurements as they did for their biological endpoints. Had they adequately captured this additional source of variability, which would have likely been substantial, it is doubtful that they would have produced the same findings.

In conclusion, the results reported in this study should be considered highly suspect due to both their internal inconsistencies and their incompatibility with earlier and more comprehensive radiation biology research on insects. The study's central assertion is that 'artificial radionuclides from the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant caused physiological and genetic damage to [the pale grass blue butterfly]'. This statement is incredulous and goes well beyond anything that the study data can actually substantiate. Therefore, this study's sensational claims should not be used to scare the local population into the erroneous conclusion that their exposures to these relatively low environmental radiation doses put them at significant health risk.

Sincerely,

Timothy J. Jorgensen, PhD, MPH
Department of Radiation Medicine and the Health Physics Program
Georgetown University
Washington DC

References:
1. Gilchrest GW, Huey RB, Serra L. Rapid evolution of wing size clines in Drosophila subobscura. Genetica 2001;112:13.
2. Vandewoestijne S, Van Dyck H. Flight morphology along latitudinal gradient in a butterfly: do geographic clines differ between agricultural and woodland landscapes? Ecography 2011;34:13.
3. Koval TM. Intrinsic resistance to the lethal effects of x-irradiation in insect and arachnid cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1983;80(15):4752-5.
4. Chanu OP, Ibotombi N. Effect of 60Co gamma radiation on eggs of tasar silkworm, Antheraea pryoylei (Lepidoptera). J. Exp. Sciences 2011;2:5.
5. Ayvaz A, Albayrak S, Karaborklu S. Gamma radiation sensitivity of the eggs, larvae and pupae of Indian meal moth Plodia interpunctella (Hubner) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Pest Manag Sci 2008;64(5):505-12.
6. Robinson AS. Mutations and their use in insect control. Mutat Res 2002;511(2):113-32.

Scientific Reports is an open-access magazine that accepts comments. There is no response to Dr. Jorgensen's comment from the researchers at University of the Ryukyus.

I tweeted this comment section. Reaction from scientific researchers and doctors, who read the comment, was "I see, this is how an open-access paper is reviewed and criticized. What a wonderful thing for the University of the Rukyus' researchers", or "My goodness, what a brutal rebuttal..." Reaction from some non-researchers was "Nature magazine is a pro-nuke outfit!" and end of story.

Tweet

#Fukushima Medical University Distributed Potassium Iodide to Medical Staff on March 15, 2011, Says It Was Their "Vested Interest" As Medical Professionals

as radioactive materials were falling on people waiting outside to get drinking water and food.

A short blog post by Minamisoma City Assemblyman Koichi Ooyama contains a link to a religious newspaper article that recounts the early days of the nuclear accident in March 2011 and how people are trying to recover from the disaster by decontaminating their place.

In the June 6, 2013 article, the author Koyu Abe, a Zen Buddhist monk in Fukushima City, says the following:

当時の放射性ヨウ素の貴重なデータがある。福島市の南東に位置する県立医大近辺で3月15日（爆発から3日後）に採取された葉菜の検査記録だ。県が測定し手書きで残したその資料には、ヨウ素だけで1キロあたり119万ベクレルが検出されたことが示されている。

There exists a valuable piece of data about radioactive iodine in the early days of the accident. It is the record of measuring leafy vegetables taken near Fukushima Medical University [located just south of Fukushima City center] on March 15 (three days after the explosion [of Reactor 1]). The handwritten data by the prefectural government shows 1.19 million becquerels/kg of radioactive iodine.

当時医大で医師・看護師などに「安定ヨウ素剤」を配ったのも頷けるデータだ。しかし、私たちにはそうしたデータが公表されることはなかった。

Looking at this number, it is understandable that Fukushima Medical University distributed potassium iodide pills to doctors and nurses. However, this data was never disclosed to us.

今年の1月、法務省主催の人権フォーラム「震災と人権」でパネリストを務め、こうした事実を伝えた。ところが、後日主催者から報告文書中のこの発言内容について削除したい旨の電話が入った。

In January this year, I served as a panelist in a human rights forum sponsored by the Ministry of Justice called "March 11, 2011 disaster and human rights", and I talked about this fact. However, the sponsor called me later and said they would like to delete my comments from the report.

医大関係者から「それは医療従事者の既得権益で、なんら問題がない」という意見が寄せられたためだ。私は「百歩譲ってそれを認めたとしても、地震により当時ライフラインの復旧のために何週間もの間、文字通り寝食を忘れ、大量の放射性物質が降り注ぐ中、復旧工事に従事していた人にはなぜ配られなかったのか。彼らには既得権益はないのか」と一蹴すると、1時間足らずで「削除せず、そのまま記録する」との返答があった。明らかな職業差別であったからだ。

Officials at Fukushima Medical University had raised issues with the sponsor by saying "It [distributing potassium iodide pills] was our vested interest as medical professionals, and there should be no problem with that."

I protested and said, "For argument's sake let's assume it is true. But there were people at that time working hard day and night for weeks on end, literally without sleep and food, in order to restore life lines after the earthquake while a large amount of radioactive materials were falling on them. Why didn't they get the pills? Why didn't they have vested interest?" One hour later, they called me back and said my comments wouldn't be deleted, and would be recorded as they were. It was clear that [the University's argument] was discrimination based on occupation.

Mr. Abe is the one who decided to use his temple to store contaminated soil removed from people's homes, three months after the start of the accident.

On March 15, 2011, I remember reading about people in Fukushima, particularly in Fukushima City, standing outside in long lines in the snow for a long time to get some drinking water, with mothers and fathers taking their kids with them.

Reactor 3 building blew up at 11AM on the previous day, March 14. They were trying to vent Reactor 2 all night and early morning of March 15. Reactor 4 building managed to blow up (no one knows how) in the early morning of March 15, and at about the same time some event did happen in Reactor 2's Suppression Chamber.

On March 15, 2011, I was writing about:

#Fukushima I Nuke Plant: Maybe a Level 7 Disaster

#Fukushima I Nuke Plant: Reactor No.4 Radiation Abnormally High, Government Asking US Military to Spray Water From Air

On March 16, 2011, I was screaming about the first evacuee death due to lack of water, heat, and food, while the official depots were swimming with foods, water and blankets and clothes from people from all over the world.

Hardly anyone was reading my blog then, but I had to write to keep some sanity. It still feels like only yesterday.

Tweet

(OT) Slight Problem with Mangano, Sherman Paper on Congenital Hypothyroidism in the US and Radiation from #Fukushima

From "Elevated airborne beta levels in Pacific/West Coast US States and trends in hypothyroidism among newborns after the Fukushima nuclear meltdown", by Joseph J. Mangano, Janette D. Sherman, page 3 (link):

A national study conducted by the National Geological Survey examined concentrations of wet depositions of fission-produced isotopes in soil at sites across the US, for several radioisotopes, between March 15 and April 5, 2011. Results showed that for I-131, the highest depositions, in becquerels per cubic meter, occurred in northwest Oregon (5100), central California (1610), northern Colorado (833), coastal California (211), and western Washington (60.4). No other station recorded concentrations above 13. Similar results were observed for Cesium-134 and Cesium-137 [42]. All the cited locations are on or near the Pacific coast, with the exception of Colorado, in the western US.

Cubic meter??? That would be indeed catastrophic.

