WHO pronounces Fukushima cancer risk

Is very low.
Yes, there is some elevation of risk. But it's very small.

http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/who-small-cancer-risk-after-fukushima-accident-1.210007

Considering the magnitude of the destruction I think that's pretty amazing.

on the one hand it seems like positive news - and we don't want to discount that.

On the other hand ... it's clear to me that not much is understood about Fukushima yet. Now we know that apparently at least one (possibly several) reactors went through melt-downs that were big enough to destroy the reactor containment. So the highly radioactive fuel has leaked out and is .... somewhere. But no-one knows for sure where that is exactly. Possibly somewhere in the ground beneath the reactor building. Do we have some guarantee this stuff won't seep through cracks, get into groundwater, and flow out into the ocean?

Who is really monitoring all these events and being completely open and trnasparent about the radiation risks??

Pete2

A bit of a positive development is the ability to trace and more fully understand fish migrations across the pacific as a result of Fukushima-induced radioactive particles:

www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-fukushima-radiation.

Geee ... thanks Geezer in Chief.
Now you're makin' me feel super-positive about this THING.
I'm gonna quit ordering tuna sandwiches from Subway - if they don't do something about this :-)

Pete2

Well, if the tuna are radioactive, you can buy a pallet of it in cans. Put them in the basement, run water lines through it and get unlimited heat and hot water for the house.

Bob- you are thinking of F I S S I O N.
Not F I S H I N'......

Fish don't rise to the level of fissionable material.

There may well be long term health effects but they'll probably not equal the prompt destruction of people and property from the tsunami.

No,the chance you will get cancer from it is either Zero or 100%,there is no in between.I wouldnt be too happy if I was that lucky 100%.

It's interesting to see the headlines in various news sources over the release of this report. Japanese authorities are upset and say the risk has been overhyped and overblown. Other articles say the risk has been minimized and downplayed.

Personally, I'm a skeptic until real data comes out, although that will be after the fact by that time. I lived in Manhattan during 9/11 and I remember how the City of New York, the EPA, and various other agencies swore up and down on their mothers' graves that the air on the pile at Ground Zero was safe. Look how well that turned out for first responders who worked that scene.

These cancer risk models are only as good as the data that goes into them, and data on radiation levels are not very good. Heck, the EPA turned off their radiation monitors shortly after the disaster. Hmmm, now why would they do that?

There is ongoing monitoring of radiation in the Fukushima area, but when you read about these monitoring stations, it's laughable. Typically, an area is decontaminated, the topsoil is dug up and trucked away, a brand new concrete platform is poured, and then the monitoring station is placed on top of the slab. Concerned citizens record far higher radiation levels just a few meters away in the soil than what the official station measures.

Regardless of what the actual risk is, the people in the region suffer tremendous psychological stress to this day, and they and their children will be stigmatized for the rest of their lives, the same way that their grandparents and greatgrandparents who lived anywhere near Hiroshima and Nagasaki were stigmatized after we dropped atomic bombs on them. The Japanese are extremely cohesive, but conversely, if you're seen as "different", the negative impact can be even more extreme.

I lived in Japan and IMHO I'd say the stigmatization ranks up there with being permanently identified as a sex offender in the US in terms of discrimination in making friends or finding a spouse, in housing, in employment, in being alienated from your own relatives, etc. I know suicides have been up in the Fukushima region, and that will likely continue for years or even decades.

A recent article on the topic. Very bleak. After Fukushima: families on the edge of meltdown

Edit: I should clarify my point from above. If these residents try to move away from the contaminated areas, they will be stigmatized by the new people around them. Additionally, if they stay put, there is great peer pressure not to "make waves" or do things that upset other people, so there is constant subtle and not-so-subtle pressure to act like nothing is wrong. Most of us have heard that famous Japanese saying, "The nail that sticks up gets hammered back down." It's a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't dilema for these residents.

Per that article directly above....Hmmmm....so nodules in 42% of children's thyroids is 'low risk' as stated in OP link???? Not in my book.I dont want nodules on my thyroid or my children's,thank you very much,so I call that harmful.As if thyroid issues arent bad enough as it is now.There's more to thyroid disease than just cancer.
------------------
This was too late to prevent their exposure to iodine-131, a radioisotope with a half-life of about eight days, that attaches to the thyroid gland. Iodine-131 is believed to be the cause of hundreds of cases of thyroid cancer among children in Chernobyl. As of February 2013, Japan has tested 133,000 children in Fukushima and found abnormal thyroid cysts and nodules in 42% of them. Three cases of cancer were confirmed and another seven were suspected cases "with an 80% chance of malignancy". The issue is bound to escalate further.
-----------------
How terrible for those poor people.I wont fight the nuclear debate beyond saying my heart goes out to the victims for sure.

And me,personally,doesnt want to live by a Nuke or within fallout range,Like is happening across ocean,however small.Not my cup of tea,but looks like I dont have much choice regardless.Thats the part that bugs me,having no control over the risk whether I support it or not.

That said,do you have your Iodine pills,store of seaweed or Kelp? Thats a reasonable prep,I have mine now,didnt before.And when it happens,stocks are GONE,so if interested best do it now.Kelp and seaweed makes some fine soups too,so not a bad thing IMO.

Here,scroll down is a nice list of iodine levels in seaweeds and safety concerns

http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/Iodine%20in%20Seaweed.pdf
------------------

Cancer from Nuclear Fall Out does not exist! (Nuclear apologist propaganda by the WHO and other vested interest)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Busby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9pk42kdL4k

When 100,000s/Millions start dying from Lung Cancer over the next 20-30 years in Japan the Fukushima event will be not blamed, but the up take in Smoking Tobacco (although it eventually took 100 years to make that connection, and is still denied by the Tobacco industry) will. Those that never smoked; Passive Smoking of course!

Thyroid abnormalities aren't necessarily cancerous. Only a very small percentage will be malignant, and as far as I know, the rest of the nodules do not necessarily cause any symptoms.

Although that high a percentage of thyroid nodules sounds shockingly high, it's not clear if that is actually abnormal for Japan. There are other thyroid surveys that people reference where the number of thyroid nodules is very small, but the definition of what an abnormality is varies significantly between surveys so it's an apples-to-oranges comparison. There are surveys planned or already underway in supposedly uncontaminated parts of Japan to obtain a baseline that the Fukushima results can be compared to.

I say "supposedly" uncontaminated because Tokyo has arranged for mildly radioactive disaster debris to be transported throughout Japan to be incinerated. These facilities are designed to burn normal municipal waste, not hazardous materials, so it's not clear how much radiation will escape to contaminate other parts of Japan. This has been going on for some time already.

A so-called conspiracy theory is that "they" want to raise the level of radiation throughout Japan so that more people outside of Fukushima develop health problems similar to those in Fukushima, thus making it seem like the nuclear disaster was less harmful than it was. Sounds crazy, but I suppose no more crazy than a government that would deliberately contaminate more areas and more citizens with radioactive isotopes that will be around for thousands of years.

Arney,the fact that a large amt of young people now have thyroid nodules,an abnormality,is not a good thing,it doesnt have to be the evil C word to have a dramatic effect on your health.Though apparently it does present a major cancer risk
=============================
From the net...

Thyroid nodules are common and detected in about six percent of women and one to two percent of men.....

Among people who have thyroid nodules, thyroid cancer is found in about 8 percent of men and 4 percent of women.....
=============================

I just read they expect a 70% increase in thyroid cancer amongst the youngest victims.Then they turn around and say since only 0.75% of people get thyroid cancer its a small amt,therefore no big deal.

IMO when a cancer rate increases by 70%,its a BIG deal.

I dont like it as I see it as spin being put on death numbers,and really downplaying a very large statistical increase.Bet if lung,breast or prostate cancer increased 70%,or heart disease increased 70% there would be heck to pay.

Then again the saying 'Statistics lie and liars use statistics'

It sounds bad, of course, but is it worse than if the nuclear accident never happened? I want to say that it is, but does the data back that up?

