Institute revises radiation exposure chart without explanation

[DeSwiss]

July 24, 2013

By YURI OIWA/ Staff Writer

A key institute that studies the effects of radiation has revised its chart of doses and related health risks without offering an explanation, triggering confusion and criticism as a result of the disparity among government figures circulating among the public.

The National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS) in Chiba posted the chart as a reference that listed exposure from natural radiation and that from radiation leaked by the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant and possible health risks on its website after the nuclear accident unfolded in March 2011.

In April 2012, the NIRS deleted a description saying that there were no increased cancer incidences with a radiation dose of 100 millisieverts or less.

Instead, the new chart said it has been found that the risk of dying from cancer gradually rises in accordance with an increase in radiation doses exceeding 100 millisieverts.

MORE

- With multiple melt-throughs on-going, broken fuel cells lying out in the open or partially covered in water in constantly depleted cooling tanks, and ''something'' boiling and emitting steam from somewhere, and the black soot that peppers Tokyo and everything north of it, and the broken reactors themselves constantly inundated with ground water that spews directly through all that poison and then back into the sea -- with a trickle being ''captured'' and put into tanks that will soon require high rise buildings for the only storage space left, is up -- Northern Japan and Southern Russia is slowly being poisoned directly. And so are all the rest of us, eventually.

So secretly raising the radiation numbers are the least of our worries.....

[intaglio]

1. I cannot work out what you are complaining about

There is one issue (unreported in your extract) which might cause concern and that is the raising of the estimated background radiation back in 2011.

What you do quote is a simple acknowledgement that cancer risk rises with increased dose above 100 milliSv which replaced the even more dubious no risk below 100 milliSv.

[sue4e3]

3. we're on the same page

[wtmusic]

2. Mental health effects of perceived poisoning by radiation

can be debilitating for some:

"The consequences of low-level radiation are often more psychological than radiological. Because damage from very-low-level radiation cannot be detected, people exposed to it are left in anguished uncertainty about what will happen to them. Many believe they have been fundamentally contaminated for life and may refuse to have children for fear of birth defects. They may be shunned by others in their community who fear a sort of mysterious contagion.

Forced evacuation from a radiation or nuclear accident may lead to social isolation, anxiety, depression, psychosomatic medical problems, reckless behavior, even suicide. Such was the outcome of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster in the Ukraine. A comprehensive 2005 study concluded that "the mental health impact of Chernobyl is the largest public health problem unleashed by the accident to date". Frank N. von Hippel, a U.S. scientist, commented on the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, saying that 'fear of ionizing radiation could have long-term psychological effects on a large portion of the population in the contaminated areas'.

Such great psychological danger does not accompany other materials that put people at risk of cancer and other deadly illness. Visceral fear is not widely aroused by, for example, the daily emissions from coal burning, although, as a National Academy of Sciences study found, this causes 10,000 premature deaths a year in the US. It is 'only nuclear radiation that bears a huge psychological burden — for it carries a unique historical legacy'."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model

Though the NIRS chart was changed simply to acknowledge controversy about the LNT (Linear No Threshhold) model, the publicity surrounding the change was indicative of how nuclear accidents can trigger an exaggerated response leading to anxiety, perceived persecution, and paranoia.

You're correct that "secretly raising the radiation numbers" and even radiation itself are the least of your worries. The nuclear industry has to do a better job at addressing psychological issues associated with fear of radiation.