However, from "Wet Deposition of Fission-Product Isotopes to North America from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Incident, March 2011" by USGS, as cited by the authors (link):

Variable amounts of 131I, 134Cs, or 137Cs were measured at approximately 21% of sampled NADP sites distributed widely across the contiguous United States and Alaska. Calculated 1- to 2-week individual radionuclide deposition fluxes ranged from 0.47 to 5100 Becquerels per square meter during the sampling period.

It was "square meter".

Open file report by USGS: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1277/

Table 2 on pages 17 and 18 of the USGS report shows I-131, Cs-134, Cs-137 deposition. Many places have only Cs-137 detected, some places with I-131 and Cs-137, some with I-131 and Cs-134. For locations that have both Cs-134 and Cs-137, the ratio is mostly not in line with those of Fukushima-origin (Cs-134:Cs-137=1:1 to =1:1.2).

(Click to enlarge.)

1,090 picocurie is 40.33 becquerels. 40.33 becquerels/liter was calculated into 5,100 becquerels/square meter, with the conversion factor of about 126.

Tweet

US Authors Claim 16% Increase in 5 States in the US in Congenital Hypothyroidism in Infants Born After #Fukushima Accident

Authors Dr. Joseph J. Mangano and Dr. Janette D. Sherman also said in June 2011 that there was a 35% spike in infant mortality in the US northwest after Fukushima (and refuted by Scientific American). Later that year, they published a paper that said about 14,000 babies died because of radiation from Fukushima (again countered by Scientific American).

This time, they compared the cases of congenital hypothyroid cases in infants in Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington from March 17 to December 31, 2011 with those for the same period in 2010, and found the number of cases in 2011 was "16% greater", with the largest divergence of 28% occurring in the period between March 17 and June 30.

From Scientific Research Publishing, March 2013:

Elevated airborne beta levels in Pacific/West Coast US States and trends in hypothyroidism among newborns after the Fukushima nuclear meltdown

Author(s)

Joseph J. Mangano, Janette D. Sherman

ABSTRACT

Various reports indicate that the incidence of congenital hypothyroidism is increasing in developed nations, and that improved detection and more inclusive criteria for the disease do not explain this trend entirely. One risk factor documented in numerous studies is exposure to radioactive iodine found in nuclear weapons test fallout and nuclear reactor emissions. Large amounts of fallout disseminated worldwide from the meltdowns in four reactors at the Fukushima-Dai-ichi plant in Japan beginning March 11, 2011 included radioiodine isotopes. Just days after the meltdowns, I-131 concentrations in US precipitation was measured up to 211 times above normal. Highest levels of I-131 and airborne gross beta were documented in the five US States on the Pacific Ocean. The number of congenital hypothyroid cases in these five states from March 17-December 31, 2011 was 16% greater than for the same period in 2010, compared to a 3% decline in 36 other US States (p < 0.03). The greatest divergence in these two groups (+28%) occurred in the period March 17-June 30 (p < 0.04). Further analysis, in the US and in other nations, is needed to better understand any association between iodine exposure from Fukushima-Dai-ichi and congenital hypothyroidism risk. Link to the full paper (PDF): http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?paperID=28599

The authors say that "All US newborns diagnosed with primary CH [Congenital Hypothyroidism] born March 17-December 31, 2011 were exposed in utero to radioactive fallout from the Fukushima meltdowns" (page 5 of the paper).

I don't know if it is scientifically valid to compare only two years, and to exclude the period from January 1 to March 16, particularly when the number of babies born with Congenital Hypothyroidism is not that large. In their previous study of infant mortality rate (which is volatile to begin with), the authors only used 4-week period prior to the accident. If the period prior to that period were used, the authors would have found out that what looked like a huge "increase" after the Fukushima accident was totally within the range for the year. In their current study on Congenital Hypothyroidism, the five states also happen to have large Hispanic and Asian populations who tend to have much higher incidence of Congenital Hypothyroidism, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

From the paper (click to enlarge), "Table 4. Confirmed primary congenital hypothyroid cases March 17-December 31 (2010 and 2011), 41 US States":

In Japan, the rumor of the study (as most non-scientists don't bother to or cannot read an English paper, it remains a "rumor") have already morphed into "One-third of babies born on the west coast of the United states after Fukushima have thyroid abnormalities!"

In the US, a vague headline like this, "Study: 28% Increase In Thyroid Problems In Babies Born After Fukushima in Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington", spreads widely. It is even quoted by some on Japanese Twitter. Thyroid problems.

About Congenital Hypothyroidism for non-experts, from wiki:

Congenital hypothyroidism (CH) is a condition of thyroid hormone deficiency present at birth. Approximately 1 in 4000 newborn infants has a severe deficiency of thyroid function, while even more have mild or partial degrees. If untreated for several months after birth, severe congenital hypothyroidism can lead to growth failure and permanent mental retardation. Treatment consists of a daily dose of thyroid hormone (thyroxine) by mouth. Because the treatment is simple, effective, and inexpensive, nearly all of the developed world practices newborn screening to detect and treat congenital hypothyroidism in the first weeks of life.

Around the world, the most common cause of congenital hypothyroidism is iodine deficiency, but in most of the developed world and areas of adequate environmental iodine, cases are due to a combination of known and unknown causes. Most commonly there is a defect of development of the thyroid gland itself, resulting in an absent (athyreosis) or underdeveloped (hypoplastic) gland. A hypoplastic gland may develop higher in the neck or even in the back of the tongue. A gland in the wrong place is referred to as ectopic, and an ectopic gland at the base or back of the tongue is a lingual thyroid. Some of these cases of developmentally abnormal glands result from genetic defects, and some are "sporadic," with no identifiable cause. One Japanese study found a statistical correlation between certain organochlorine insecticides and dioxin-like chemicals in the milk of mothers who had given birth to infants with congenital hypothyroidism.

Congenital hypothyroidism can also occur due to genetic defects of thyroxine or triiodothyronine synthesis within a structurally normal gland. Among specific defects are thyrotropin (TSH) resistance, iodine trapping defect, organification defect, thyroglobulin, and iodotyrosine deiodinase deficiency. In a small proportion of cases of congenital hypothyroidism, the defect is due to a deficiency of thyroid stimulating hormone, either isolated or as part of congenital hypopituitarism.

I suppose the authors want to point to the possibility of genetic defects due to radiation from Fukushima.

Here's US ABC News San Diego Station's reporter Michael Chen quoting the authors and claiming that 39% of infants in California "were more likely to develop congenital hypothyroidism".

Never mind that it is not "likely to develop", because babies are born with it ("congenital"), and promptly treated in the first weeks of their lives. Mr. Chen doesn't ask a silly question like "What if the entire year was taken into account?" or "What is the long-term trend, not just two years?"

The authors Mangano and Sherman say in the paper that "annual data is made easily available on the internet", but I can't seem to find it so far. If readers can post links to such data, I'd much appreciate.

==================

(Update 4/7/2013) Oh great. ABC San Diego news is being spread wide to the Twitter followers of Kouta Kinoshita...

Tweet

#Radioactive Japan: 50 Millisieverts Radiation Exposure Per Year Is "Low" Enough to Bring Residents and Businesses Back to Tomioka-Machi in Fukushima

That's where Fukushima II (Daini) Nuclear Power Plant is located, but the town was heavily contaminated when the radioactive plume released from Fukushima I (Daiichi) Nuclear Power Plant (mostly from vent, from explosions to a lesser degree) hit south. The entire town has been designated as "no-entry (exclusion) zone".

