Skip to main content

View Diary: The Childrens Health Crisis In Fukushima (18 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Medical science is medical science (0+ / 0-)

    and fantasy is fantasy.

    Don't really know what else to say  - I choose to accept the former and you opt to believe in the latter.

    That's all well and good, but it is puzzling to me why some pseudoscience nuttery is rejected from this site (e.g., anti-vaxxer BS and creationism) while some is welcomed to wide acclaim.

    •  Please prove it (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau

      One study does not make it fact. There are plenty of crappy biased studies on Chernobyl that make whatever they want to out of it. Some are agenda based, others because everyone and their cousin has written a paper on Chernobyl.

      There was considerable cover up in the early years of Chernobyl. When people did begin testing kids for thyroid damage they found cancers and some that had already spread to other organs at that 4 year mark. This explains well the information gap for those early years after Chernobyl
      http://www.japanfocus.org/...

      •  It's not one study, it's the consensus (0+ / 0-)

        of many hundreds of studies archived at the Pubmed search engine (yes, anyone can use it - but for some reason the anti-nuke nutcases opt not to . . . ).

        In contrast to the Chernobyl reactor accident, the Fukushima reactor accident has to date resulted in no deterministic effects and no worker deaths. Estimates to date of population doses suggest very low uptakes of radioactive iodine which was a major determinant of the epidemic of thyroid cancer following childhood exposures around Chernobyl. The estimates to date of population doses are also much lower (and the distribution much narrower) than the doses for which cancer excesses have been detected among atomic bomb survivors after 60 years of follow-up. Studies of populations exposed to low doses are also limited in their ability to account for important lifestyle factors, such as cigarette smoking and medical x-ray exposures, which could distort findings. Studies of the Fukushima population should be and are being considered for reassurance and health care reasons. Apart from as regards the extreme psychological stress caused by the horrific loss of life following the tsunami and the large-scale evacuation from homes and villages, such studies have limited to no chance of providing information on possible health risks following low dose exposures received gradually over time--the estimated doses (to date) are just too small.
        link

        The pity is, if eventually health effects do emerge, no one's really going to pay that much attention because of all the current "boy crying wolf" goings on.

        •  Wow. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jim P
          ...Apart from as regards the extreme psychological stress caused by the horrific loss of life following the tsunami and the large-scale evacuation from homes and villages, such studies have limited to no chance of providing information on possible health risks following low dose exposures received gradually over time--the estimated doses (to date) are just too small.
          Way to illustrate my point for me, RG. Thanks. Once the 'official' Lie is on record, all subsequent studies must comport with that 'official' Lie. Happened after Chernobyl, and TMI too. Standard Operating Procedure.

          Besides, it's not YOUR children, so why should you care? Why would anybody question when told it's long-ago settled medical science that "psychological stress" about radiation exposure causes acute radiation sickness, thyroid nodules, cysts and cancers, leukemias, lymphomas, organ and bone cancers, etc. that LOOK exactly like the well-documented effects of radiation exposure, but aren't. Because somebody who owned (or was owned by) a nuclear plant that melted and exploded in that neighborhood said radiation enough to account for the observed health effects was not released.

          Why, even little children who know nothing about things nuclear will present with overt symptoms of serious radiation exposure after not being exposed to radiation from their melted and exploded neighborhood nuke that didn't release any radiation. Amazing how that works, isn't it?

          We've heard it all before. Sleep well.

          •  It's not the "official" lie (0+ / 0-)

            it's science.

            You can't just make shit up and put it on the internet - well actually you clearly can do that much - but not expect any pushback.

            For the life of me I don't know why some conspiracy theories are banned at this site why others are allowed to fester away to relative acclaim.

            •  No, it's NOT science, (0+ / 0-)

              either medical or nuclear. It's CYA bullshit on the part of corporation and government who want to keep their liability low for the serious health effects of the worst nuclear disaster this world has ever seen.

              By the way, "medical science" knows that thyroid nodules and cysts are symptomatic of pre-cancerous states of the human thyroid gland. "Medical science" knows from actual surveys that the 'normal' occurrence of nodules/cysts in children is 1-2% at the top end (with entire regions having NO such issues in children). And "medical science" knows that a 45% rate of thyroid nodules/cysts in children in the immediate region of major fission product dumping due to major nuclear oopses (or on purposes) means that those children were exposed to very significant exposures of the thyroid-concentrating isotope iodine-131. There is a reason that it's the most limiting isotope in nuclear practice.

              It is nuclear science - specifically health physics - that has correlated from the aftermath of nuclear oopses and on purposes through the past 60+ years the range of exposures to iodine-131 that cause thyroid nodules/cysts and cancers, the time factor per dose levels in children and adults, etc.

              "Medical science" has used iodine-131 to treat naturally occurring thyroid issues since it became aware of how this isotope concentrates in thyroid glands and gets used by the gland in place of stable elemental iodine for producing metabolic hormones. They learned all those decades ago that the therapeutic doses they were using caused thyroid cancer in the patient some years down the line. Thyroid cancer is treated by removal of the gland, requiring the patient to take supplemental metabolic hormones for the rest of their lives.

              Neither "medical science" nor "nuclear science" /health physics made the spurious assertion that no one in the immediate vicinity of Fukushima Daiichi got more than 4.2 mSv dose to the thyroid from released iodine-131. That was a political decision, not a medical observation or a health physics determination. The medical observation is that nearly half of Fukushima children developed thyroid nodules/cysts less than a year after the disaster. That figure will keep increasing, which is why the politicians feel they must stop Fukushima parents from having their children tested or treated.

              The presentation of a 45% childhood thyroid damage rate less than a year after the disaster clearly indicates that the doses were far, far higher than ~4 mSv. That's science, RG. The political decision has been demonstrated wrong.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site