From the same WHO report we're talking about:

If the "normal" percentage of nodules can be as high as 35%--and the prior research may not have been using a fine-toothed comb looking for nodules like they are in Fukushima--how does 42% compare with that? But like I said, there is no good comparison data for Fukushima yet so it's hard to say what "normal" is for the Japanese using the same medical definitions and the same quality of imaging technology until these new surveys are completed.

And besides ultrasound studies, autopsy studies have found thyroid nodules in 50-60% of people by the time they die. Most didn't even know that they had them.


Actually, the WHO is not saying anything about deaths, but of developing cancers. And thyroid cancers have a very high cure rate (not that that makes it any easier, for primarily children, to go through it). Will any more children actually die from thyroid cancer attributable to the nuclear disaster? None have so far and it's possible that none will die because thyroid cancer is highly treatable (not to say the treatment doesn't have a lasting impact, like no more thyroid gland).

A report like this is produced for the public health perspective, not the individual's health risk perspective. A significant increase in a rare condition is still a rare condition in the greater scheme of things which can easily be handled by the existing medical system. A small increase in a common condition results in many, many more people needing medical care for that condition which means mobilizing resources to accomodate that increase and that is actually a big deal from a planning perspective.

A 70% increase (even of a rare condition) makes good headlines. A 5% increase of a common condition is not such an interesting headline even though it means a lot more lives are being affected.

For comparison, I just saw this morning that about 75 Japanese have died so far this winter from falls related to clearing snow and ice from roofs. Compare 75 deaths vs 0 thyroid cancer deaths in Fukushima. Which issue is the bigger problem for Japan? (I know, a rather insulting question but I'm just making a point about the numbers involved in some sort of context.)

I'm not trying to sound like an apologist, I'm really not. I've been following the Fukushima situation regularly since the disaster and I think the nuclear meltdown is a tragedy that is still punishing folks to this day in many ways. I just wish the data so far was more clear cut about the damage it has caused.

**************************************************

On a different note, your comment about 70% got me to thinking about another situation. Many of us are enthralled with pharmaceuticals due to advertising about relative changes in risk. You may be dutifully chugging a pill everyday that gives you side effects like impotence because it "slashes" the risk of something undesirable by 50%.

But if a doctor said to you, would you trade impotence for reducing your lifetime risk of X from 2 in 100,000 to 1 in 100,000, would you still want to take that drug? Or, in a more public health way of looking at it, does it make sense to have 100,000 people take some very expensive drug to prevent just one more case of X?

Uh huh,I see WHO making a lot of noise about 'newer' tests,its a common ploy to misinform,Ive seen it before,plenty of times.Rates right up there with the line "Its for the Children" when folks want something.

Bottom line remains,any 'attack' that damages MY body/health isnt acceptable is my point.Zero,nada,not acceptable in any form,at any level.

Yep,'relative risk' is another stat that really confuses the public.

After reading all this, my question is: do we keep iodine tabs or kelp or seaweed to consume if we are in a fallout zone? How much iodine/kelp/seaweed do we consume if we're in a fallout zone? For how long? MDINANA, any sound advice?

JP,google is your friend,theres tons of info on it.

Are you talking about preps for someone who lives near a nuclear power plant in anticipation of some meltdown? I ask because when people say "fallout" they are often referring to nuclear weapons, and that's a different situation. Radioactive iodine is a primary contaminant from nuclear power plants, but not as much from nuclear weapons.

And don't forget that in both cases, dozens of radioactive isotopes are spewed into the environment from the nuclear reaction. The situation with iodine and thyroid cancer just happens to be a convenient combination to try and block with pills. Taking KI pills is not some anti-radiation pill that protects you from all the radiation. That's only in science fiction.

There are standard guidelines for taking potassium iodide pills, like they hand out to residents near nuclear power plants, and just follow the directions on any commercial KI pills out there or what local authorities tell you if there's some nuclear power plant accident. But I think Fukushima has turned many of those assumptions on their head because it's an ongoing nuclear accident instead of a discrete event with a definite end. I'm not sure how much radioactive iodine is still being emitted from Fukushima (probably not that much compared to early on), but other isotopes like cesium-137 and strontium-90 are still leaking and getting into the air and the ocean.

Oceanographers have noted that the level of radiation in the Pacific was expected to spike and then gradually return to a fairly low level. However, in reality, the level only reduced part of the way and then leveled off at a higher than expected level. That suggests that more radiation is being added to the Pacific on an ongoing basis.

There are plenty of people who supplement with iodine long term for health reasons, but it's a risky thing to do without medical supervision because you can screw up your metabolism and thyroid hormone levels with long term supplementation. Eating more iodine rich foods, like kelp and dulse, though, should not be a problem. People like the Japanese eat a lot of it everyday as part of their normal cuisine.

That's probably not exactly the answer you were looking for, JP.

But that is the right answer for that.All kinds of info at our fingertips on how to prepare and consume those products.

Heres a link for you,I will put seaweed links as I find em on comp

http://www.y2knorth.com/pot_iodate.html#5
================
seaweed links

http://www.greenurbanliving.co.nz/index.php?AID=67

http://www.yummly.com/recipes/wakame

http://www.naturalnews.com/032032_purple_dulse_radiation.html#ixzz1udEVqZ1K

http://www.healthiertalk.com/seaweed-protection-against-radiation-3581

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2766/2

http://www.livestrong.com/seaweed/

http://www.oceanvegetables.com/simple-seaweed-soup.html

http://www.oceanvegetables.com/wakame-seaweed.html

http://www.oceanvegetables.com/edible-seaweed.html

http://radiationfalloutprotection.blogspot.com/2011_04_01_archive.html

"WHO pronounces Fukushima cancer risk"

At first, I thought this thread was about the correct pronunciation of "Fukushima", which I will admit, should be pronounced very carefully in mixed company.

potassium dose and source
============================
130 mg tabs....more info at the link

How And When To Take Potassium Iodide
Potassium iodide should be taken as soon as possible after public health officials tell you. You should take one dose every 24 hours. More will not help you because the thyroid can "hold" only limited amounts of iodine. Larger doses will increase the risk of side effects. You will probably be told not to take the drug for more than 10 days.
=======================
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00006N...modesurvblog-20

With that guy in N Korea threatening an A bomb attack wouldnt be a bad idea to make sure your rad preps are there.While I think credibility is very low,this is cheap insurance.

I picked up a couple of these for the BOB's
http://www.amazon.com/iOSAT-Potassium-Iodide-Tablets-130/dp/B00006NT3A

iOSAT Potassium Iodide Tablets, 130 mg (14 Tablets)
by iOSAT

Price: $7.38 ($3.84 / oz)

In Stock.
Ships from and sold by

Please read all label information upon delivery
Reduces chance of thyroid damage in a radiation emergency
Safe for babies, children, pregnant and nursing women, those taking medicine for thyroid problem
One dose every 24 hours for no more than 10 days
Possible side effects include skin rash, swelling salivary glands, iodism

KI pills are not particularly useful during most radiation events. They only protect against uptake of radioactive iodines, and won't protect you from any external exposure even to that.

Ensure that you don't have an iodine allergy before taking these, or you could do yourself a lot more harm than good.

If it is recommended that stable iodine be taken, you can use Betadine, water purifying tabs, iodized salt or any other source of stable iodine and have the same protective effect.

Greg

Bumping this old thread on Fukushima.
The Japanese power company increased the risk ratings at Fukushima this last week. Independent experts say the problem of leakage of radioactive elements into the Pacific Ocean is worse than they are telling.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23779561

Pete2

Awaiting Godzilla to emerge!!

Record player with "Blue Oyster Cult" album on stand-by...

OK - well I'm in California.
I'll start checking the sand on the beach each day and see if I see any big footprints.

So far I've tried to avoid the usual paranoia and have not bought a Geiger Counter or any other radiation detector. But I've got to wonder - who's checking our seafood for radiation levels. And would they tell us the truth ... if they got a high reading?

Pete2

Er, Nope. Did your local and national government advise you the dangers of the Nuclear fallout hot particles in California 2 years ago?

BTW if its a Plutonium hot particle (Fukishima Diachi 3 MOX reactor) it will loose half its radioactivity after about 34,000 years.

Along similar lines, I've wondered about seafood from the Gulf after Deepwater Horizon. That's gotta be one of the biggest science experiments around, pouring millions of gallons of Corexit into the ecosystem. Where did all that crude go? The question you gotta ask is, "Does anyone profit from warning us? Does anyone profit from NOT warning us?"

Well, another option is the "Charlie Brown and Lucy playing football" trick--right when you're about to hit the alarm button to warn people about levels being too high, just raise the "acceptable" level of radiation even higher and all that radioactive worry just sails right on by.

But back to Fukushima, the situation seems to be getting worse again, with all the recent news about contaminated groundwater flowing into the sea, or even worse, undetected leaks of highly contaminated reactor cooling water from storage tanks on site. And by "leaks," I'm talking tons of water per day. TEPCO has no idea how to stop either problem. There's talk of raising the nuclear disaster threat level from a 1 back to 3 over these issues.

They're so lucky that they haven't had another big quake in the immediate area for a long time. I don't think most of these jury rigged external storage tanks and cooling systems are that robust, from what I've read.

TEPCO is getting closer (that's a relative term) to starting to actually remove fuel assemblies from the spent fuel pool, from Reactor 4 first, IIRC. No easy task. The original overhead cranes and equipment were destroyed. The area is highly radioactive. The fuel assemblies were buried in debris from the cranes and building, the rods were overheated, and sat in salt water for all this time. No telling what condition they are in or whether they can even be removed safely without bursting into flames once in the open air and releasing radiation, or worst case, triggering a nuclear reaction right in the fuel pool if they jostle enough fuel assemblies close together. Sounds like the script from a movie but unfortunately, it's real life and going on right now.

"Along similar lines, I've wondered about seafood from the Gulf after Deepwater Horizon. That's gotta' be one of the biggest science experiments around, pouring millions of gallons of Corexit into the ecosystem"

that's a good point Arney. I scratched my head on that one too. How could they pour all that chemical contamination into the Gulf, then come out with TV adds (6-12 months later) proclaiming a "miracle recovery" after the accident. seems like a lot of people are eating the Corexit pollutant every time they order sushi in the USA.

Something needs to be DONE about Fukushima. This situation is clearly beyond anything that the Japanese know how to handle. The world needs to draw a line, tell them to stop and become transparent with their data, and get some global experts in there fast.

Pete2

As usual, The Register has a contrary view.

What has happened is that one of the holding tanks, containing water that had only been through one stage of purification, has sprung a leak and about 300,000 litres of water has got out. Almost all of this was contained by a backup dam which had been built around the tanks when they were set up (this is the nuclear industry, there is always a backup). However, "two shallow puddles" of the water got out of the dam via a rainwater drain valve which has since been sealed off.

After some discussion of the difference between gamma and beta radiation:

So this is a pretty minor industrial-waste spill; thousands of more serious accidents occur every single day.

They are completely ignoring the most serious part of the problem. The coolant water has been leaking directly into the underground water reservoir, and is about to flow into pacific ocean.

Here's another view on the subject: http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2013/08/23/fukushima-water.html

Quite true. More than two years later and still no one knows exactly where the melted cores are, but many experts speculate that at least one of them have melted completely through all containment and is in contact with the ground.

That scenario would be one explanation of observations about increases in groundwater contamination over time under the facility, although other hidden water leaks from within the reactor and turbine buildings, as well as the external storage tanks, could also be contributing to that, and there is little that TEPCO has been able to do to contain the groundwater.

There are multiple leaks and groundwater contamination problems at the site. Not just this one specific leak.

Arney - it's hard to believe that this problem has simply got worse and worse over time. Yet it rarely appears in the media, and the American public are not getting factual updates at all.

It seems plausible that the USA has resources (maybe Navy ships, submarines and drones) that are sampling the air and water over the Pacific Ocean near Japan. That would be the responsible thing to do. No doubt the President does get regular briefings on what these results are showing. But where the heck is the dissemination of this info to the American public? Is it safe for us to be eating fish caught from the northern Pacific? Is it safe to be eating crab and salmon from Alaska?

Halloooooo Goverment - where are you? :-)

Pete2