InAudito
Baneado
Scaring The Japanese People With Radiation Is Criminal - Forbes
I realize many journals and on-line publications need sensational headlines to attract readers. It seems necessary in these times of social media and 24-hour news cycles.
But it becomes unethical to push bad science without doing at least a little due diligence. I understand anti-nuke ideology cares little about science and is never held to any technical standard, but in some cases reporting bad science hurts people who need good science to make personal decisions for themselves and their families.
A recent textbook case of this malfeasance is the Fukushima-induced thyroid scare in Japanese children. There is no increase in thyroid health problems in Japanese children living in and around the Prefectures of Fukushima and it is unlikely there ever will be (UN Report; Nuclear News; J. of Am. Phys. and Surg.; CBCnews; Hiroshima Syndrome; National Geographic; Asahi Shimbun).
http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2013/13-85418_Report_2013_Annex_A.pdf
Radioactive Japan: Thyroid Control Screening Reveals Much Higher Percentages of Cysts and Nodules in Children Far Away from Fukushima? « nuclear-news
http://www.jpands.org/vol19no2/orient.pdf
Fukushima Prefecture | Child Thyroid Anomalies | Thyroid Cancers
Why the Cancer Cases in Fukushima Aren't Likely Linked to the Nuclear Disaster
Ministry: Rate of Fukushima thyroid abnormalities roughly normal - AJW by The Asahi Shimbun
However, many so-called researchers, activists and reporters claim thyroid cancers have exploded in Japan and Japanese children are dying by the thousands (Business Insider; Eco Child’s Play). They intentionally compared the wrong data sets, data sets that were not comparable, that used different methods, looked at different characteristics, even different ages. These news entities are not particularly known for their treatment of scientific issues and might be forgiven for not recognizing bad research, but just a phone call to a real scientist would have gone a long way to preventing this scare.
Unfortunately, these articles get picked up by other news outlets, lending them further legitimacy (Voice of Russia; CubaSi). And Eco Child’s Play is supposed to care about children and parents, which they generally do. In this case, however, they have only caused grief and antiestéticar in thousands of parents in Japan.
The root of this thyroid cancer antiestéticar is the rapid and sophisticated screening of Japanese children for thyroid nodules and cysts after the Fukushima accident. The Thyroid Ultrasound Examination (TUE) Program was carried out as part of the Fukushima Health Management Survey, and uses the most sophisticated ultrasound technology that can detect thyroid growths better than previous methods.
The post-tsunami testing screened for all nodules of all sizes ( Japan Probe; Fukushima Voice). Previous testing screened only for large nodules, greater than 5 mm, and large cysts, greater than 20 mm, since small ones are common in Japan and usually of no consequence. Hence, they didn’t even write them down.
According to Dr. Jane Orient in an article just published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, “Modern ultrasound equipment, such as that used in the TUE study, is able to detect thyroid carcinomas as small as a few millimeters, long before these may come to clinical attention. Prior to the initiation of the TUE, no data existed to estimate the baseline frequency of thyroid cancer, detected by ultrasound, in a population of this age in Japan. Studies post Chernobyl show that radiation induced thyroid cancer has a minimal latency of around 4 years, so the initial screening carried out in Japan within 3 years of the accident would be predicted to give a measure of the background incidence of thyroid cancer in this population [and not any effect from Fukushima].”
So when comparing these data sets, you would obviously only compare those data for larger nodules, greater than 5 mm, since that’s what the previous tests have data on.
However, these we-want-to show-children-dying-so-everyone-will-hate-nuclear-energy types have purposefully compared the total data sets knowing full well that the recent ones would have thousands more small nodules not reported in the older data and, therefore, would make it appear that Fukushima had a huge health effect on children.
Scaring parents might be acceptable on Facebook, but in serious news outlets it’s criminal.
There was never enough of an iodine-131 dose to children after the Fukushima accident to cause any problems because the Japanese government, for all their other issues, did the right thing in initially evacuating the region, and then preventing anyone from eating produce and drinking milk from that area until I-131 decayed away in the first two months. The Soviets did not do this after Chernobyl and that is the primary difference in the thyroid doses (Scientific Reports) plus the vastly lower radiation emissions to the Japanese around Fukushima versus the Ukrainians around Chernobyl.
http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120712/srep00507/pdf/srep00507.pdf
That’s it. You can’t get rad-induced thyroid cancer or tumors from anything else accept radioactive iodine, and only from a dose in the first two months since I-131, with an 8-day half-life, dies away in that time. Cs-137 and Sr-90 don’t affect the thyroid. They have a different biochemistry.
More importantly, you can’t develop thyroid cancer this fast, it takes more than 4 years, and it’s only been 3 years since the tsunami, and most of this screening was even earlier. So what has been measured so far in this screening is the pre-Fukushima baseline. It is good to do this extensive screening so that we can have a database to compare with the results several years from now when any Fukushima-induced thyroid cancers would actually show up.
The Japanese have a high level of iodine in their diet, which means that their thyroid glands are virtually saturated with non-radioactive iodine leaving little room for uptake of radioactive iodine. This is the reason for taking iodine pills before a plume of radiation hits you, but is only useful before it hits you. The areas around the Chernobyl power plant are naturally iodine deficient, and therefore uptake of radioactive iodine was greater in that population after Chernobyl.
The thyroid doses in Japanese children after Fukushima averaged 100 times lower than those after Chernobyl (4 mSv versus 500 mSv; UNSCEAR 2008).
http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_2008_Annex_D.pdf
The WHO, UNSCEAR and the upcoming IAEA report state that no increase in thyroid cancer will likely ever be discernible from Fukushima.
The results so far show no meaningful effect from Fukushima compared to previous data. Children from Fukushima have about the same number of thyroid growths as those in prefectures far away from Fukushima, in Aomori, Yamanashi, and Nagasaki prefectures, 0.7% versus 1%, respectively (Hayashida et al, 2013).
PLOS ONE: Thyroid Ultrasound Findings in Children from Three Japanese Prefectures: Aomori, Yamanashi and Nagasaki
In addition, “the overall rates of cysts (56.9%) and thyroid nodules (1.7%) as well as the proportion of ≤ 5 mm cysts (92%) and nodules (39%) are consistent with the cysts and nodules found in Fukushima children. Thus, crude comparison of rates in two pediatric populations suggests that thyroid lesions, particularly small thyroid cysts and nodules (≤ 5 mm), are common among children screened with sensitive ultrasound equipment” (Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons).
http://www.jpands.org/vol19no2/orient.pdf
So why are some unethical people declaring children are dying? Because they’re unethical. And they don’t care how many people they hurt as long as their political agenda is met. It’s nasty, cruel and wrong.
Of course, the same names keep popping up with these stories, like Joseph Mangano, Harvey Wasserman and Helen Caldicott. These articles all say the same thing and reference the same debunked scientific studies that skew data to indicate a non-existent problem.
Since I subscribe to most of these environmental journals and have been a lifer for many groups such as NRDC, EDF, Sierra Club and Greenpeace, I am especially troubled. I understand the desire to reinforce a stereotype with data, but that is why being an actual scientist is important. We don’t do that. It’s why we have peer-review. By other scientists. In that field. Not editors, other writers or activists. A real scientist would have caught the disparity between these two uncomparable data sets right off the bat.
Since few in the public read peer-reviewed journals or have the patience to plow through jargon-filled papers, it is the responsibility of scientists to communicate clearly and for journalists to have reputable sources.
Ironically, it has repeatedly been shown that the worst health effects from Fukushima have come from the antiestéticar of radiation and the forced evacuations, not from any radiation effects (Gaji 2013; Japan Daily Press; WHO Report; NYTimes).
ASME DC | Proceedings | ICONE21 | Volume 3: Nuclear Safety and Security; Codes, Standards, Licensing and Regulatory Issues; Computational Fluid Dynamics and Coupled Codes | A Post Accident Safety Analysis Report of the Fukushima Accident
http://japandailypress.com/evacuation-related-deaths-now-more-than-quaketsunami-tol
http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78218/1/9789241505130_eng.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/24/w...in-evacuations-after-japan-tsunami.html?_r=3&
Not one person has, or likely will, die from Fukushima radiation. But many people have died from the forced evacuations, antiestéticar and depression resulting from both well-intentioned and politically-motivated ignorance on radiation doses and effects ***owing the accident.
Maybe Business Insider needs to ***ow up on their wanton contribution to this terrorism because, as we all know, radiation antiestéticar-mongering is an excellent weapon of terror. Why they would use it against our allies is confounding.
_______________
I realize many journals and on-line publications need sensational headlines to attract readers. It seems necessary in these times of social media and 24-hour news cycles.
But it becomes unethical to push bad science without doing at least a little due diligence. I understand anti-nuke ideology cares little about science and is never held to any technical standard, but in some cases reporting bad science hurts people who need good science to make personal decisions for themselves and their families.
A recent textbook case of this malfeasance is the Fukushima-induced thyroid scare in Japanese children. There is no increase in thyroid health problems in Japanese children living in and around the Prefectures of Fukushima and it is unlikely there ever will be (UN Report; Nuclear News; J. of Am. Phys. and Surg.; CBCnews; Hiroshima Syndrome; National Geographic; Asahi Shimbun).
http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2013/13-85418_Report_2013_Annex_A.pdf
Radioactive Japan: Thyroid Control Screening Reveals Much Higher Percentages of Cysts and Nodules in Children Far Away from Fukushima? « nuclear-news
http://www.jpands.org/vol19no2/orient.pdf
Fukushima Prefecture | Child Thyroid Anomalies | Thyroid Cancers
Why the Cancer Cases in Fukushima Aren't Likely Linked to the Nuclear Disaster
Ministry: Rate of Fukushima thyroid abnormalities roughly normal - AJW by The Asahi Shimbun
However, many so-called researchers, activists and reporters claim thyroid cancers have exploded in Japan and Japanese children are dying by the thousands (Business Insider; Eco Child’s Play). They intentionally compared the wrong data sets, data sets that were not comparable, that used different methods, looked at different characteristics, even different ages. These news entities are not particularly known for their treatment of scientific issues and might be forgiven for not recognizing bad research, but just a phone call to a real scientist would have gone a long way to preventing this scare.
Unfortunately, these articles get picked up by other news outlets, lending them further legitimacy (Voice of Russia; CubaSi). And Eco Child’s Play is supposed to care about children and parents, which they generally do. In this case, however, they have only caused grief and antiestéticar in thousands of parents in Japan.
The root of this thyroid cancer antiestéticar is the rapid and sophisticated screening of Japanese children for thyroid nodules and cysts after the Fukushima accident. The Thyroid Ultrasound Examination (TUE) Program was carried out as part of the Fukushima Health Management Survey, and uses the most sophisticated ultrasound technology that can detect thyroid growths better than previous methods.
The post-tsunami testing screened for all nodules of all sizes ( Japan Probe; Fukushima Voice). Previous testing screened only for large nodules, greater than 5 mm, and large cysts, greater than 20 mm, since small ones are common in Japan and usually of no consequence. Hence, they didn’t even write them down.
According to Dr. Jane Orient in an article just published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, “Modern ultrasound equipment, such as that used in the TUE study, is able to detect thyroid carcinomas as small as a few millimeters, long before these may come to clinical attention. Prior to the initiation of the TUE, no data existed to estimate the baseline frequency of thyroid cancer, detected by ultrasound, in a population of this age in Japan. Studies post Chernobyl show that radiation induced thyroid cancer has a minimal latency of around 4 years, so the initial screening carried out in Japan within 3 years of the accident would be predicted to give a measure of the background incidence of thyroid cancer in this population [and not any effect from Fukushima].”
So when comparing these data sets, you would obviously only compare those data for larger nodules, greater than 5 mm, since that’s what the previous tests have data on.
However, these we-want-to show-children-dying-so-everyone-will-hate-nuclear-energy types have purposefully compared the total data sets knowing full well that the recent ones would have thousands more small nodules not reported in the older data and, therefore, would make it appear that Fukushima had a huge health effect on children.
Scaring parents might be acceptable on Facebook, but in serious news outlets it’s criminal.
There was never enough of an iodine-131 dose to children after the Fukushima accident to cause any problems because the Japanese government, for all their other issues, did the right thing in initially evacuating the region, and then preventing anyone from eating produce and drinking milk from that area until I-131 decayed away in the first two months. The Soviets did not do this after Chernobyl and that is the primary difference in the thyroid doses (Scientific Reports) plus the vastly lower radiation emissions to the Japanese around Fukushima versus the Ukrainians around Chernobyl.
http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120712/srep00507/pdf/srep00507.pdf
That’s it. You can’t get rad-induced thyroid cancer or tumors from anything else accept radioactive iodine, and only from a dose in the first two months since I-131, with an 8-day half-life, dies away in that time. Cs-137 and Sr-90 don’t affect the thyroid. They have a different biochemistry.
More importantly, you can’t develop thyroid cancer this fast, it takes more than 4 years, and it’s only been 3 years since the tsunami, and most of this screening was even earlier. So what has been measured so far in this screening is the pre-Fukushima baseline. It is good to do this extensive screening so that we can have a database to compare with the results several years from now when any Fukushima-induced thyroid cancers would actually show up.
The Japanese have a high level of iodine in their diet, which means that their thyroid glands are virtually saturated with non-radioactive iodine leaving little room for uptake of radioactive iodine. This is the reason for taking iodine pills before a plume of radiation hits you, but is only useful before it hits you. The areas around the Chernobyl power plant are naturally iodine deficient, and therefore uptake of radioactive iodine was greater in that population after Chernobyl.
The thyroid doses in Japanese children after Fukushima averaged 100 times lower than those after Chernobyl (4 mSv versus 500 mSv; UNSCEAR 2008).
http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/11-80076_Report_2008_Annex_D.pdf
The WHO, UNSCEAR and the upcoming IAEA report state that no increase in thyroid cancer will likely ever be discernible from Fukushima.
The results so far show no meaningful effect from Fukushima compared to previous data. Children from Fukushima have about the same number of thyroid growths as those in prefectures far away from Fukushima, in Aomori, Yamanashi, and Nagasaki prefectures, 0.7% versus 1%, respectively (Hayashida et al, 2013).
PLOS ONE: Thyroid Ultrasound Findings in Children from Three Japanese Prefectures: Aomori, Yamanashi and Nagasaki
In addition, “the overall rates of cysts (56.9%) and thyroid nodules (1.7%) as well as the proportion of ≤ 5 mm cysts (92%) and nodules (39%) are consistent with the cysts and nodules found in Fukushima children. Thus, crude comparison of rates in two pediatric populations suggests that thyroid lesions, particularly small thyroid cysts and nodules (≤ 5 mm), are common among children screened with sensitive ultrasound equipment” (Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons).
http://www.jpands.org/vol19no2/orient.pdf
So why are some unethical people declaring children are dying? Because they’re unethical. And they don’t care how many people they hurt as long as their political agenda is met. It’s nasty, cruel and wrong.
Of course, the same names keep popping up with these stories, like Joseph Mangano, Harvey Wasserman and Helen Caldicott. These articles all say the same thing and reference the same debunked scientific studies that skew data to indicate a non-existent problem.
Since I subscribe to most of these environmental journals and have been a lifer for many groups such as NRDC, EDF, Sierra Club and Greenpeace, I am especially troubled. I understand the desire to reinforce a stereotype with data, but that is why being an actual scientist is important. We don’t do that. It’s why we have peer-review. By other scientists. In that field. Not editors, other writers or activists. A real scientist would have caught the disparity between these two uncomparable data sets right off the bat.
Since few in the public read peer-reviewed journals or have the patience to plow through jargon-filled papers, it is the responsibility of scientists to communicate clearly and for journalists to have reputable sources.
Ironically, it has repeatedly been shown that the worst health effects from Fukushima have come from the antiestéticar of radiation and the forced evacuations, not from any radiation effects (Gaji 2013; Japan Daily Press; WHO Report; NYTimes).
ASME DC | Proceedings | ICONE21 | Volume 3: Nuclear Safety and Security; Codes, Standards, Licensing and Regulatory Issues; Computational Fluid Dynamics and Coupled Codes | A Post Accident Safety Analysis Report of the Fukushima Accident
http://japandailypress.com/evacuation-related-deaths-now-more-than-quaketsunami-tol
http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78218/1/9789241505130_eng.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/24/w...in-evacuations-after-japan-tsunami.html?_r=3&
Not one person has, or likely will, die from Fukushima radiation. But many people have died from the forced evacuations, antiestéticar and depression resulting from both well-intentioned and politically-motivated ignorance on radiation doses and effects ***owing the accident.
Maybe Business Insider needs to ***ow up on their wanton contribution to this terrorism because, as we all know, radiation antiestéticar-mongering is an excellent weapon of terror. Why they would use it against our allies is confounding.
_______________
Última edición:
