Radiation levels in Fukushima are lower than predicted

[The Vegan Marxist]

And to think, despite all of Red Dave's anti-nuclear energy fear-mongering, only 0.2% were effected from the radiation leak!

Radiation levels in Fukushima are lower than predicted
By Chelsea Whyte
November 16, 2011

The fallout from the radiation leak at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor in Japan may be less severe than predicted.

Radiology researcher Ikuo Kashiwakura of Hirosaki University, Japan, and colleagues responded immediately to the disaster, travelling south to Fukushima prefecture to measure radiation levels in more than 5000 people there between 15 March and 20 June.

They found just 10 people with unusually high levels of radiation, but those levels were still below the threshold at which acute radiation syndrome sets in and destroys the gastrointestinal tract. Geiger-counter readings categorised all others in the area at a "no contamination level".

How did the population of Fukushima prefecture dodge the radioactivity? Gerry Thomas at Imperial College London, director of the Chernobyl Tissue Bank, says the answer is simple. "Not an awful lot [of radioactive material] got out of the plant – it was not Chernobyl." The Chernobyl nuclear disaster released 10 times as much radiation as Fukushima Daiichi.

Rapid response

Thomas says the quick and thorough response by the Japanese government limited radioactive exposure among the population. On 12 March, the same day as the first explosion at Fukushima Daiichi, the government ordered the evacuation of residents within 20 kilometres, and asked various institutions to begin monitoring contamination levels.

"They had no faxes, no emails, nothing was working," says Thomas, adding that other countries might not have coped as well with a combined earthquake, tsunami and nuclear plant malfunction. "Given the circumstances, they did phenomenally."

The Japanese authorities also removed contaminated food and gave iodine to those who were very young, she says. Radioactive iodine can contaminate the thyroid gland in the body, leading to radiation-induced cancer, but can be counteracted by introducing non-radioactive iodine into the body.

Health researchers will have to keep an eye on radiation levels, however. "There are many 'hotspot' areas where radioactivity has accumulated locally," says Kashiwakura. This is because rainfall deposited radioactivity unevenly. "The Japanese people have a responsibility to continue research on the effect of radioactivity in humans."

Journal reference: PLoS One, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027761 (http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0027761)

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21181-radiation-levels-in-fukushima-are-lower-than-predicted.html

[Blackscare]

I can't recall where, but I recently read something that contradicts this article, saying that fallout levels were about twice what the government claimed. I'll try to find it.

[The Vegan Marxist]

This study wasn't done by the Japanese govt. though, but by radiology scientists.

[S.Artesian]

And to think, despite all of Red Dave's anti-nuclear energy fear-mongering, only 0.2% were effected from the radiation leak!

Radiation levels in Fukushima are lower than predicted
By Chelsea Whyte
November 16, 2011

The fallout from the radiation leak at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor in Japan may be less severe than predicted.

Radiology researcher Ikuo Kashiwakura of Hirosaki University, Japan, and colleagues responded immediately to the disaster, travelling south to Fukushima prefecture to measure radiation levels in more than 5000 people there between 15 March and 20 June.

They found just 10 people with unusually high levels of radiation, but those levels were still below the threshold at which acute radiation syndrome sets in and destroys the gastrointestinal tract. Geiger-counter readings categorised all others in the area at a "no contamination level".

How did the population of Fukushima prefecture dodge the radioactivity? Gerry Thomas at Imperial College London, director of the Chernobyl Tissue Bank, says the answer is simple. "Not an awful lot [of radioactive material] got out of the plant – it was not Chernobyl." The Chernobyl nuclear disaster released 10 times as much radiation as Fukushima Daiichi.

Rapid response

Thomas says the quick and thorough response by the Japanese government limited radioactive exposure among the population. On 12 March, the same day as the first explosion at Fukushima Daiichi, the government ordered the evacuation of residents within 20 kilometres, and asked various institutions to begin monitoring contamination levels.