But now, one year after similar measures were taken in other outlying cities and towns like Minami Soma City, Tomioka-machi and Namie-machi, another very contaminated town north of Fukushima I Nuke Plant, are being reorganized into new zones that signifies "hope" (at least for the government if not for the residents). No more forbidding "no-entry zone".

The areas which are expected to have cumulative radiation exposure of 20 millisieverts or less per year will be called the "zone in preparation for having the evacuation order lifted" (避難指示解除準備区域) where people are free to go back and live (or I should say strongly encouraged to go back and live) after the national government thoroughly decontaminate the areas.

The areas with the expected cumulative radiation exposure of 20 to 50 millisieverts per year will be called the "zone with restricted entry" (居住制限区域) which only means cannot cannot stay there overnight but no problem if they want to commute to work there.

Only if the cumulative radiation exposure per year in the areas exceed 50 millisieverts, the areas are designated as "zone where it is difficult for people to return" (帰還困難区域), and people cannot go back at all until 5 years after the accident, meaning only three more years. After three more years, the cumulative radiation levels per year are magically expected to drop below 50 millisieverts. (Good luck with that, with cesium-137 whose half-life is 30 years.)

Who measures the radiation levels? The national government under the pork-cutlet-over-rice prime minister (baseless rumors say he won't last long, as his stomach ailment has returned) of course. They will continue token "decontamination" - practically smearing the area with water and bagging the top soil (if that, these days), cutting branches of trees (and dumping in the rivers nearby) - mostly to profit general contractors, greatly save on compensation money, and claim "See, we're not Chernobyl! We're returning people in two years!".

Here's from Mainichi English, talking hopefully about cherry blossom viewing event in the most contaminated area inside Tomioka-machi (3/25/2013; emphasis is mine):

Nuke disaster exclusion zone change has Fukushima town ready for cherry blossom season

TOMIOKA, Fukushima -- The cherry blossoms in this town are on the edge of blooming, and as of March 25 local residents can see the buds in person for the first time since the Fukushima nuclear disaster began more than two years ago.

Tomioka had been locked inside the nuclear disaster exclusion zone since the town was evacuated in March 2011. However, the national government has determined that radiation doses in about 70 percent of the town have fallen to 50 millisieverts per year or less -- still high, but low enough to re-designate these areas as open to temporary visits.

The rezoning happens to cover a good portion of Yonomori Park, known for its some 1,500 cherry trees lining an L-shaped road and forming a pink tunnel when in full bloom.

"The buds look ready to pop open," said Kiyoshi Horikawa, the 72-year-old chairman of a local cherry blossom viewing group as he looked on the trees on March 25.

The day also marked the beginning of decontamination work on the trees. Unfortunately, the east-west part of the route generally remains in the exclusion zone and generally out-of-bounds even for quick visits. Many of the trees in that section are more than a century old.

Nevertheless, the town government is planning a cherry blossom-viewing bus trip for residents in late April, and includes the section still inside the exclusion zone.

So the national government has simply decided the radiation levels have dropped below 50 millisieverts per year in 70% of the town. Why didn't Russians think of this wonderful gimmick?

Tweet

Another #Fukushima I Nuke Plant Worker Dies, Off Site, Cumulative Radiation Exposure of 25 Millisieverts; TEPCO Says It Cannot Reveal the Cause of Death Yet

Back in the land of abundant rice (a la PM Abe), a worker in his fifties died after having fallen ill at a stockyard in Hirono-machi (that's where J-Village, used as the staging area for the work at Fukushima I Nuke Plant, is located) in Fukushima Prefecture. He had been working at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant since June 2011, and most recently he was working on the prep work for the Reactor 3 building cover.

I think it is just lunacy to force workers to be anywhere near Reactor 3, but that's what the Japanese government and TEPCO have been doing to alleviate fears, basically, from so-called experts that Reactor 3 is in danger (along with Reactor 4) and to make them look as if they were doing something.

The worker's cumulative radiation exposure since June 2011 was 25 millisieverts, which NHK tries to characterize it as "low".

From NHK News (3/1/2013):

東京電力福島第一原子力発電所の復旧作業に当たっていた５０代の男性作業員が、体調不良を訴えて病院に運ばれ、２７日夜、死亡しました。

A worker in his 50s who had been working at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant was taken to hospital after he complained he wasn't feeling well, but he died in the evening of February 27.

東京電力は、「診断書を確認していないため、男性の死因は公表できない」としています。

TEPCO says they cannot disclose the cause of death because they haven't seen the medical certificate.

東京電力によりますと、今月２５日の午前９時すぎ、福島第一原発３号機の原子炉建屋で、カバーを設置する準備作業を行っていた５０代の男性作業員が、福島県広野町にある会社の資材置き場で体調不良を訴えて一時心肺停止状態となり、いわき市の病院に運ばれました。

According to TEPCO, past 9AM on February 25, a worker in his 50s who had been doing the preparation work in the Reactor 3 building to install the cover over the reactor building at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant fell ill in the stockyard of the company he worked for in Hirono-machi in Fukushima Prefecture. At one point, he was in a state of cardiopulmonary arrest, and was taken to a hospital in Iwaki City.

その後、２７日午後１１時半すぎに、男性が亡くなったと会社から東京電力に連絡があったということです。

Later at 11:30PM on February 27, the company notified TEPCO that the worker had died.

この男性は、おととし６月から福島第一原発の復旧作業に当たっていて、これまでの被ばく量は、作業員の通常時の年間限度となっている５０ミリシーベルトより低い、２５ミリシーベルト余りだということです。

The worker had been working at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant since June of 2011. His cumulative radiation exposure was 25 millisieverts, lower than the annual limit of 50 millisieverts for radiation workers in the normal time.

東京電力は、「診断書を確認していないため、男性の死因は公表できない」としています。

TEPCO says they cannot disclose the cause of death because they haven't seen the medical certificate.

福島第一原発では事故のあと、これまでに男性作業員５人が心筋梗塞などで亡くなっています。

At Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, five workers have died so far from myocardial infarction (or heart attack) and other causes since the start of the accident.

The 50 millisieverts per year limit for radiation workers is rarely reached in normal condition, but NHK wouldn't volunteer that kind of information. Independent journalist Ryuichi Kino tweeted from TEPCO's press conference that the worker never regained consciousness.

Before the Fukushima accident, the natural radiation exposure in Japan was about 1.5 millisievert per year, including both internal exposure (radon inhalation, radioactive potassium from food) and external exposure (from cosmic rays, earth).

From TEPCO's press release on 2/28/2013 (pretty much the same as NHK News):

-At around 9:20 AM on February 25, at the material storage of cooperative company in Hirono Town, Fukushima Prefecture, a cooperative company worker who was engaged in the preparation for cover installation on Unit 3 Reactor Building reported being sick. The worker was transported to the medical clinic in J-Village. As cardiopulmonary arrest was confirmed at the clinic, an ambulance was called at 9:35 AM. After cardiac massage was performed, the worker's pulse was recovered at 9:54 AM. At 10:10 AM, the worker was transported to Iwaki Kyoritsu Hospital by ambulance. Later, we received an announcement from the main contractor that he was pronounced dead by a doctor at 11:32 PM on February 27.

