Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fukushima schoolchildren's radiation exposure estimated at half of upper limit

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-13-11 12:32 PM
Original message
Fukushima schoolchildren's radiation exposure estimated at half of upper limit
Source: Mainichi Daily News

Fukushima schoolchildren's radiation exposure estimated at half of upper limit


A worker from the Japan Atomic Energy Agency measures radiation levels in a sandbox at the Fukushima University-affiliated kindergarten in Fukushima on May 8, 2011. (Mainichi)
Schoolchildren's cumulative radiation exposure a year in Fukushima Prefecture would be about half the limit for their outdoor activities, if calculated under the current standards, according to the education ministry.

The finding has prompted the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology to convene a meeting to seek advice from experts on whether the outdoor activities of schoolchildren in the prefecture should be restricted.

University of Tokyo professor Toshiso Kosako has resigned as a nuclear adviser to Prime Minister Naoto Kan after criticizing the dose limit as too lax.

On the assumption that the hourly amount of radiation is 3.8 microsieverts -- the current standards for limiting children's outdoor activities during school hours -- the ministry calculated the levels of schoolchildren's cumulative radiation exposure, taking into account their activity patterns.


<snip>


Read more: http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110513p2a00m0na016000c.html



I shudder at the coming cancer epidemics in Japan...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-13-11 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. And Here
That's why the insurance industry is going into overdrive trying to undo HCR. All the cancer cases that Fukushima is going to cause will cost them hundreds of billions unless they can find some way to deny coverage. The pre-existing conditions clause is really good for that, since cancer usually kills slowly, and nobody can really tell when it started. With the lack of stable employment, few will have the same carrier long enough for their cancer to be covered under the old system.

That is also why the Repigs in Congress are in such a rush to gut Medicare and Medicaid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-13-11 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. because our ongoing poisoning by their sponsors will, in fact, bankrupt those same sponsors?
Good point....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caraher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-13-11 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'm not sure I understand the estimates
It seems like they're focusing a bit obsessively on exposure during and on the way to and from school, and not the question of living in the area in the first place (as though only radiation exposure associated with school activities had health effects).

The ~10 mSv exposure they're calculating - which I take to be additional exposure because of the nuclear accident, on top of whatever the background was - at least can be compared with standard risk assessments for radiation, even if the figure is a bit questionable. A rule of thumb is that if you take the product of number of people exposed and their exposure in rem and divide by 2000, that's roughly the expected excess cancer mortality. 10 mSv is 1 rem, so basically you're looking at 1 fatal cancer per 2000 people. Fukushima prefecture has about 2 million people, so if they were all exposed at this level a pretty conservative estimate would be 1000 additional cancer deaths in this area alone.

I'd say the numbers one would get this way are minimum values. The rate would be higher in children as they're a more vulnerable population. Clearly, the 10 mSv figure is only looking at part of the children's days; one would assume there's exposure at home even if there is a lower exposure rate indoors. And there's also a fair amount of uncertainty in the cancer dose response rule of thumb I mention. It's also a bit early to have much confidence in the radiation exposure projections until the accident situation stabilizes more.

Seems to me that if it's too radioactive to let the kids outside to play during school, it's too radioactive to live in that area. But relocation is costly, and from a certain perspective it's cheaper (and thus "rational") to accept the burden of some thousands of cancer deaths rather than incur the economic (and other) burdens of relocating people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-13-11 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. Would think they'd be trying to get the children completely OUT of the area ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Devil_Fish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-13-11 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. If I lived there with my 2 year old daughter, I would leave by any means nessasary. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jun 02nd 2020, 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC