The Voice of Russia Radio : “Japan gov’t fails Fukushima children”

Photo: EPA

Damage inflicted by the Fukushima disaster could be far more severe than the Japanese authorities would like people to believe. In April 2011, the government raised radiation limits for exposure at schools near the Fukushima plant to 20 millisieverts. A senior nuclear adviser to the government at the time promptly resigned in protest, saying the level was 20 times too high, especially for children who, he said, are more vulnerable to radiation than adults.

Akira Sugenoya, mayor of the city of Matsumoto on the Japanese island of Honshu, has been calling for children’s relocation from the areas. Speaking in an interview with the Voice of Russia, Mr. Sugenoya stressed that the Japanese authorities are not doing enough to protect children from the negative effects of radiation.

“Immediately following the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, I started saying that children should not be allowed to live on the contaminated land. I would have liked to see the government address the issue, but it never happened. Living in an area contaminated by radiation weakens children’s immune systems and severely harms their health, so they should be relocated. Children are a lot more vulnerable to radiation than adults. As of now we have an exclusion zone established but that’s not enough in my opinion. That’s why I want to repeat once again that children should be relocated to clean, radiation-free areas at least temporarily.

The government though has a different plan, namely to decontaminate the affected area and bring the residents back but is it feasible to quickly and effectively do away with radioactive pollution? I am absolutely certain that it is unfeasible. Let’s recall the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, when the authorities acted differently and moved people from the affected areas to safe ones. On failing to get a government reaction, we have decided to act on a municipal level, to do the little things we can do to help. We’ve launched a programme on checking school meals for radiation. People across Japan are now following our example. We have also measured radiation levels in the air and in the soil of schoolyards. We invited children to children’s camps for rest and recreation during summer and winter seasons, and we borrowed this from what they did after the Chernobyl accident in the USSR. We have since spread the practice all over Japan. I hope that the example that our small city of Matsumoto sets in terms of conducting an evacuation on a large scale will also be followed far and wide. Radiation leaks create two problems, namely they are detrimental to people’s health and they pollute terrain. Compared to Chernobyl, the situation in Japan is further aggravated by radioactive water leakage. The world has never ever come across this kind of situation. Radioactive water flows into the sea but Prime Minister Abe says in an interview with Japanese newspapers that everything is under control. Opinion polls however show that between 70% and 80% of the Japanese are mistrustful of the Prime Minister’s claims. We should admit that radioactive water is a grave problem. The threat that children may have been contaminated with radioactive materials still looms large. We shouldn’t remain indifferent to the challenges we are facing.”

Japan’s now defunct Nuclear Industrial Safety Agency originally hid important radiation data from the general public, to avoid causing panic. Radioactive materials continue leaking into the groundwater from the plant even though Fukushima’s operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Company is conducting work to contain the damage.

end quote.

You can look at a group of people either as a merely a group, or as a collection of individuals.

You can look at the group stats and understand that even in a severe cancer cluster, the majority don’t get sick.

IF YOU CONCENTRATE ONLY ON THE GROUP, you can say “It’s ok, its not bad, its only an increase in disease of 3 – 10 times, and its a big population. If we didn’t look and record it and tell the people, they might not have noticed (fat chance but this is the rationale).

IF YOU LOOK AT THE INDIVIDUALS THOUGH, you realise that many got ill when they would not have gotten sick at all, and many got sick decades before they naturally would have. And you think, if Tepco had used rifle bullets instead of the random distribution of radionuclides, the kids of Fukushima would have a better chance of health and justice.

And the nuclear authorities, when translated into common rationality, so as much themselves. Look:

“GERALDINE THOMAS: Following Fukushima I doubt that there’ll be any rise in thyroid cancers in Japan.

MARK WILLACY: Professor Geraldine Thomas is a specialist in the molecular pathology of cancer at Imperial College London.

She also helped establish the Chernobyl Tissue Bank, which analyses samples from people exposed to radiation after the nuclear disaster in 1986.

She argues that there’s a simple reason for the higher than expected incidence of thyroid cancer among Fukushima’s children.

GERALDINE THOMAS: If you look for a problem, especially if you use an incredibly sensitive technique, which is what the Japanese are actually doing, you will find something.”

If they had not gone looking, she says, the thyroid disease rate would have stayed at the pre disasters level. She says.

And that is, she is saying that if you don’t measure you get accurate stats and if you do you dont. Which is total crap. Are we supposed to be grateful nuclear industry and its advocates measures and reports the consequences of its actions?

I don’t thinks so.