At least these days they can call the ambulance, and the ambulance can get to the hospital quickly. It took 2 hours to transfer the very first worker who suffered a heart attack from the plant to the hospital in Iwaki City, about 48 kilometers from the plant.

Tweet

WHO Report on Risk Assessment from #Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant Accident

WHO says "no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated" inside and outside Japan. Greenpeace is crying foul, NHK quotes experts saying WHO is overly cautious and exaggerating the risks, UK's Guardian emphasizes "70%" increase in thyroid cancer (from 0.77% to 1.29%), Scientific American credits "fortunate" wind direction.

From WHO press release (2/28/2013):

Global report on Fukushima nuclear accident details health risks

28 February 2013 | GENEVA - A comprehensive assessment by international experts on the health risks associated with the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant (NPP) disaster in Japan has concluded that, for the general population inside and outside of Japan, the predicted risks are low and no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated. 

The WHO report ‘Health Risk Assessment from the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami based on preliminary dose estimation’ noted, however, that the estimated risk for specific cancers in certain subsets of the population in Fukushima Prefecture has increased and, as such, it calls for long term continued monitoring and health screening for those people. 

Experts estimated risks in the general population in Fukushima Prefecture, the rest of Japan and the rest of the world, plus the power plant and emergency workers that may have been exposed during the emergency phase response. 

“The primary concern identified in this report is related to specific cancer risks linked to particular locations and demographic factors,” says Dr Maria Neira, WHO Director for Public Health and Environment. “A breakdown of data, based on age, gender and proximity to the nuclear plant, does show a higher cancer risk for those located in the most contaminated parts. Outside these parts - even in locations inside Fukushima Prefecture - no observable increases in cancer incidence are expected.” 

In terms of specific cancers, for people in the most contaminated location, the estimated increased risks over what would normally be expected are:

• all solid cancers - around 4% in females exposed as infants;

• breast cancer - around 6% in females exposed as infants;

• leukaemia - around 7% in males exposed as infants;

• thyroid cancer - up to 70% in females exposed as infants (the normally expected risk of thyroid cancer in females over lifetime is 0.75% and the additional lifetime risk assessed for females exposed as infants in the most affected location is 0.50%).

For people in the second most contaminated location of Fukushima Prefecture, the estimated risks are approximately one-half of those in the location with the highest doses. 

The report also references a section to the special case of the emergency workers inside the Fukushima NPP. Around two-thirds of emergency workers are estimated to have cancer risks in line with the general population, while one-third is estimated to have an increased risk.

The almost-200-page document further notes that the radiation doses from the damaged nuclear power plant are not expected to cause an increase in the incidence of miscarriages, stillbirths and other physical and mental conditions that can affect babies born after the accident.

“The WHO report underlines the need for long-term health monitoring of those who are at high risk, along with the provision of necessary medical follow-up and support services,” says Dr Maria Neira, WHO Director for Public Health and Environment. “This will remain an important element in the public health response to the disaster for decades.” 

“In addition to strengthening medical support and services, continued environmental monitoring, in particular of food and water supplies, backed by the enforcement of existing regulations, is required to reduce potential radiation exposure in the future,” says Dr Angelika Tritscher, Acting Director for WHO’s Food Safety and Zoonosis Department. 

As well as the direct health impact on the population, the report notes that the psychosocial impact may have a consequence on health and well-being. These should not be ignored as part of the overall response, say the experts. 

This is the first-ever analysis of the global health effects due to radiation exposure after the Fukushima NPP accident and is the result of a two-year WHO-led process of analysis of estimated doses and their potential health implications. The independent scientific experts came from the fields of radiation risk modelling, epidemiology, dosimetry, radiation effects and public health.

For more information please contact:

Glenn Thomas
WHO Communications Officer, Department of Communications
Telephone: +41 22 791 3983
Mobile: +41 79 509 0677
E-mail: thomasg@who.int

Nada Osseiran
WHO Communications Officer, Public Health and Environment
Telephone: +41 22 791 4475
Mobile: +41 79 445 1624
E-mail: osseirann@who.int

The 172-page English report is available at the WHO site, here. The executive summary is also available in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, and Russian. (Where's Spanish?)

Tweet

(UPDATED) Newly Released TEPCO Teleconference Video: "It Didn't Occur to Us that Water Puddle Would Be Highly Radioactive..."

(UPDATE) TEPCO, under the new Abe administration, will not release any video to the general public this time. Only the reporters who belong to the Japan Press Club can visit TEPCO's headquarter building in Tokyo and view the video. Some openness.

==================================

According to Yomiuri Shinbun, TEPCO has just released the third batch of its teleconference videos in the early days of the nuclear accident at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant. No video available so far at TEPCO's site for the general public yet.

As Yomiuri reports, the plant manager Masao Yoshida is heard saying to the TEPCO headquarter people that it didn't occur to him that the water in the turbine building for Reactor 3 could be highly radioactive the next day after the radiation level had been checked.

Three workers from TEPCO affiliate companies were exposed to 2 to 6 sieverts of radiation on their feet on March 24, 2011.

From what little Yomiuri reports, it looks like teleconferencing may not be such a good thing to have during an extreme emergency like this. It may serve to fragment the effort, and have too many people without direct knowledge of the situation dictate the effort, as clearly happened between the plant and TEPCO headquarters in Tokyo.

From Yomiuri Shinbun (1/23/2013):

高放射能水の可能性失念…公開映像で吉田所長

Possibility of highly contaminated water didn't occur to the plant manager Yoshida, video [disclosed by TEPCO] reveals

東京電力は２３日、一昨年の福島第一原子力発電所事故直後、東京の本店と現場などを結び、事故対応を検討したテレビ会議の映像約２週間分を追加公開した。

On January 23, TEPCO made additional teleconference videos of about 2 weeks. [TEPCO] used the teleconference system that connected its headquarters in Tokyo, the plant, and other locations right after the start of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident nearly two years ago to deal with the accident.

東電は昨年８月から段階的に映像公開を進め、３度目となる今回の公開で、事故から１か月間（２０１１年３月１１日～４月１１日）の映像が出そろった。

TEPCO started to make the videos public in August last year, and this is the third installment. Now the videos that cover the one month period (March 11 to April 11, 2011) have been made public.

今回公開されたのは、３月２３～２９日と４月６～１１日の映像。３月２４日には、３号機タービン建屋地下にたまった高濃度汚染水で、関連会社の作業員３人が大量に被曝(ひばく)した。前日の現場確認時より汚染水が増え、作業環境が悪化することを予想しなかった結果だった。

This time, the videos cover from March 23 to 29, and April 6 to 11. On March 24, three workers from TEPCO's affiliate [subcontracting] companies were exposed to massive amount of radiation from the highly contaminated water in the basement of Reactor 3 turbine building. It happened because no one had thought that the amount of contaminated water might increase when they had done the survey of the work location, and that the work condition might worsen.

吉田昌郎所長（当時）は「高放射能のたまり水の可能性を失念し、次の日も（作業環境が）変わらないという思いこみがあった」「こんだけ（作業が）パラ（同時並行）で走っている。本店主体で進むと、現場のケアが十分じゃないという感じがしていた」と指摘。現場の状況を十分把握せず多数の作業を指示する東電本店に対し、不満を示した。

Masao Yoshida, then the plant manager, [is heard] saying "It didn't occurred to us that there might be highly contaminated water, and we took it for granted that (the work condition) would remain the same", and "So many jobs are being done in parallel (simultaneously). I have the feeling that if the headquarters people are the ones who tell us what to do, they may not know enough about what's going on at the plant", showing his dissatisfaction with the TEPCO headquarters that directed many jobs without fully understanding the situation at the plant.

So, Mr. Yoshida is saying TEPCO had surveyed the condition of the Reactor 3 turbine building basement, and didn't think it would be full of highly contaminated water the next day when the workers from affiliate companies entered. That doesn't still explain the testimony of one of the affiliate company workers that TEPCO workers also entered the basement the same day, and they withdrew after measuring 400 millisievert/hour radiation in the water.

TEPCO workers could have told the affiliate workers to get the hell out, but that clearly did not occur to them either.

On March 25, 2011, that water "puddle" in the Reactor 3 turbine building basement was:

• 1.5 meter deep; and

• had 3.9 million becquerels per cubic centimeter.

From March 20 to March 23, 2011, black smoke was rising from the wreckage of Reactor 3 building. During the same period, elevated levels of radiation were measured in wide areas in Tohoku and Kanto. Some "event" may have been happening in Reactor 3; one researcher, Fumiya Tanabe, speculates that's when the melted core in Reactor 3 Pressure Vessel melted through the RPV down to the Containment Vessel, as the amount of water being injected dropped to 24 tonnes per day (probably due to high pressure inside the RPV) from the previous 300 tonnes per day.

For more on the affiliate worker's allegation and the incident on March 24, 2011, see my November 1, 2012 post.

Tweet

(Now They Tell Us) US Nuclear Terrorism Specialists Were Sent to Japan Right After the Start of Fukushima Nuclear Accident to Measure Radiation

A short article by Kyodo News doesn't reveal much details, but it is clear, sort of, that the US was measuring radiation from the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident from very early on.

Kyodo News writes as if everybody knew there was a team of US experts measuring radiation around Fukushima I Nuke Plant right after the accident. (Did we?)

Kyodo News (12/31/2012):

米、原発事故に核特殊チーム派遣　初展開、菅政権把握せず

US sent a nuclear special team to Japan, first [overseas] deployment of the team; Kan administration did not know about the deployment

東電福島第１原発事故直後に、原発周辺の放射線量を測定するために米政府が日本に派遣したのは、核テロなどに備える特殊専門チームだったことが３１日、分かった。このチームが海外へ本格展開した初の事例だったが、当時の菅直人政権中枢は派遣の事実を当初把握していなかったことも判明。チームが実測したデータの公表が遅れ、住民の「無用な被ばくを招いた」（福島県浪江町議会の吉田数博議長）恐れがある。

It was revealed on December 31 that a team that the US government sent to Japan in order to measure radiation around Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant right after the start of the nuclear accident was a special team to counter nuclear terrorism. It was the first overseas deployment for this team, but the core officials in the Kan administration weren't aware of the deployment at that time. The actual measurement [as opposed to simulations like SPEEDI] by the team was therefore delayed, and it may have caused "unnecessary radiation exposure" for the residents (Namie Town Assembly chairman).

チーム派遣決定に関わった複数の米政府関係者と、日本側当局者らが共同通信に明らかにした。

Multiple sources in the US government and the Japanese counterparts who were involved in the deployment disclosed the news to Kyodo Tsushin.

派遣されたのは、上空からガンマ線を実測し汚染状況を分析する「被害管理対応チーム」の３３人。

The team consisted of 33 people in "Damage Control and Response Team" [my translation, probably not the official name] in charge of measuring gamma radiation from the sky and analyzing the situation of contamination.

Could this team be from Nuclear Emergency Support Team? Kyodo article has a photograph provided by the US National Nuclear Security Administration, so it is likely it was this team.

Tweet

#Radioactive Japan with No Money Part 2: Government/TEPCO to Cover Annual Cancer Screening Costs of Only 3.7% of #Fukushima I Nuke Plant Workers

That's 904 workers out of 24,118 who have worked at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant since March 2011, up to September this year.

It's still over 5-fold increase, though. Originally when Prime Minister Noda declared a "cold shutdown state" to the ridicule of the world on December 16, 2011, only 167 workers who had exceeded the cumulative radiation of 100 millisieverts one day prior were to be fully covered by the national government for annual cancer screening for life, but no one else.

In August this year, TEPCO (at that time already effectively nationalized) was kind enough to lower the limit to 50 millisieverts, but the exposure should have been sustained by December 16, 2011 to qualify for the free checkups.

How much does a cancer screening test cost?　About 50,000 yen (US$610). 45.2 million yen (about US$549,000) per year for 904 people, instead of 1.2 billion yen (US$15 million) per year for 24,118 people.

The Japanese government is paying 22 trillion yen (US$268 billion), or about a quarter of the annual budget, in interest payments for its enormous debt. "We owe it to ourselves", say the Japanese citizens, analysts, politicians alike.

I guess they don't feel they owe it to the subcon workers at Fukushima I Nuke Plant.

From Asahi Shinbun (11/22/2012; part):

【青木美希】東京電力福島第一原発で原発事故から今年９月までに働いた２万４１１８人のうち、国と東電のがん検診制度を無料で受けられるのは９０４人で全体の３．７％にとどまることがわかった。国と東電が、５０ミリシーベルト超の放射線を昨年１２月の野田政権による事故収束宣言までに浴びた場合に限る、と期限を切ったからだ。東電は「不安に思う作業員から相談は受ける」という。相談窓口は鈴木正勇弁護士で、電話０３・３５９７・０７４１。

(Report by Miki Aoki) It has been revealed that only 904 workers, or 3.7% of the 24,118 workers who have worked at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant since the start of the accident up to September this year will be able to receive free cancer screening tests from the national government and TEPCO. It is because the national government and TEPCO will allow free cancer tests only to workers who had already received more than 50 millisieverts of radiation by the December [16] declaration by the Noda administration that the accident was over. TEPCO says the workers who are worried can still talk to the company by calling 03-3597-0741 to speak with [TEPCO's] attorney.

収束宣言が出たとはいえ、福島第一原発では高線量下での作業が続く。例えば、９月にも２４人が積算５０ミリシーベルトを超えたが、特別措置対象の東電社員２人をのぞく２２人は、無料のがん検診を受けられない。

Even after the declaration that the nuclear accident is over, the work at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant is carried out in a high radiation environment. For example, 24 workers exceeded cumulative radiation exposure of 50 millisieverts just this September. However, except for 2 TEPCO employees who are exempt [from the government/TEPCO rule], 22 workers won't be eligible for free cancer screening tests.

厚生労働省は福島第一原発の作業員を「緊急作業に従事する作業者」とし、うち１００ミリシーベルトを超える放射線を浴びた人は、生涯にわたり年１回、無料でがん検診を受けられる制度を昨年１０月に設けた。

Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare set up the system last October which designated the workers at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant as "workers engaged in emergency work" and allowed them to receive annual cancer screening tests for free for life if their cumulative radiation level exceeded 100 millisieverts.

検診費（１回約５万円）は雇用主の会社が負担するが、作業員が会社をやめた場合は、国が負担することにしていた。

The cost (about 50,000 yen [US$610]) would be borne by the employers, and if the workers quit, the national government would pay the cost.

ところが、野田政権が昨年１２月１６日に事故の収束を宣言すると、厚労省は「緊急作業は原則的に終了した」として、宣言前日までに１００ミリシーベルトを超えた人に対象を限定。１６７人で確定させた。

However, when the Noda administration declared the end of the nuclear accident on December 16 last year, Ministry of Health decided that the emergency work was now basically over and limited the number of workers eligible for the free annual cancer checkups to 167 who had already exceeded 100 millisieverts as of December 15, 2011, one day prior to the declaration.


東電は今年８月、収束宣言までに５０ミリシーベルト超を浴びた作業員６６３人を無料検診の対象に加える救済措置を実施した。また、特定の作業をする一部東電社員は収束宣言後に５０ミリを超えても無料にする特別の措置を始め、これまでに７４人が対象となった。

This August, TEPCO announced the remedial measures whereby 663 workers who had exceeded 50 millisieverts by the time of the declaration would be added to the workers who could receive free checkups. In addition, some TEPCO employees who carry out particular work will receive free checkups even if they exceed 50 millisieverts after the declaration, and there are 74 such employees so far.

福島第一原発では、９月単月でみても、２７人が１０～２０ミリシーベルトの放射線を浴びた。通常、各原発で仕事をしている業者が年間２０ミリ未満を管理基準にしていることからもわかるように高線量で、作業員からは「期限を設けず全員を対象にすべきだ」との声が上がっている。健康管理の問題を甘く見過ぎると、労働者が福島第一原発の作業を敬遠し、４０年かかるとされる廃炉作業が滞りかねない。

At Fukushima I Nuke Plant, in September alone, 27 workers were exposed to 10 to 20 millisieverts of radiation, which is very high, as evidenced by the 20 millisieverts per year standard used by the companies that work in nuclear power plants. There are workers at Fukushima I Nuke plant who say all workers should be included in the program [of free annual cancer screening tests]. If this health management problem is underestimated, workers may start avoiding the work at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, causing the delay in decommissioning which is estimated to last for more than 40 years.

40 years. That's why some right-wing politicians (including the vice governor of Tokyo) have been talking about reinstating the draft and send young people to work at the plant, willing or not.

As you see, the declaration in December last year that the cold shutdown "state" was achieved and the nuclear accident was over was made so that the national government would not need to spend extraordinary amount of money on the workers at the plant and to the residents in Fukushima who were displaced by the nuclear accident. Instead, the government have been generously giving money to general contractors doing the "decontamination" and transporting disaster debris full of asbestos and heavy metals as well as radioactive materials to be burned and buried in faraway places like Osaka and Kitakyushu.

LDP politicians, already planning for their administration (or at least how to spend more taxpayers' money once they get there, which they have no doubt about), wants to have a supplementary budget to the tune of 5 trillion yen or more right after the election. You can bet none of the money is going to Fukushima I Nuke Plant workers.

Tweet

#Radioactive Japan with No Money Part 1: Chiba's Kashiwa City Mayor to Have Residents Decontaminate, Says "It's a Great Learning Opportunity"

It all boils down to the governments of all sizes in Japan not having the rainy-day funds they could spend. They don't have any savings (budget surplus) at all, and the borrowed money they are willing to spend is on "decontamination" and "sharing the pain" by spreading disaster debris, both of which have been contracted out to the largest general contractors in the nation.

First, the mayor of Kashiwa City in Chiba Prefecture in the high-radiation Tokatsu area where over 650,000 Bq/kg of radioactive cesium was found in the soil (dry) in the city-owned land in the storm drain in October last year has decided that the "decontamination" effort in his city is to be done by the residents themselves. Yes, the city will help, by providing promotional videos.

Mayor Akimoto, 44-year-old ex-Bain management consultant, says, "In order to eradicate the fear of radiation, it's best that the residents themselves do the decontamination and experience firsthand what radiation is about." According to the mayor, it is a learning opportunity for the residents, and decontaminating one's own home is just a light work.

Talk about a spin by a management consultant. What Kashiwa City has is "contamination from radiation", not "fear of radiation".

From Tokyo Shinbun Chiba Local Version (11/23/2012):

民有地除染「市民で」　柏市長方針　来月に支援強化

Kashiwa City Mayor's policy is for the city residents to decontaminate privately-owned properties, extra support starting next month

柏市の秋山浩保市長は二十二日の記者会見で、住宅など民有地の除染問題について「放射線不安の払拭（ふっしょく）には市民に実感していただくことが大切」と述べ、業者などを派遣せず市民の手による除染を進める方針をあらためて示した。市は十二月から道具の貸し出しや除染方法を説明する映像の公開などを通じ、除染支援を強化する。

In the press conference on November 22, Mayor Hiroyasu Akiyama of Kashiwa City said about the decontamination of privately-owned properties such as houses, "In order to eradicate the fear of radiation, it is important for the residents to have firsthand experience", stressing again his policy to proceed with the decontamination by the residents instead of using contractors.

　民有地除染をめぐっては、県内で汚染状況重点調査地域に指定された九市のうち、松戸、流山、野田、我孫子、印西、白井の六市が業者派遣など市主体の除染を実施している。柏市も同様の対応を求める声があったが、国の財政支援の対象が不十分で効果が見込めないことなどを理由に、市民主体で進める考えを示していた。

In Chiba Prefecture, 9 cities have been designated as "areas that need special attention to the contamination", and 6 of them, Matsudo, Nagareyama, Noda, Abiko, Inzai, Shiroi, are employing businesses to do the decontamination. There were people who asked for the same approach in Kashiwa City, but [the mayor] said his intention was to have the city residents to do the decontamination, because the financial support from the national government would not be enough.

　秋山市長は会見で、住宅周りの除染は市民で可能な軽作業と指摘し、「除染は放射線の知識を深めるチャンス。イメージではなくきちんと理解してほしい」と協力を求めた。

In the press conference, Mayor Akiyama pointed out that the decontamination of one's home is a light work that residents can do themselves, and asked for cooperation. "Doing the decontamination is a great opportunity to deepen one's knowledge of radiation. I would like [the city residents] to fully understand [by experience], instead of understanding as a concept."

　除染方法の映像は十二月一日から市ホームページで公開する。

The video of how to decontaminate will be available in the city's homepage starting December 1st.

What neither the mayor nor the residents acknowledge is that Kashiwa City has no money. Only 60% of the city budget is funded by tax revenue (still better than the national government budget, 50% of which is funded by tax revenue), and the rest comes from government subsidies and municipal bonds.

If a favorite refrain of many in Japan, "National debt? We owe it to ourselves, not a problem", is true, well, print away. Debt does not matter, right?

Tweet

#Radioactive Japan: Fukushima's Radiation Monitoring Posts Attract Residents' Anger

Yomiuri Shinbun (11/13/2012) reports that the radiation monitoring posts in Fukushima have been the targets of citizens' anger for some time.

As I posted last week, these monitoring posts display lower-than-actual numbers because the lead batteries are placed conveniently or inconveniently so that they block the radiation to the sensors. Step away from these monitors and measure locations with turf or dirt that hasn't been replaced, and the radiation levels could easily be 20, 30% higher, as many (including Professor Hayakawa in Koriyama City) have discovered.

FNN News reports it will cost the national government 150 million yen to fix the problem. As if the government has money.

