Thursday, February 28, 2013

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

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

Nada Osseiran
WHO Communications Officer, Public Health and Environment
Telephone: +41 22 791 4475
Mobile: +41 79 445 1624

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?)


Anonymous said...

Eight percent of Japan has radioactive fallout for generations. Fukushima disaster is not over. WHO and IAEA are the bullhorn for corporate global nuclear.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 6:41PM, 100 percent of Japan has had radioactive fallout for generations already. For that matter, not just Japan.

Anonymous said...

I don't think there is anywhere on the planet that has not been touched by radioactive fallout.

Ivan said...

Chronology and origin of accumulation is long and difficult task(involving graphing and other supremely boring diligences). Even if proven, the country responsible will deny it. Try to blame it on Russia or U.S. and see what happens.

Getting back to topic, I don't know what WHO is doing and why. Somebody needs job doing stats, I suppose. Health risks already well known from long duration intensive studies after the Chernobyl disaster.

Anonymous said...

FAnonymous here : a very big problem / see Wiki for WHO ( or OMS in french - a much more elaborated paper)

IAEA – Agreement WHA 12–40
In 1959, the WHO signed Agreement WHA 12–40 with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The agreement states that the WHO recognises the IAEA as having responsibility for peaceful nuclear energy without prejudice to the roles of the WHO of promoting health. However, the following paragraph adds: "whenever either organization proposes to initiate a programme or activity on a subject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult the other with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual agreement".[92] The nature of this statement has led some pressure groups and activists (including Women in Europe for a Common Future) to believe that the WHO is restricted in its ability to investigate the effects on human health of radiation caused by the use of nuclear power and the continuing effects of nuclear disasters in Chernobyl and Fukushima. They believe WHO must regain what they see as "independence".

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Thank you Ivan.
Let's pretend.
Model how many times you were served a school lunch with 510,000Bq/kg cesium in it. How many breaths you took on the days the wind was blowing toxic junk in your direction. How much tritium was in the water you drank or bathed in on any given day. How much DNA damage is too much for the following generations.
Reducing the impact of this disaster to some numerical model is convenient.
Nobody died. Nuclear power is good. Children with thyroid cancer can receive "treatment". Nuclear power is good. Chernobyl heart is just anecdotal. Nuclear power is good. Bioaccumulation in the food chain and your body will also be anecdotal.Nuclear power is good.We have weapons and electricity. Nuclear power is good.
We can't even clean up one leaking toxic tank farm.
Nobody "died" and we have extra unlimited Billions to spend on health care and clean-up for the rest of how many half-lives ?
Not seeing the logic, but definitely paying for it.

Anonymous said...

Prof. Takeda is saying thyroid cancer in Fukushima kids is up some 50 times already (post 14 Feb 2013).

Anonymous said...

The Road to Fukushima Starts in Chernobyl

WHO IGNORED 30,000 publication and 170,000 sources in favor of their 350 sources, talk about cherry picking data!

“There is an underlying prejudice being played upon here: ‘our science is good and Russian science is bad.’ The conclusions of the Chernobyl Forum are reached by ignoring a huge body of research conducted in Eastern Europe that just happens not to be published in English. Certainly, if the UN was genuinely interested in Chernobyl rather than fabricating results, they could have paid for translations of relevant articles. Basically, it is just propaganda and worthless from a scientific perspective”

Ivan said...

“There is an underlying prejudice being played upon here: ‘our science is good and Russian science is bad.’

Haha, for WHO this might be true according to previous humourous article Arivamirpal posted where Japanese are saying soil in Japan is different from rest of world( especially Russia-Ukraine in this case). This is also why burning contaminated waste, soaking up liquid contamination with paper and diapers, making children raking contaminated leaves into plastic bags, using duct tape as remedy for radioactive leaks, not working for rest of the world, only Japan.

Anonymous said...

Fkn idiots... Fkn 3rd world know nothing piece of shtt.
P.fkng S, Stop The Fission in the fkng molten cores with neutron poisons ie; "lead & tin" A fkng Holes! I can see that they're fkng fissioning!!!!!
In addendum japan's dead, should've stopped the fission, day 1.
Is 5-10 times "5million to 10 million bq/m2«notice it's not bq's km2, yeah, oh shtt is right"chernoble evacuation zone contamination livable? Well... It's factually proven it isn't.
/also, that 5 to ten million bq's a m2, that's just cesium137, outputs of cesium 134 are nearly double that when reactors and fuel pools spew, not to mention that Americium which turns into plutonium, and plutonium are likely adding another million of 2 million bq's a m2 which everyone is too COWARDLY "yeah, it's the truth, wanna fight about it?" to test for, so do the math = roughly 20-22million bq's m2 200 km's of course not spread evenly, god. The reactors are still adding to that. Staying = DEATH proven/ factually backed up fukushima and surrounding areas»
Knowing this, if someone in Japan KNOWS THIS OK!!! and stays, well I can say they just don't give a profoundly offensive expletive. Ignorance in this will end in death, no if, and's or but's, you can bet your life on it, I'm factually right according to chernoble's fallout zones human statistics. Save life or kill it, there is no fkng middle ground here, what am I trying to do? What are you trying to do? Stay die, leave maybe live "'cause you have plutonium in you" PROOOOVEN!
No1listens, lalala I can't hear you... You've been effing warned/armed with Factually Valid information, wtf more do you want or need, change your own diaper, all I offer is life saving intelligence. Take it or die, your life is in YOUR HANDS NOT MINE. Your life has been stolen, I'm trying to give you a chance to cheat the cheaters and live it. Lies are not factual life saving/giving intelligence, facts and truth are ffs. But, but, but.... "no but's, it happened, to leave is to live and that is that when in comes to long term wide area dispersal of fissionable nuclear materials through fission and fire." PERIOD. Not your fault,theirs, leave! Stockholm syndrome, you have no allegiance nor owe anything, nor support those who ever try to harm or kill you, you fkng remember that. Fk
I just watched a supposedly democratic nation kill it's civilian population, think about that.
P.S 3 meltdowns/fuel fires in a country the size of california=no more country, disagree? Go Fkn live there, prove it you shtt talkin' snivelkng Lil shtt's.

Anonymous said...

7:29 PM Above, is an excellent example of a rant typed by a Finnish un-rehabilitable drunk living in his mother's basement and receiving disability from the Finnish government.

MsCrebople said...


"P.S 3 meltdowns/fuel fires in a country the size of california=no more country, disagree? Go Fkn live there, prove it you shtt talkin' snivelkng Lil shtt's."

P.S. Three meltdowns/fuel fires in a country the size of California = no more country, disagree? Go fucking live there. Prove it you shit talking snivelling little shits.

MsCrebople said...


"Fkn idiots... Fkn 3rd world know nothing piece of shtt.
P.fkng S, Stop The Fission in the fkng molten cores with neutron poisons ie; "lead & tin" A fkng Holes! I can see that they're fkng fissioning!!!!!"

Fucking idiots...fucking third world know-nothing pieces of shit. Please fucking stop. Stop the fission in the fucking molten cores with neutron poisons, ex: lead and tin. Fucking assholes! I can see that they're fucking fissioning!!!!!

Anonymous said...

I guess he is hitting the bottle(s) hard in celebration of a Jesuit Pope's resignation or whatever. woo hoo

Anonymous said...

Hey You shtt offerin Popes emissary.Do j€§uits hate their oaths exposed? For obedient, Papal fkn offerings is a must …fkng thks again. I have already a trucload of yall mrderers shtt. You scoundrel, kid from L0yola – Pope bloody Mass murderer University! How much you get paid for the fkn shtt u keep spreadin on all forums?

Anonymous said...

"A fkng Holes! I can see that they're fkng fissioning!!!!!"

Look, what's the point of correcting they guy's grammar and spelling when his thought process is lacking. Reading the above two sentences one would think he sees "assholes fissioning".

Anonymous said...

3:28 PM, given his prior innuendo filled rants I would not be at surprised at all if he did see assholes fissioning.

Post a Comment