That there was a thyroid cancer emergency in Chernobyl affection of such proportions that doctors from around the world had to come in and perform thousands of surgeries, which, but for the measurements, would never have taken place and would never have been needed?

It is Orwellian double think to say, as nuclear industry does, that the increase in thyroid cancer rates in the former Soviet Republics and Japan are merely the result of the tender mercy of nuclear industry and its post disaster measurements of CONSEQUENCES.

Is the nuclear industry correct in saying, as its rationale implies, that the way to lower cancer rates is to have routine nuclear disaster and not measure the consequences?

Every country gathers cancer stats. Noone has ever shown that gathering cancer stats causes cancer.

But that’s what they imply.

As an additional example:

We have to ensure that radiation is respected and we have to understand what damage radiation can cause – but radiation is not the poison, the dose is,” Professor Sykes said.

“We need radiation in our environment, just as we need vitamins and minerals. Too much is a problem, too little is a problem,” she said.

“Chernobyl was obviously a disaster but there was no increase in leukaemia, solid tumours or birth defects among the 335,000 people who were evacuated and who received less than 100 milliSieverts of radiation – that’s five times the dose I’m allowed as a radiation worker.

“There was an increase in thyroid tumours but we’re not sure how much that related to the fact that everyone was screened for thyroid tumours, which wouldn’t normally happen.” Pam Sykes, US DOE, Flinders University South Australia, 2012.

Pam you really think vitamin R actually moderated the following graph quanta and shape?

from Chernobyl Radiation-induced Thyroid Cancers in Belarus
Mikhail V. MALKO
Joint Institute of Power and Nuclear Research, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus
Krasin Str. 99, Minsk, Sosny, 220109, Republic
of Belarus: QUOTE: ” absence of marked latency period is another feature of radiation-induced thyroid cancers caused in Belarus as a result of this accident. “

These experts in denial double think have one year left in Japan in which to sow confusion.

The Australian Cancer Council gathers cancer statistics routinely. It has never qualified its findings with the caveat “We have conducted this survey and we deeply regret that the Australian cancer statistics are now higher than they would have had we not conducted the survey.” they never have and never will. Because its a nonsense to say such a thing. But nuclear industry says this sort of thing all the time.

In fact just this last week I received a package from the Australian Government. A National Bowel Cancer Screening kit I am asked by the Government to action and return. On the basis of Sykes and on the basis of Thomas, speaking for nuclear industry (Imperial College is the home of British Reactor Design and Sykes is paid in part by US DOE) I should immediately throw the kit into the rubbish because 1. Only the Japanese have sufficient technology and skill to sensitivity determine cancer rates 2. For me to participate in the survey will artificially inflate the cancer statistics, which would, if no one participates, stay low. According to the logic of Sykes and Thomas. Well, I think I’ll return the kit this time round just to piss em off. If yo dont look for cancer, the cancer rates stay look, so the cause, according to them, of the Chernobyl related cancers, isnt the reactor accident its the cancer surveys. Brilliant. Not.

If experts such as Thomas and Sykes, came out an said prior to Chernobyl, Belarus and Ukraine were captive states of the Soviet Union, and thus their cancer stats under reported disease. The surveys were poor, the data barely in existence. Ok, I’d consider it. I’d write to those nations and ask about it. IF THAT IS THE CASE, if that is why the post Chernobyl stats produce distortion, WHAT IS JAPAN’S EXCUSE TODAY???

It is a commonality that among many previously captive nations, and Japan was occupied until 1952, that they emerge with non existent national cancer registries. Iran is only now reinstating its national registry, Brazil still does not have one and refuses to supply data to WHO, and JAPAN DID NOT START GATHERING A NATIONAL CANCER REGISTRY DATASET UNTIL THE 21 st century. What is it’s excuse? That the ABCC spoke for the whole of Japan? No. Researchers today still have to drive or fly to individual hospitals throughout Japan to find the data and to collate it into a national dataset. That dataset only came online and available to the public in 2013. As far as I can tell, for I’ve looked for it since 2011, and it suddenly popped up in 2013.

What Yamashita and Suzuki and Fukumshima Medical University are actually contesting, actually trying to create in the public mind by their statements of denial relating to the early onset, short latent period cases is this: That the first half of the Bell Curve graph of thyroid cancer cases did not exist in Ukraine and Belarus and does not exist today in Japan. And of course, that stance is a false stance. Noone can rationally amputate the first half of the Bell Curve by decree. It is merely propaganda.

