The Human
Consequences of the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accidents
Eiichiro Ochiai
When a
very strong earthquake (magnitude 9.0) hit the Pacific ocean side of the
northeastern part of the main island of Japan on March 11th (3.11)
2011, the accompanying huge tsunami wiped out many communities along the
coast. Close to 20,000 people lost their
lives, mainly due to the tsunami. Many
who were stripped of their homes and livelihood continue to struggle to recover
their ways of life.
One of the most disastrous results of the
quake/tsunami was the devastation at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant
(Fk-1) of the Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO).
The plant is known in Japan as Fk-1 (Fuku-ichi. It released an enormous amount of radioactive
material. Its effects on living
organisms have already begun to be felt in many ways, though it’s been only
four and a half year[s]. It may, however, be premature to make a
judgment as to the degree of disaster,
in light of the fact that the after-effects of the Chernobyl accident of 1986
are still unfolding.
This article discusses some prominent features of the current situation
(as of August 2015) in the aftermath of the Fk-1 accident.
The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident
Four of
the six reactors (units 1~4) on the premises of the Fk-1 plant experienced
serious accidents including explosion, while the other two reactors (5 and 6) were
not in operation and remained intact, as they are located slightly apart from
the others.
Units 1~3 were operating at the time, but
shut down automatically when the quake hit.
The shutdown reactors need to be continuously cooled, because the fuel
rods, though out of fission reaction, release great heat due to the nuclear
decaying process of radioactive fission products. The quake caused substantial damage to the
reactors, and the cooling systems of units 1~3 did not function properly due to
both physical damage and human errors.
As a result, the fuel rods in units 1~3 “melted down”.
Water added from outside for cooling
purposes reacted with the hot rods to form hydrogen gas. The resulting hydrogen explosion in unit 1
stripped the roof on March 12th. Unit 2
showed no apparent damage, but released an enormous amount of radioactive
material through holes created by the quake, mostly on March 15 and thereafter.
The explosion at unit 3 on March 14 was
most damaging. TEPCO insists that it was
also a hydrogen explosion, but many observers offered different opinions,
including one that it a small-scale nuclear fission explosion occurred. Unit 4 had no nuclear fuel rod in the reactor,
though a large number of spent as well as new fuel rods were in its storage
pool. It exploded also, its cause
unknown, though TEPCO speculated that hydrogen gas entered from the adjacent
unit 3, and exploded.
Release of Radioactive Material from Fk-1
A large
amount of radioactive material was released as a result of the accidents. How did it happen? Leakage through cracks and holes made by the
quake on some reactors, explosions, intentional vents to relieve pressure, and
leakage of cooling water which is contaminated as a result of contact with the
melt fuel rod debris.
The amount of radioactive material cannot
be determined accurately, and can only be estimated by various means. TEPCO made an estimate of the released
amounts of several tens of radioactive nuclides based on the readings of several
monitoring posts placed on the premise (1).
The initial governmental data (2) were based on these estimates. Some of the official data are presented in
Table 1. The government’s assessment of
the scale of the release from Fukushima, based on these data, was that the
radiation release was relatively small compared to that of Chernobyl (April,
1986 in Ukraine), about one tenth to at most one third.
But these data accounted for only the
release into the atmosphere. Radioactive
materials were also released into the water systems surrounding the facilities,
as well as directly into the ocean. When
the amounts released into the water and the ocean were estimated (3), the total
amounts released were re-calculated (4).
They are shown in Table 1 along with the official data. The ratio of the amount released from
Fukushima to that from Chernobyl ranges from 1.2 to 3.1 for the major nuclides,
suggesting that the extent of radiation release from Fukushima was very likely
more than that from Chernobyl; perhaps more than twice if all were taken
account of.
Table 1. The amount of radioactive nuclides released from the Fk-1
accident (2011) compared with those released from the Chernobyl accident (1986)
nuclide
|
Quantity
in reactors at Fukushima
at
the time of accidenta
|
The
official released amount from Fukushimaa
|
Total
amount released from
Fukushimab
|
Total
amount
released
from
Chernobylc
|
Fukushimab
over
Chernobylc
|
Kr-85
|
8.37E+16
|
8.37E+16
|
|||
Xe-133
|
1.20E+19
|
1.1E+19
|
1.20E+19
|
6.5E+18
|
1.85
|
I-131
|
6.01E+18
|
5.0E+17
|
2.08E+18
|
1.76E+18
|
1.18
|
Cs-134
|
7.19E+17
|
1.8E+16
|
1.65E+17
|
5.4E+16
|
3.06
|
Cs-137
|
7.00E+17
|
1.5E+16
|
1.59E+17
|
8.5E+16
|
1.87
|
Sr-89
|
5.93E+18
|
2.0E+15
|
7.31E+16
|
1.15E+17
|
0.636
|
Sr-90
|
5.22E+17
|
1.4E+14
|
8.49E+15
|
1.0E+16
|
0.849
|
Pu-238
|
1.47E+16
|
1.9E+9
|
1.91E+10
|
3.5E+13
|
0.00055
|
Pu-239
|
2.62E+15
|
3.2E+9
|
3.14E+9
|
3.0E+13
|
0.00011
|
H-3
|
3.40E+15
|
E+18 means 1018; a. ref
(3), b. ref (4), c. ref. (5)
Radioactive materials are still continuously
coming out; and the data shown in the table do not take account of them. For
example, Fig. 1 shows the radiation levels (Bq/L) of Cs-134, Cs-137, Sr-90, H-3 and all beta sources
found in one of the drainage systems in the facility, which drained out into
the ocean between April 2014 and Feb 2015 (6).