Photo in the Yomiuri article: Monitor in Motomiya City, Fukushima, with solar panel damaged:

Tweet

Environmental Health Perspectives Magazine: "Radiation and the Risk of Chronic Lymphocytic and Other Leukemias among Chornobyl Cleanup Workers"

I found the paper by the University of California - San Francisco researcher Lydia B. Zablotska et al regarding increased risk of leukemia for Chernobyl cleanup workers even at a low (less than 200 millisieverts) cumulative radiation exposure (see my previous post).

From Environmental Health Perspectives Magazine, advance publications (11/8/2012):

• PDF file
• Supplemental Material

The media report on this paper in Japan is causing anxiety. People are worried that any low level of radiation exposure from the Fukushima I Nuke Plant accident would lead to leukemia, as it has been "proven" by this paper. It seems only Nikkei Shinbun actually cited the radiation exposure levels in the study (less than 200 millisieverts, with over 90% less than 100 millisieverts).

Speaking of "low level radiation exposure", I happened on an old article from June last year by Yomiuri Shinbun that mentions the radiation exposure sustained by Self Defense Force soldiers during two-day work (March 12 and 13 last year) at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, pouring water into the reactors to prevent core melts. Of 12 soldiers who had dosimeters on them, 2 soldiers got 80 millisieverts in 2 days, and 8 others exceeded 30 millisieverts. 8 soldiers didn't even have dosimeters.

Ministry of Defense at that time said there would be no health problem because the exposure was within the limit set by the ministry. What's the limit? 100 millisieverts. For 2 days' work.

Tweet

UC San Francisco Researchers: "Chernobyl cleanup workers had significantly increased risk of leukemia"

even with the cumulative radiation exposure of less than 100 millisieverts, as Nikkei reports (quoting Kyodo), supposedly from the paper published on November 8, 2012 in the journal Environmental Health Perspective. (I haven't found the paper yet.)

Here's from Eurekaalert.org (11/8/2012; emphasis is mine), UCSF Press Release:

Chernobyl cleanup workers had significantly increased risk of leukemia
Findings may help estimate cancer risk from low-dose exposures like CT scans

A 20-year study following 110,645 workers who helped clean up after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident in the former Soviet territory of Ukraine shows that the workers share a significant increased risk of developing leukemia. The results may help scientists better define cancer risk associated with low doses of radiation from medical diagnostic radiation procedures such as computed tomography scans and other sources.

In the journal Environmental Health Perspectives this week, an international team led by scientists at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and the Chernobyl Research Unit at the Radiation Epidemiology Branch of the National Cancer Institute describes the increased risks of leukemia among these workers between 1986 and 2006. The risk included a greater-than-expected number of cases of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, which many experts did not consider to be associated with radiation exposure in the past.

The new work is the largest and longest study to date involving Chernobyl cleanup workers who worked at or near the nuclear complex in the aftermath of the accident.

Overall, there were 137 cases of leukemia among the workers over the 20-year span of the study, and 16 percent of those cancers were attributable to the Chernobyl radiation exposure, the team found.

The findings shed light on the thorny issue of estimating cancer risk from low doses of radiation – an issue of importance to miners, nuclear workers and anyone who is chronically exposed to low levels of radiation at work or patients who receive sizeable radiation doses when undergoing medical diagnostic tests.

"Low doses of radiation are important," said the lead researcher Lydia Zablotska, MD, PhD, an associate professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at UCSF. "We want to raise awareness of that."

Worst Nuclear Accident of All Time

The nearly 111,000 Ukrainian workers in the study were among the more than 500,000 former Soviets who worked directly on the front lines in the aftermath of Chernobyl disaster, which was the worst nuclear accident of the 20th century followed by the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan.

It began in the early morning hours of April 26, 1986 when a planned test of a backup system for operating cooling pumps went awry. A combination of human error and unsafe reactor design led to the runaway production of heat in Chernobyl's Reactor No. 4, which quickly caused two massive explosions, ruptured the reactor, crumbled the building, exposed the nuclear core, rained radioactive debris around the compound and spread fallout through the atmosphere over the Soviet Union and Europe.

Many of the Ukrainian workers were exposed to high levels of radiation because they were part of the teams that helped sweep up contaminated debris from the immediate area – much of which was highly radioactive. Some of them, in fact, reached lifetime limits of radiation exposure within a matter of a few hours.

Although an elevated radiation-related risk of leukemia was not surprising, given the level of exposure among many of these workers, what did surprise Zablotska and her colleagues was the elevated risk of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), which was similar in size to the risk estimated for non-CLL leukemia.

Leukemia and Low-Dose Radiation

For many years, doctors have known that ionizing radiation from an X-ray source or produced by the decay of radioactive elements can cause leukemia, because it can penetrate the body, expose bone marrow to the radiation and damage DNA. But while scientists have understood this basic mechanism for decades, the question of how much leukemia risk is associated with moderate or low doses of radiation has been hard to answer.

For many years, the best estimates came from long-term studies involving survivors of the 1945 atomic bomb detonations over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan during World War II. People in the immediate vicinity of the blasts were exposed to various levels of radiation, and in the decades afterward, their health was monitored and the increase in cancer tracked.

From those assessments of cancer risk, scientists estimated risks from lower doses by extrapolating the data down. But there have always been problems with this approach, said Zablotska. Atomic bomb survivors were bathed in gamma or neutron rays, while someone who undergoes a CT scan in the U.S. is exposed to X-rays, a different type of radiation. Moreover, extrapolating risks for Japanese population to Western population is further confounded by differences in genetics, lifestyle and diet between the two.

The new work helps to bridge this gap because the doses received by the Ukrainian cleanup workers falls somewhere in between the high level received by the Japanese atomic bomb victims and the lower levels received by people who undergo extensive medical scans.

It also challenges the idea that chronic lymphocytic leukemia is not linked to radiation exposure – something that earlier studies of atomic bomb survivors had seemed to support.

The genetic makeup of the Japanese population may have hidden any increased risk, Zablotska said, because they are much less likely to develop this type of cancer anyway. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia accounts for only 3 percent of all cases of leukemia in Japan – as opposed to about one-third of all leukemia cases in the U.S. and 40 percent of all cases of leukemia in Ukraine.
###

The article, "Radiation and the Risk of Chronic Lymphocytic and Other Leukemias among Chernobyl Cleanup Workers" by Lydia B. Zablotska, Dimitry Bazyka, Jay H. Lubin, Nataliya Gudzenko, Mark P. Little, Maureen Hatch, Stuart Finch, Irina Dyagil, Robert F. Reiss, Vadim V. Chumak, Andre Bouville, Vladimir Drozdovitch, Victor P. Kryuchkov, Ivan Golovanov, Elena Bakhanova, Nataliya Babkina, Tatiana Lubarets, Volodymyr Bebeshko, Anatoly Romanenko and Kiyohiko Mabuchi will be published online by the journal Environmental Health Perspectives on November 8th, 2012. See: http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/

In addition to UCSF, authors on this study are associated with the National Research Center for Radiation Medicine in Kyiv, Ukraine; the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Md.; Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in Camden, N.J.; Columbia University in New York City; and Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Centre in Moscow.

This study was funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) through grant #CA132918 and contract #NO1-CP-21178 and by the Intra-Agency Agreement between the NCI and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) through agreement #Y2-Al-5077 and #Y3-CO-5117. Both NCI and NIAID are part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Additional support was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (contract HHSN 261 2004 55796C), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the French Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety.

UCSF is a leading university dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care.

Contact: Jason Socrates Bardi
jason.bardi@ucsf.edu
415-502-4608
University of California - San Francisco

The Japanese "safety" limit for workers doing decontamination, aka "shifting contamination elsewhere", is maximum 50 millisieverts per year, and maximum 100 millisieverts total in 5 years - same as radiation workers at nuclear power plants.

But as then-Minister of the Environment Goshi Hosono said, "Japan is different! We're not Russia! We have advanced decontamination technology!" Like screwdrivers.

The country is different indeed, that's for sure.

Tweet

Japanese Government Now Admits 675 Radiation Monitoring Posts Show "10% Lower" Than Actual Levels, "Beyond Expectation" Says Ministry of Education

Why 10% lower? Because the led battery was shielding the radiation detector.

How convenient.

From Kyodo News (11/7/2012):

現地の放射線量１０％低く表示　監視装置６７５カ所改修へ

Radiation levels displayed 10% lower, 675 monitoring posts to be repaired

　政府の原子力災害対策本部は７日、空間放射線量を測定するため、福島県や周辺県に設置した放射線監視装置（モニタリングポスト）で、１０％程度低い空間線量が表示されていたとして、６７５カ所で改修工事を行うと発表した。

The Nuclear Disaster Response Headquarters of the Japanese national government announced on November 7 that the radiation monitoring posts set up in Fukushima and the neighboring prefectures have been showing air dose levels about 10% lower [than the actual levels], and that the repair work will be done on 675 of them.

　装置内で金属製の箱に覆われたバッテリーが検出器の隣に設置されていたため、放射線が遮られていた。

The metal box containing the battery is placed next to the radiation detector inside a monitoring post, blocking the radiation.

　住民や自治体から実際の線量と異なるという指摘を受け、機器の位置を変更し、より正確な表示を目指す。

Residents and municipalities [in these prefectures] have pointed out that the levels displayed by the monitors are different from the dose levels [that they measure], so the government will modify the location of the equipment and try to have a more accurate reading.

　東京電力福島第１原発事故を受け、政府は公共施設や観光地などにモニタリングポストを設置し、今年４月から文部科学省のホームページで測定結果を公開していた。

In response to the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident, the national government has set up the radiation monitoring posts in public buildings and tourism destinations, and the monitoring results have been available on the homepage of the Ministry of Education and Science since this April.

Jiji Tsushin says it was the lead storage batteries right next to the monitoring post shielding radiation from the ground, and there are 545 monitoring posts in Fukushima, and 130 in neighboring Miyagi and Yamagata and other prefectures (the article doesn't say where).

10% lower. And that's on top of the reduction of radiation by replacing the soil/concrete around the monitoring posts, and after a sizeable decrease in cesium-134 (half life 2 years) in the environment.

The original vendor contracted to build these monitoring posts (Alpha Tsushin) was summarily dismissed in November last year after their monitoring posts displayed the radiation levels "too high" for the comfort of the Ministry of Education. The current monitoring posts are supplied by Fuji Electric, one of the top four heavy electric companies including Hitachi, Toshiba, and Mitsubishi, and Hitachi-Aloka Medical.

These four companies do a healthy business contracting from the national and local governments on large and small public projects. Always go extra miles to please the price-insensitive customers.

Jiji Tsushin's article also says:

同省はバッテリーの遮蔽（しゃへい）効果を想定していなかったという。

Ministry of Education says it did not expect the shielding effect of the batteries.

Yeah right. I can almost hear the conversation that may have taken place between an official at the Ministry of Education and the favored vendors like Fuji Electric and Hitachi:

Official: "We have a problem. Alpha Tsushin's monitoring posts are scaring the residents. The numbers are just too high, and we don't think it's right to scare people who have suffered so much (and whom we need to stay put where they are). So we're going to fire the vendor. What can you offer?"

Fuji, Hitachi: "Well, we could build monitoring posts that display more reasonable numbers."

Official: "Do it. I don't care how you do it, and don't tell us how you do it."

Tweet

#Radioactive Japan: US High School Students Did Visit Fukushima, on "Strengthen Kizuna" Project

A Japanese independent journalist posted this photo on his tweet. It is an air dose measurement of 0.54 microsievert/hour in front of a junior high school in a village in Fukushima Prefecture, and the village name is Tenei-mura (pronunciation: ten'ei).

Remember that before the Fukushima nuclear accident, the average air dose rate in Fukushima Prefecture was one order of magnitude lower.

Now, why did this particular tweet catch my attention? Well that village was one of the locations where the high school students from the US were sent, as part of the "Kizuna" project by the Japanese and the US government to show support and solidarity with the "victims" of the disaster and to spread the correct information about recovery and decontamination effort by the Japanese government by having young people from the US visit Fukushima.

Remember those high school students, who followed the footsteps of the students from Middle Tennessee State University?

The original meaning of 'Kizuna' is "a tie that binds a domestic animal so that it can't escape".

From Fukushima-net.com (no date, but assumed to be in July 2012; part):

米国の高校生が被災地を訪問　天栄などで「キズナ強化プロジェクト」

US high school students visit disaster-affected areas, part of "Project to strengthen 'Kizuna'" in Ten'ei

東日本大震災の復興支援のため、アメリカの高校生たちが10日から天栄村などを訪れ、地元の人たちと交流を深めている。

High school students from the US have been visiting places [in Fukushima] including Ten'ei-mura starting July 10, interacting with the locals to support the recovery from the March 11, 2011 disaster.

外務省の委託事業で、日本国際協力センターが実施する「キズナ強化プロジェクト」の一環。アメリカの高校生が被災した宮城、岩手、福島、茨城の４県を訪れ、復興状況などを視察している。

It is part of the "Project to strengthen Kizuna", which is commissioned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and carried out by the Japan International Cooperation Center. Under the project, high school students from the US are visiting the disaster-affected Miyagi, Iwate, Fukushima and Ibaraki Prefectures and observing the progress of the recovery efforts.

本県は天栄村ふるさと子ども夢学校推進協議会が受け入れ先となり、１０日から１３日までの日程で実施。

In our Prefecture [Fukushima], a council of Ten'ei-mura is organizing the event from July 10 to 13.

アメリカの4つの高校で日本語を学んでいる学生と教師約１１０人が来日している。

110 students and their teachers from 4 US high schools are in [Fukushima]. The students are learning Japanese at their high schools.

...　12日は長沼高、岩瀬農業高を訪れ、日本の高校生との交流を図るほか、天栄村の職員から村内の畑の除染活動について説明を受ける予定。

On July 12, they are scheduled to visit the local high schools to interact with the Japanese high school students [there], and to be briefed by the village officials on the progress of decontaminating the farm lands in the village.

今回のプロジェクトは、アメリカの学生に被災地の復興状況を見てもらい、除染への取り組みを海外に発信してもらおうという狙い。

The aim of this project is to have the US students see the recovery of the disaster-affected area, and have them spread information on the decontamination effort.

The site has a photograph of students wearing "Kizuna" T-shirts and eating "mochi".

Ten'ei-mura is located along the corridor in the middle of Fukushima where the radioactive cloud passed through, between Sukagawa and Shirakawa. Professor Hayakawa's Radiation Contour Map (ver.7) has Ten'ei-mura inside 0.5 microsievert/hour, with a significant chunk of it inside 1 microsievert/hour.

Tweet