"They had no faxes, no emails, nothing was working," says Thomas, adding that other countries might not have coped as well with a combined earthquake, tsunami and nuclear plant malfunction. "Given the circumstances, they did phenomenally."

The Japanese authorities also removed contaminated food and gave iodine to those who were very young, she says. Radioactive iodine can contaminate the thyroid gland in the body, leading to radiation-induced cancer, but can be counteracted by introducing non-radioactive iodine into the body.

Health researchers will have to keep an eye on radiation levels, however. "There are many 'hotspot' areas where radioactivity has accumulated locally," says Kashiwakura. This is because rainfall deposited radioactivity unevenly. "The Japanese people have a responsibility to continue research on the effect of radioactivity in humans."

Journal reference: PLoS One, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027761 (http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0027761)

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21181-radiation-levels-in-fukushima-are-lower-than-predicted.html


This is crap. "Quick response by the Japanese Govt"??? You have to be kidding me. They didn't even distribute the potassium iodine pills until 3-5 days after the event.


Earlier figures showed the release at Fukushima put the event at the "emergency" level of Chernobyl. That the total amount released is less is cold comfort to those who have been exposed.

Where did most of the radiaton go? Into the ocean, which should make everyone feel a whole lot better-- 19% touched down on Japanese territory, 79% in the ocean, 2% reached other territories.

Right, they found nobody with enough radiation to destroy the gastrointestinal system. Well, I'm sure everybody in Japan feels so much better. Except... the greater risk is from exposure to low dose radiation-- try reading Deadly Deceit.

Interesting thing about the article-- the measurements were taken at 7 different locations. Did anyone notice that the area of measurement closest to Fukushima is 67 km from the reactors? And the furthest? 355 kms. So...uhh....the exclusion zone was originally 20 Km, and then 30 km, and this study gets no closer than 67 km and draws its conclusion from that? That's called science?

Here's what needs to be analyzed-- infant mortality rates in Japan after the releases; infant mortality rates in that 2% area that received contamination from the event.

[The Vegan Marxist]

This is crap. "Quick response by the Japanese Govt"??? You have to be kidding me. They didn't even distribute the potassium iodine pills until 3-5 days after the event.

I'll only address this for now, but your claim is actually what's crap. The meltdown first occurred sometime March 11. 230,000 units of iodine was actually distributed 2 days after:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/14/japan-quake-iodine-idUSLDE72D1XF20110314

[Zav]

So? It wasn't as big as the media portrayed it, and most people were evacuated, so I wasn't expecting all too much human damage. It still poisoned the land, though.

Also, OP, being against nuclear power is not equal to fear-mongering, nor is it anti-science. I am against it because of the nuclear waste it produces, the fact that it is not renewable, and that it can't be decentralized. Noxion (f the diacritics) did show me new theoretical models that produce minimal waste, but this technology doesn't exist yet, and so it can't be used to justify the nuclear power produced now. If Capitalism prevails when these exist and if we find a way to not destroy huge chunks of land to get the radioactive material for fuel, then it would be fine. Those are big 'if's, however.

[S.Artesian]

I'll only address this for now, but your claim is actually what's crap. The meltdown first occurred sometime March 11. 230,000 units of iodine was actually distributed 2 days after:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/14/japan-quake-iodine-idUSLDE72D1XF20110314


Well, gee. let's start with this:

1. On Oct 28, 2011 the Wall Street Journal reported that the release from Fukushima Daichi was greater than originally estimated, amounting to 42% of the radiation released from Chernobyl.

2. On Oct 31, 2011 the same newspaper reporter that the radiation cleanup in Japan is faltering, and that Japan is using a method known to be unsafe-- called shallow pit burial, lining the pit with plastic.

3, Your Reuters article, is based on a information floated 3 days after the event. A few days later, the Japanese government admitted that it improperly withheld distribution of the pills. See here (http://www.prisonplanet.com/japanese-government-admits-potassium-iodide-pills-should-have-been-distributed-earlier.html)


Associated Press distributed this statement, which has been carried by hundreds of mainstream news organizations:


“A Japanese nuclear safety official, Kazuma Yokota, acknowledged that the government only belatedly realized the need to give potassium iodide pills that help reduce chances of thyroid cancer to those living within 12 miles (20 kilometers) of the nuclear complex.”
4. On Sept 29, 2011 the Wall Street Journal ran another story (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204010604576596321581004368.html?m od=googlenews_wsj)
reporting that the government failed to hand out radiation pills until 5 days after the accident.

5. It is well known that use of potassium iodide is most effective when utilized prior to exposure to iodine 131, with effectiveness declining dramatically if administration is delayed for more than just a few hours after exposure.

EDIT: 6. Forgot to add this beaut from the very Reuters article you cite:
The iodine has not yet been administered to residents; the distribution is a precautionary measure in the event that this is determined to be necessary," it said.

Get that? The pills were supposedly distributed to the centers. The pills were never given to the people. Pay attention to the small print. It makes all the difference in the world. Buildings don't get thyroid cancer. People do.


You simply don't know what you are talking about, and ought to be a little bit more cautious before spouting the PR crap pumped out by the bourgeoisie and their government.

[S.Artesian]

Well this thread sure ended in a hurry. Any pro-nuke technocrat pro-pseudo science advocates out there want to take up the challenge and tell us all how Fukushima wasn't really all that bad; how well the Japanese govt. handled the situation; how we have nothng to fear from radiation releases but fear itself?

[piet11111]

Obviously Fukushima was bad but to condemn nuclear energy is a mistake when its based on Tepco's complete disregard for safety.
Nuclear power can be done responsibly and safely.

New designs are much saver and can use nuclear waste as fuel and are incapable of producing nuclear weapons material.

[S.Artesian]

Obviously Fukushima was bad but to condemn nuclear energy is a mistake when its based on Tepco's complete disregard for safety.
Nuclear power can be done responsibly and safely.

New designs are much saver and can use nuclear waste as fuel and are incapable of producing nuclear weapons material.

But that's not what Vegan argued. He defended a completely fraudulent story put out by the govt. He uncritically published a puff piece from the New Pseudo-scientist.

Nuclear power can be done responsibly and safely? Maybe, maybe not. But we can't even begin to determine that while the bourgeoisie are in charge, doing things like they've done historically with nuclear power.

And the fact of the matter is that I have yet to see a "pro-nuker" on this list, or anywhere take a Marxist critique of Fukushima-- instead we got from day one, and continuing until.. well at least yesterday-- "Oh it's not that bad. Oh, the government is handling it properly. Oh it's not Chernobyl. Oh, nobody could have predicted and defended against a 9.0 earthquake and a 30 foot tsunami. Oh, contamination will not spread very far...." blah, blah blah.

Well, it is that bad. The government did not handle it properly. It's 42% of Chernobyl. Such an earthquake and tsunami were predicted, and in fact were recorded in history. And Tepco had actually lowered the ground on which the reactors were build by about 20-30 feet."

So when a pro-nuker decides to quit flacking for the bourgeoisie, and takes up the cause of human safety and health as first and foremost and joins with all those anti-nukers who say "no more nukes" because the pro-nukers recognize that this ruling class in this society could give a fuck less as to how many are killed, injured, contaminated-- then I might be inclined discuss our areas of mutual agreement.


PS: Where's the Vegan Marxist now? I'm still waiting for him to deal with my outrageous anti-scientific assertions.

[Misanthrope]

This study wasn't done by the Japanese govt. though, but by radiology scientists.

Funded by whom?

[Invader Zim]

Funded by whom?

Tis conspiricyes! OMG.

Ever heard of the peer-review process?

[S.Artesian]

Funded by whom?


Don't hold your breathing waiting for an answer. Vegan won't be back. He'll pop up somewhere else until, of course, he can't duck the challenges to his baloney that appear, and then he'll disappear again.