The amounts leaked out through drainage systems are given in Table 2 (6). Substantial amounts continue to leak out. The main reason is that 300 tons of cooling
water is being added daily to keep the fuel rod debris cold. That cooling water is immediately
contaminated, and leaks out as a number of gaps/holes were created by the
quake, though an effort has been made to contain and store it in tanks. Eventually TEPCO hopes to decontaminate the
water collected, and return it to nature.
How successfully decontamination procedures are being carried out is not
known. There are other sources of
water. One is subterranean water, which
flows through the premises, particularly under the contaminated buildings. This has not yet been halted.
Fig. 1. Radioactivity of K-drain system in Fk-1 premises
Table
2 Leaked
amount of radioactive material through drainage systems in Fk-1 premises
Are
radioactive materials still leaking out into the atmosphere as well? No obvious phenomena, such as explosions,
have been observed since March 2011, though sudden rises in temperature of the
reactors have occurred occasionally.
However, some signs of plumes are still often observed visually (as
dense fog) as well as on the monitoring posts placed all over Fukushima
prefecture and throughout Japan.
Monitoring post data are daily posted on the internet (7). Occasionally sudden peaks (spikes) appear on
a number of posts, near and far. If time
sequences are carefully taken account of, it seems, they could show the flow of
a plume. Such a plume flow was seen
throughout Japan on April 14, 2015. Spike
phenomena occurred on April 8/9
and May 16, 2015, as well. Fig. 2 shows
an example of a spike phenomenon on April 9 in Iidate-mura 30 km northwest of
Fk-1. This is not a complete record; it
is only what this writer observed in periodic checks.
Fig. 2. Spikes observed in a monitoring post in
Iidate-mura, Fukushima
Each time there are spikes on monitors, the
government attributes such a phenomenon to a “malfunctioning monitor”, and shuts
down such posts, until the readings return to normal (regular) levels. It is rather strange that a number of
monitoring posts (all across Japan) go out of order simultaneously or rather in
sequence. This phenomenon indicates that
sudden releases of radiation are still happening occasionally, but how often,
on what scale, and their causes are not known.
All these events suggest that the accidents
are “far from contained”, and radioactive materials are still leaking out. In sum, the overall radioactive materials
released from the Fk-1 accidents are already larger than that of Chernobyl and
will increase further unless measures are taken to stop these leakages.
Distribution of Radiation Levels
How far
and how widely the radioactive materials are dispersed, i.e., the radiation
levels at various locations, are constantly monitored not only by officials as mentioned above, but also by civil activists. Unfortunately the official data may not be
reliable, as many observers have noticed. Civil activists have compared the
monitoring values with their own readings and found the monitor readings lower by
as much as 50% at many locations. The
structure of the monitor itself often prevents the true reading of radiation. It has been pointed out, for example, that a
metal plate placed just under the measuring device shields radiation coming
from below (8).
A monitor placed by the government reads
the so-called spatial dose; i.e., the supposed external exposure dose at 1 meter
above the ground. The radioactivity is
measured in terms of Bq and, if equipped, the energy value of the radiation
measures is combined to indicate the spatial dose value, expressed often in
terms of mSv/hr.
Most monitors can measure only g-radiation, and many monitors as well as Geiger
counter type instruments measure only cpm (counts per minute), convert it to Bq
values, which are converted to Sv values assuming that radiation is due to cesium
(Cs-137). Cs-137 has a relatively long
half-life of 30 years and is produced in a significant quantity in the fission
reaction. The spatial dose is due to
many other nuclides such as strontium (Sr)-89/90, tritium (H-3) and iodine
(I)-129/131, but the contribution from these and other nuclides is not taken
account of, or rather is counted as Cs-137. It is a sort of measure of radiation level,
but does not represent the true exposure dose.
However, this value is commonly used in assessing the danger level due
to radiation.
A few readings will be cited here to
illustrate the typical radiation levels given by the government. Some readings at monitoring posts on March 31,
2015 were: 6~10.5 mSv/hr in Hutaba-cho where Fk-1 is located, 4~17
mSv/h in
Okuma-cho, just south of Hutaba (several km from Fk-1) and 1.7~3.6 mSv/hr in
Tomioka-cho, south of Okuma (i.e, 10 km south of Fk-1). These are readings in highly contaminated
areas.
On April 14, 2015 when a plume seemed to
have been released, several readings (except the spike, which was a sudden rise
to twice or higher level) were: 0.03~0.04 mSv/hr in Hokkaido (northernmost island); 0.02~0.05
mSv/hr in
Aomori; 0.02~0.05 mSv/hr in Iwate; 0.04~0.12 mSv/hr in
Miyagi (just north of Fukushima); 0.14~0.30 mSv/hr in Soma city, Fukushima;
0.05~0.12 mSv/hr in Tochigi; 0.08~0.09 mSv/hr in
Tokyo; 0.03~0.06 mSv/hr in Kyoto; 0.05~0.08 mSv/hr in
Hiroshima; 0.04~0.06 mSv/hr in Fukuoka.
These are recorded on the monitoring
posts, but many places are not covered by monitoring posts, where much higher
radiation levels have been recorded; i.e., “hot spots”. Recently reported examples were: 1.23 mSv/hr in
western Tokyo on July 23, 2.92 mSv/hr in Saitama on July 25, 4.8 mSv/hr in
Iwaki (30 km south of Fk-1) on Aug. 2 (9).
Let’s assume that you are standing on a
location where the monitoring post showed 0.1 mSv/hr throughout a whole
year. Then, you will be exposed to 0.9
mSv/year (0.1 mSv/hr x
24 hrs x 365 days=876 mSv/year=0.9 mSv/y). The Japanese government
calculates the dose per year by assuming that one would stay in open areas for 8
hrs and for the rest of the day in buildings, where the radiation level is assumed
to be about 40% of the outside. This
calculation would make the exposure dose significantly lower than the real
value; in the example above, it would be 0.54 mSv/year. This assumption is arbitrary, indeed, the
inside of a building has often been found to have radiation levels as high as that
of the immediate outside.
The official exposure dose allowed is
currently set as 1 mSv/year (see note at the end). This corresponds to a dose rate of 0.18 mSv/hr according
to the governmental way of calculation.
It is further degraded to 0.23 mSv/hr with some other arbitrary assumptions,
and this value is regarded as the permissible level of dose rate. So dose rate below this value is supposed to
be OK. If you are exposed directly to
this level for a year, then your accumulated dose will be 2 mSv/year. In other words, the government limit of 1
mSv/year is actually close to 2 mSv/year in reality. The government is currently trying to raise the
1mSv/year limit to 20 mSv/year. If 20
mSv/year is approved and people are forced to return to their previous homes
under this condition, they will be exposed to dangerously high levels of
radiation. It must be pointed out, though,
that there is no safe level.
Radioactive iodine affects the thyroid
immediately. Iodine-131 is short-lived
with a half-life of 8 days, and I-129 has a very long half-life of 15.7 million
years. Both would be readily absorbed
into the thyroid gland, as iodine is used to make thyroid hormones. In the nuclear reactor, both are produced in
comparable amounts, but I-131 affects the thyroid more seriously. An entity with a shorter half-life emits
radiation more often than that with a longer half-life in the same chemical
quantity. The distribution of I-131 in
the environment is difficult to determine accurately, as it is short-lived.
In Dec. 2014, the official nuclear
regulatory committee (Japan) published a report to indicate that Fk-1 is still
emitting I-131 and other I-radioisotopes (10).
According to their report, trans-uranium Cm-242 and other such nuclides
were formed in the fuel rods during the operation, and they fission spontaneously,
as a result producing radioactive nuclides including I-131. The possible maximum amount of I-radioisotopes
released from this source has been estimated as 28 mSv/week (=170 mSv/hr)
in terms of equivalent dose for child thyroid at the border of the premises of
Fk-1 (10).
An alternative expression of contamination
is the radioactivity of soil, typically Bq value per kg of soil, which often is
converted to Bq/m2. It is
assumed that the density of soil is 1.3 g/cm3 and that the
radioactive material exists in the uppermost 5 cm of the soil, so that Bq/m2
value is 65 x the value in Bq/kg. This
value (Bq/kg) is real, measured directly by an instrument on a sample of
soil. Hence this may be more reliable in
expressing the level of contamination than the spatial exposure dose. Besides, the source of radiation (from a soil
sample) can be readily identified. This
is not sufficient, however, as minute radioactive particles can be floating
above the soil, which can be measured as spatial radiation.
In all these expressions, a fundamental
uncertainty is that radiation levels may not be constant over time. Radioactive material decays over time and can
move due to water flow or wind. Therefore, radiation levels have to be
monitored continuously.
It must be pointed out that the external
exposure dose level obtained from measurements of this kind (i.e., spatial dose
and soil contamination) is less important than the internal exposure dose,
which is not necessarily related to the external dose. The significance of internal exposure will be
outlined below. The only thing that can
be said here is that people living in a place of higher spatial dose level and/or
higher soil contamination would have a higher risk of being exposed internally;
but there is no proven direct correlation, and cannot be.
The more serious factor, internal
exposure, is supposed to be measured by the whole body counter. But it can measure only g-radiation,
and cannot measure the more serious a- and b-radiation.
Besides, it measures only the radiation coming out of a body at the time
of the test, and cannot determine the more meaningful accumulated exposure dose. Hence whole body counter results can only be
used to give a tested person mental relief in cases where the reading is low or
non-detectable. But, even that could be
dangerous, if the source inside is emitting a and/or b
radiation.
Reality of Internal Exposure
The
effects of radioactive fallout from an accident of a nuclear power reactor as
well as a nuclear bomb explosion are caused mostly by “internal exposure”, yet
no adequate attention has been given to this aspect by the authorities and the
associated scientists. The sources of
the internal exposure are minute radioactive particles floating in the air,
which can be inhaled, and contaminated food and drinks consumed. Radioactivity of foods and drinks produced in
the contaminated area is monitored, and those with activity higher than the
regulation values cannot legally be marketed.
One cannot well safeguard against ingesting
radioactive material, unless one measures the radioactivity of everything one
takes in, which is not possible. The
issue of “internal exposure” is complicated, and would require another detailed
article. For now, three photographs are
shown below to illustrate the reality of internal exposure.
Figs. 3 and 4 are the trace of a-particles
in the preserved tissues of victims of the atomic bomb explosions in Hiroshima
and Nagasaki. It is not easy technically
to take this kind of photo, and scientists succeeded in doing so only recently
(11, 12). The source of the first trace
is plutonium from the Nagasaki bomb, and that of the second is uranium from the Hiroshima bomb. The plutonium and uranium embedded in the
tissues of atomic bomb victims are still emitting a-radiation
after 70 years. This says that the
fallout of the atomic bomb explosions, which included uranium in the Hiroshima
bomb and plutonium in the Nagasaki bomb, somehow got into the body of the
victims and stuck in those tissues, and emitted and destroyed the surrounding
tissues for 70 years. Both plutonium and
uranium have a long half-life, millions of years or more.
Fig. 3. a-Particles travel straight even in
tissues. The linear traces are those
emitted by plutonium in the preserved kidney tissues of an A-bomb victim in
Nagasaki (70 years ago) (11)
Fig. 4. A trace of a-particle of
uranium in the lung tissue of a Hiroshima victim (12)
Fig. 5 shows
the heart muscle fibers of a victim of the Chernobyl accident (13). They are broken at many places. Likely the b and g
radiation from Cs-137 (and others) damaged the fibers by breaking the chemical
bonds. The traces of b and g cannot
be visualized in such samples.
Fig. 5. The
heart muscle fibers are broken in the heart of a man (43 years old) who died of
heart disease in the most contaminated area (Belarus) of the Chernobyl accident
(13)
Thyroid Cancers among Children in Fukushima
The
authorities, such as ICRP and IAEA, have acknowledged that thyroid cancers in
children can be caused by radiation, likely due to I-131. They have also recognized the causal
relationship between leukemia and radiation.
But they deny a causal relationship in the case of other cancers and
other diseases, despite the fact that many studies and reports have shown that all
sorts of disease including cancers can be caused by radiation.
The rate of thyroid cancer is very low
among children (those under 18 years) under normal circumstances; 1 or 2 per
million children per year. Fukushima
prefecture started to investigate abnormalities in the thyroid gland in
children (under 18 years old) in 2011.
Soon they found high rates of abnormalities: nodules, cysts, and
then tumors mostly malignant. By the
spring of 2015 they have counted 126 thyroid cancer cases (mostly papillary)
among 370,000 children in Fukushima (14).
This rate amounts to 340/1,000,000 over 4 years, i.e., 85/1,000,000/year. This is abnormally high, approximately 60
times the normal rate, even much higher than that reported in Chernobyl.
Yet, the authorities and the committee in
charge of this investigation have denied causality to radiation from Fk-1
accidents. They argued against causality
thus:
(a) Screening effects, that is, they used sophisticated
techniques to show that cancers that are ordinarily non-detectable were
detected. However, officials admitted
recently that screening effects would not be able to explain such a high rate
(15).
(b) In the case of Chernobyl thyroid cancers in
children appeared only 4 years after the accident. It is too early for Fukushima children to get
thyroid cancers. This argument has been
rebutted by an article published in the Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (16).
(c) They checked a few other places in Japan, and
say that the thyroid cancer rate in Fukushima is similar to that found in Aomori,
Nagasaki and Yamanashi (17). They imply
that Fukushima is not abnormal. This
study is based on a very small sample in which only one cancer was found; hence
the result is not statistically meaningful.
(d) It is too soon for thyroid cancers to appear. It usually takes four to five years. This is in addition to the argument of comparison
with Chernobyl (b) above. Hence the
cancers found here should have started before the accidents.
(e) The amount of radioactive material released was
far lower than that of Chernobyl, and hence would not have such effects as those
found in Chernobyl.
A
recent report (18) indicates that the latent period for thyroid cancer can be
as short as one year in children. The
amount of radioactive material released (e) has been discussed earlier, and has
been shown to be at least as high as, or even higher than, that of Chernobyl. All of these arguments by the authorities are
based on weak or incorrect information.
Careful studies of the relationship
between the locations where children who got thyroid cancer live and the
radiation distribution have revealed correlations, though these are not
perfect. A correlation obtained by an
analysis is shown in Fig. 6 (19). This
indicates a likely causality; i.e., radiation caused the thyroid cancers,
though the dose used here does not necessarily represent an accurate value of
I-131 but rather a general radiation level.
Thyroid cancers are increasing among adults, too. As seen in Table 4, the increase over
2010-2013 was more than 200 % in Fukushima as well as in adjacent prefectures:
Ibaragi, Gunma and Tochigi.
Fig.
6. Pediatric thyroid cancer rate vs
spatial exposure rate for different areas in Fukushima prefecture. The line is
the linear regression line. R2 implies that the line accounts for 54% of the
variance in thyroid cancer rate due to radiation.
Other Diseases are also Increasing in Fukushima
since the Accident
No systematic
investigation has been published officially on the health effects of radiation as
a result of the Fukushima accident.
However, some statistical data may be indicative of significant trends. All indications are that incidence of many
diseases is increasing not only in Fukushima but also all over Japan.
Table 3 shows the number of diagnosed
cases recorded at Fukushima (prefectural) Medical School Hospital (latest
published data based on ref. 20). Cancer
of the small intestine, which is normally rare, increased by 400% in two
years. Eye disease (cataract), brain,
heart disease (angina) and all kinds of cancer have increased. Many diseases other than those listed in the
table have also increased since the Fk-1 event.
Table 3. Increase in diseases since
the accidents: records at the Hospital of Fukushima (prefectural) Medical
School
Disease
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
cataract
|
150 (100%)
|
344 (229%)
|
340 (227%)
|
angina
|
222 (100%)
|
323 (145%)
|
349 (157%)
|
bleeding in brain
|
13 (100%)
|
33 (253%)
|
39 (300%)
|
lung cancer
|
293 (100%)
|
504 (172%)
|
478 (163%)
|
esophagus cancer
|
114 (100%)
|
153 (134%)
|
139 (122%)
|
stomach cancer
|
146 (100%)
|
182 (125%)
|
188 (129%)
|
cancer in small intestine
|
13 (100%)
|
36 (277%)
|
52 (400%)
|
colon cancer
|
31 (100%)
|
60 (194%)
|
92 (297%)
|
prostate cancer
|
77 (100%)
|
156 (203%)
|
231 (300%)
|
shortened pregnancy period + low birth weight
|
44
(100%)
|
49 (114%)
|
73 (166%)
|
The
Problem is Not Confined to Fukushima; Diseases are Increasing All over Japan
Radioactive
materials do not stop at the border of Fukushima prefecture. They have spread beyond Fukushima as noted earlier. Accordingly, health effects could be observed
in other prefectures, as well. Indeed this
turned out to be the case.
Unfortunately, no systematic studies of cities or prefectures have been published
yet. However, every hospital publishes
its activities listing the number of patients with different diseases, the
number of surgeries, etc. These data may be indicative of larger
patterns in Japan.
The following tables are based on such
accounts; collecting data for all hospitals that reported data. They include
published data from all prefectures (21).
The tables list such data for Fukushima and the surrounding prefectures
(Tochigi, Gunma, Ibaragi, Yamagata, Miyagi), the next nearest prefectures
(Saitama, Chiba, Tokyo, Kanagawa), and several major prefectures further away
(Aichi, Osaka, Fukuoka, Hokkaido and Okinawa).
In three years since the accident, many
diseases increased by 40-50% as shown in tables 4-6. These tables were constructed on the basis of
collections of data from hospitals across Japan (21). The incidence of thyroid cancer, which is the
most sensitive indicator, more than doubled in the three years 2010 to 2013 not
only in Fukushima but in neighboring Gunma, Tochigi and Ibaragi to the south of
Fukushima. It increased by amounts
ranging from 26 to 61 percent in all other prefectures listed below, as well. The
national total rose by 42%.
Table 4. Thyroid cancers increased everywhere since
the 11 March 2011 accident (21)
prefecture
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2013/2010
|
Fukushima
|
119
|
187
|
199
|
271
|
228%
|
Tochigi
|
116
|
218
|
211
|
235
|
203%
|
Gunma
|
108
|
124
|
185
|
350
|
217%
|
Ibaragi
|
61
|
115
|
136
|
138
|
226%
|
Yamagata
|
95
|
128
|
146
|
139
|
146%
|
Miyagi
|
248
|
343
|
378
|
399
|
161%
|
Saitama
|
203
|
226
|
306
|
301
|
148%
|
Chiba
|
260
|
340
|
410
|
352
|
135%
|
Tokyo
|
1833
|
2819
|
2874
|
2884
|
157%
|
Kanagawa
|
469
|
664
|
656
|
749
|
160%
|
Aichi
|
525
|
632
|
819
|
949
|
120%
|
Osaka
|
650
|
938
|
1048
|
1039
|
160%
|
Fukuoka
|
583
|
736
|
629
|
587
|
101%
|
Hokkaido
|
855
|
1083
|
1151
|
1227
|
144%
|
Okinawa
|
82
|
104
|
117
|
103
|
126%
|
Japan
|
10816
|
14909
|
15635
|
16023
|
148%
|
It is known that Cs-137 (as well as
Cs-134) affects the myocardial muscles, causing heart diseases, myocardial
infarction and other diseases. Table 5
shows increases in myocardial infarction.
Not only neighboring prefectures but also Tokyo and as far away as
Okinawa showed significant increases.
Table 5. Increase of myocardial
infarction (21)
prefecture
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2013/2010
|
Fukushima
|
507
|
622
|
668
|
675
|
133%
|
Tochigi
|
722
|
878
|
1014
|
977
|
135%
|
Gunma
|
538
|
710
|
797
|
821
|
153%
|
Ibaragi
|
700
|
948
|
1077
|
1212
|
173%
|
Miyagi
|
598
|
718
|
831
|
901
|
151%
|
Saitama
|
1873
|
2465
|
2733
|
2752
|
147%
|
Chiba
|
1447
|
2008
|
2558
|
2604
|
135%
|
Tokyo
|
3680
|
4849
|
5581
|
5605
|
180%
|
Kanagawa
|
2361
|
2871
|
3421
|
3657
|
155%
|
Aichi
|
2212
|
2877
|
3158
|
3287
|
149%
|
Osaka
|
2335
|
3224
|
3648
|
3652
|
156%
|
Fukuoka
|
1533
|
1996
|
2326
|
2285
|
149%
|
Okinawa
|
437
|
572
|
537
|
669
|
153%
|
Japan
|
35411
|
46109
|
51947
|
53400
|
151%
|
Leukemia is another specific indicator of
radiation effect. The data shown in
Table 6 indicate that it increased over 2010-2013 by as much as three times in neighboring
Gunma while the total for Japan increased by 142%.
Table 6. Acute leukemia is also
increasing (21)
Prefecture
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2013/2010
|
Fukushima
|
108
|
97
|
79
|
230
|
213%
|
Tochigi
|
363
|
418
|
340
|
322
|
89%
|
Gunma
|
113
|
178
|
267
|
350
|
310%
|
Ibaragi
|
251
|
309
|
351
|
324
|
129%
|
Yamagata
|
121
|
117
|
172
|
135
|
112%
|
Miyagi
|
191
|
236
|
199
|
241
|
126%
|
Saitama
|
266
|
336
|
590
|
757
|
285%
|
Chiba
|
449
|
430
|
529
|
576
|
128%
|
Tokyo
|
1770
|
2135
|
2366
|
2342
|
132%
|
Kanagawa
|
686
|
1024
|
964
|
1062
|
155%
|
Aichi
|
895
|
1138
|
1208
|
1178
|
132%
|
Osaka
|
869
|
1210
|
1393
|
1623
|
187%
|
Fukuoka
|
686
|
755
|
722
|
767
|
112%
|
Hokkaido
|
449
|
628
|
728
|
830
|
185%
|
Okinawa
|
101
|
111
|
111
|
110
|
109%
|
Japan
|
12820
|
15498
|
17015
|
18167
|
142%
|
These are only the tip of the iceberg. Diseases that may not be caused by radiation
itself can also be attributable indirectly to radiation effects. Radiation affects lymphatic and also blood
producing systems and weakens the immune system. This makes such people more vulnerable to
infectious diseases. It is noteworthy in
this regard that death from pneumonia seems to have increased significantly since
the Fukushima accident. This is only one
example.
This could be only the beginning of further
serious developments in time. The
radiation effects are likely to increase with time. In particular, various solid cancers have
relatively long latent periods. They increase after 10 years or later as seen
among atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki (22).
Concluding Remarks
The Japanese
government under Democratic Party rule, declared that the Fukushima accident
was over at the end of 2011, and the prime minister in Sept 2013 under the Liberal-Democratic
Party at the IOC meeting to select
the next Olympic site pronounced that the Fukushima accident had been contained
and Tokyo was well prepared for the Olympics.
The real situation is far different, as documented
above. Leakage of radioactive materials
through various routes continues. The
locations and states of the melted fuel rods in the reactors at Fk-1 have yet to
be determined. It was found only
recently (by use of muon radiation/absorption technique) that the nuclear
reactors of units 1 and 2 are indeed devoid of nuclear fuel rods in the core
(23), but the technique was insufficient to locate the melted fuel rod debris.
Serious health effects of radiation in
general have already been widely observed.
It is best to refer to better studied examples of the past: Chernobyl
(24) and down-winders of Nevada tests (25). The reality of health effects at Chernobyl due
to fallout from the explosive accident as detailed in (26) and summarized in
(27) may indicate the future of Fukushima and Japan.
The health effects of radiation are often slow
in manifesting, particularly in the case of cancers, though cancer rates have already
started to increase in Fukushima and elsewhere, as discussed above. Therefore, more people will be affected by
radiation in the years to come, not only in Fukushima, but across Japan.
The health effects have been investigated
by the Japanese national and local governments only with respect to Fukushima
children’s thyroid abnormalities, as mentioned above. The Fukushima prefectural medical school is reportedly
collecting data from all hospitals in Japan, but it has not published the data.
Although still in denial of the causal relationship between children’s thyroid
cancers and radiation, they finally admitted recently that the cancer rate is
indeed abnormally high (15).
Radiation effects are seen not only on
human health, but also on many living organisms. A butterfly species has been observed to be
affected by radiation, and the effects seem to be inherited from one generation
to another (27). Reproductive success of
goshawks has decreased in response to higher levels of radiation (28). Many
bird species are rapidly decreasing in number (29). Deserted cows have been found to be highly contaminated
with cesium-137 and other nuclides (30). Deformed vegetables and fruits have been
observed at many locations. These are but
a few examples of radiation effects on plants and animals.
The government may be attempting to cover
up the negative data it gathers. If it
admits the causal relationship between serious health effects and radiation, it
would be obliged to abolish the nuclear power plants or at least delay
re-opening closed plants. The truth that
“radiation (of high energy) is incompatible with life” (31) directly confronts
humankind, yet many refuse to recognize it because the government and the
nuclear industry and associated scientists in Japan and many other countries continue
to suppress the data.
No single nuclear power plant has operated
in Japan in the last
two years, yet there has been no shortage of electricity. The Japanese government, along with the
nuclear industry, has now restarted one of the fifty nuclear power reactors,
despite strong opposition by the majority of Japanese and despite the high risk
in Japan of further geological activity, both volcanic and earth quakes.
Note: The
limit 1 mSv/year was set by the department of science and education of the
Japanese government, based on a law (protection against radiation effects due
to radioactive isotopes) and a recommendation by ICRP (international commission
of radiological protection)
Acknowledgement: Comments and suggestions made by Drs. Anders
Moller, Leonard Angles, and Mark Selden are gratefully acknowledged.
Recommended citation: Eiichiro Ochiai,
Related articles
•Eiichiro Ochiai, The Manga “Oishinbo” Controversy: Radiation and Nose
Bleeding in the Wake of 3.11 http://japanfocus.org/-Eiichiro-Ochiai/4138/article.html
•Nakasatomi Hiroshi, After
Nuclear Disaster: The decision-making of Fukushima University authorities, the
threat to democratic governance and countermovement actions http://japanfocus.org/-Nakasatomi-Hiroshi/4136/article.html
•Kyle Cleveland, Mobilizing Nuclear Bias: The Fukushima Nuclear Crisis and the Politics of Uncertainty http://japanfocus.org/-Kyle-Cleveland/4116/article.html
•David McNeill, Japanese Government Squelching Efforts to Measure Fukushima Meltdown http://japanfocus.org/-David-McNeill/4094/article.html
•Yasuhito Abe, Safecast or the Production of Collective
Intelligence on Radiation Risks after 3.11 http://www.japanfocus.org/-Yasuhito-_Abe_/4077/article.html
•Adam Broinowski, Fukushima:
Life and the Transnationality of Radioactive Contamination http://japanfocus.org/-Adam-Broinowski/4009/article.html
•Paul Jobin, The Roadmap for Fukushima Daiichi and the Sacrifice of Japan's Clean-up Workers http://japanfocus.org/-Adam-Broinowski/4009/article.html
• Anders Pape Møller and Timothy A. Mousseau, Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Nuclear Accidents at Fukushima and Chernobyl http://japanfocus.org/-Timothy-A__Mousseau/3921/article.html
References
Asterisked
references (*) are available only in Japanese.
(1) Estimate of the quantities of radioactive
material released to the atmosphere from the accident of Fk-1, TEPCO, May, 2012:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/betu12_j/images/120524j0105.pdf*
(2) The
state of the nuclear reactor cores of units 1~3, June 6, 2011, Nuclear safety/protection
agency (Japan): http://www.meti.go.jp/earthquake/nuclear/pdf/20110606-1nisa.pdf*
(3) Pavel P. Povinec, Katsumi Hirose, Michio
Aoyama, “Fukushima Accident ―
Radioactivity Impact on the Environment,” pp. 125~127, (Elsevier (2013))
(4) Yamada, K., Watanabe E., Re-evaluation of released
amounts of radioactive material from Fk-1 accident: Comparison with data of
Chernobyl, May, 2014: http://acsir.org/data/20140714_acsir_yamada_watanabe_003.pdf*
(5) Chernobyl data are cited from ref (3), but based
on several estimates including UNSCEAR; ANNEX J Exposures and
effects of Chernobyl accident
http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2000/Volume%20II_Effects/AnnexJ_pages%2
0451-566.pdf
(6) http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2015/images/k_drainage_15071601-j.pdf*
(7) http://ma-04x.net/all.html*
(9) This kind of data is regularly reported by
activists/organizations on the internet; its accuracy cannot be
ascertained. It can be said only that
such high spots likely exist.
(11) Shichijo,
K., Nagasaki University, http://ihope.jp/2009/03122206.html*
(12) Kamata, N., et al, Hiroshima University and Nagasaki
University, published in June 8th edition of Mainichi newspaper; http://www.hiroshimapeacemedia.jp/?p=45379*
(13) Bandazhevsky,
Y., “The
Effects of Radioactive Cesium on the Population and its Physiological Effects”,
(Japanese ed., translated from Russian by Kubota, M.), p. 65, (Godo Publ. Co.
(Tokyo), 2015)
(14) http://www.pref.fukushima.lg.jp/uploaded/attachment/115321.pdf
*
(16) http://japanfocus.org/-Piers-_Williamson/4232/article.html
(17) https://www.env.go.jp/press/press.php?serial=17965*
(21) http://kiikochan.blog136.fc2.com/blog-entry-4254.html*, http://kiikochan.blog136.fc2.com/blog-entry-4253.html*, http://kiikochan.blog136.fc2.com/blog-entry-4261.html*
(22) Ozasa, K., Shimizu, Y., Suyama, A., Kasagi, F.,
Soda, M., Grant, E. J., Sakata, R., Sugiyama, H., Kodama, K., Studies of the
mortality of atomic bomb survivors, Report 14, 1950-2003: An overview of cancer
and noncancer Diseases (LSS-14), Rad. Res.,
177 (2012), pp. 229-243
(23) Press
release of Nagoya University, March 19, 2015*; Kyodo Press, March 19, 2015*
(24) Yablokov, A. V., Nestrenko, V. B, Nestrenko, A.
V., ”Chernobyl: Consequences of the
Catastrophe for People and the Environment” (Ann. New York Acad. Sci., Vol 1181,
2009)
(25)
Johnson, C. J., Cancer Incidence in an Area of Radioactive Fallout Downwind
From the Nevada Test Site, J. Am. Med.
Assoc., 251 (1984), pp. 230-236
(26) Pflugbeil,
S., Claussen, A., Schimitz-Feuerhake, I., “Health
Effects of Chernobyl: 25 years after the reactor catastrophe”, (IPPNW
Germany (IPPNW=International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War), 2011)
(27)
Hiyama, A., Nohara, C., Kinjo, S., Taira, W., Gima, S., Tanahara, A., Otaki, M.,
Biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue
butterfly, Scientific Rept., 2 (2012), article #570: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep00570
(28) K.
Murase, J. Murase, R. Horie & K. Endo, Effects of the Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear accident on goshawk reproduction, Sci.
Rep. 5:9405
(29) Bonisoll-Alquati,
A., Koyama, K., Tedeshci, D. J., Kitamuara, W., Suzuki, H., Ostermiller, S.,
Arai, E., Moeller, A. P., Mousseau, T. A., Abundance and genetic
damage of barn swallows from Fukushima, Scientific
Rept, 5 (2015), article # 9432:
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep09432
(30) http://www2.idac.tohoku.ac.jp/hisaidoubutsu/seika.html*
(31) Ochiai, E.,
“Hiroshima to Fukushima: Biohazards of
Radiation” (Springer Verlag (Heidelberg), 2013)