In Japan, one takes it that they are comparing Fukushima populations with cancer stats pre 3/11 from Fukushima. And in that there may be an additional problem for them. The national stats show that at the start of records in that dataset (about 1974) the first years showed a constant incline, a year on year increase in new cases of all cases. Throughout Japan. It levelled, but from 1988 to 1992, for females, it showed a marked second increase. One has to ask why the increase throughout the second half of the seventies, and why the marked increased from 1988 to 92 (girls) throughout the 80s (boys). What do the stats show for the period of normal operation of Fukushima Diiachi and Danni prior to 3/11? Anything interesting? Anything to accord for Dr Yamashita’s apparent need to search for a claimed marker for radiation induced thyroid cancer ? He claims he has found one, but he has not. The two types of thyroid cancer he looks at both occurred in the wake of Chernobyl. But showed marked increases.

Public Administration, as conducted by government everywhere, involves the perception of people as groups. Just because there are government files somewhere with me name and your name on them, does not mean we are seen or treated as individual in the responses of authority toward the group. `In this respect, I, and you, and everyone else, are expected to be the same as everyone else.

That is their concept of justice and equity.

Because there was a low natural rate of disease prior to Fukushima, and because the majority will not get ill within the time frame of the childhood thyroid survey, (there is carried into adulthood, and as the children age, they exist the survey, with a cohort of most vulnerable being late teen girls) the survey can be structured to exclude the most at risk. Particularly if the parameters of the survey allow for the exclusion of the early onset cases.

These have been in fact excluded by the Yamashita declaration, carried on by Fukushima Medical University, that the minimum latent period for childhood thyroid cancer is four or five years.

This declaration is shown to be false by a reading of the relevant medical literature, which gives, variously, a minimum latent period for the disease, of between zero years (Belaus) to two years (911 Commission, USA).

EVEN Yamashita himself wrote in a peer reviewed paper in 1998 that he and his coauthors found a “surprisingly short” latent period in Chernobyl affected children. And further, he noted that the development of the early onset disease was “rapid”.

The world literature reveals an irrational deviance from the reality by Yamashita and FMU.

When they are thoroughly discredited in 2015 and 2016, when the median latent period timespan has been reached, who are they going to hand over to ? Who would take their job and not care about their reputations? Donald and Daffy Duck?

The existence of four – five year MEDIAN latent period, such as exists and such has been confirmed by numerous sources, DOES NOT SNUFF OUT THE REALITY OF THE EARLY ONSET CASES.

The medium latent period is the NOT shortest latent period, and even though the shortest latent period is NOT the median latent period, authorities have recognize that INDIVIDUALS within the cohort WILL AND HAVE suffered early onset disease due to radiation in Fukushima.

Anything else, on the face of the literature, is an irrational suppression of the shortest latent period on the phoney excuse that the shortest is not the median.

And of course, they aren’t. They are two different periods of disease latency. They ARE NOT mutually exclusive. They both exist.

To deny this is to deny the early onset victims.

The frightening thing about the statistics is the NUMBER OF EARLY ONSET VICTIMS IN JAPAN TODAY.

That’s the insight `Yamashita and his trainees at FMU dont want me or you or anyone else to think about.

They have failed.

Once, Yamashita was a respected doctor. He isn’t anymore.

“Happy people don’t get sick” Yamashita, 2011.

Is this why you are so intent on depressing as many people as you can Doc? No one with half a brain believes you and those who do are as crazy as cut snakes.

Sure Doc, the flood wont really start until 2015 – 16. But you know yourself, for you have written so, that the early cases come on “surprisingly fast”. Months not years Doc, and you know it very well. That these are a minority of cases DOES NOT EXCLUDE THE INDIVIDUALS FROM CONSIDERATION.

The knowledge does two things: 1. It mandates the inclusion of the minority. 2. It is a cause for great sadness because the minority of early cases are the harbingers of the flood median period majority of cases.

The Bell Curve graph for Fukushima will happen. The quanta will be different to Chernobyl. Its shape will not be.

I believe that the cancer stats have been carefully studied by `Japanese authorities since the inception of nuclear power in Japan. So far they have not revealed their findings to the public. While independent medical researchers, until the 21st century, had to visit each region and each hospital (with some exceptions such as Osaka), the liaison between central government and individual hospitals merely an organizational matter, one that can be expected to be routine.

It is also true that the Japanese nuclear authorities have been measuring the routine emissions of nuclear industry into air and water since the 1970s. The papers have been published.

They would have us believe that nuclear industry is unique in that it causes no public health hazard. What a joke that is. The industry admits to nothing until it looses in court and even then it merely responds by saying the court got it wrong.

%d bloggers like this: