Comedienne/Journalist Mako Oshidori Exposes the Truths at the Press Conference in Germany

On March 4-7, 2014, shortly before the third anniversary of the Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami and the subsequent Fukushima nuclear accident, an international conference was held, 25 minutes outside of Frankfurt, on "Effects of Nuclear Disasters on Natural Environment and Human Health," co-organized by the German chapter of the International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) and the Protestant Church in Hesse and Nassau. (Program PDF here).

Mako Oshidori, a Japanese comedienne and a freelance journalist, was part of the press conference on March 6, 2014. The Ustream video in Japanese can be found here, and her presentation begins around 5 minutes and 20 seconds into it. The press conference was attended by multiple German media outlets. This German article covered the content of her presentation well.




Mako Oshidori was enrolled in the School of Life Sciences at Tottori University Faculty of Medicine for three years, studying basics of medical research, before leaving school to go into comedy. Mako Oshidori is a regular at the TEPCO press conference, known for her sharp and tenacious questions. Mako Oshidori herself discovered a TEPCO memo telling officials to "cut Mako-chan('s question) short appropriately." As a freelance journalist, she covers not only the Fukushima nuclear accident but other important health issues such as Minamata disease and asbestos. Although she considers nuclear power plants unnecessary for Earth, she doesn't consider herself an anti-nuclear activist. She is simply a journalist investigating various health issues including the radiation exposure issues.

"Stunning Story from a Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Worker" is an example of her investigative report translated into English.

The transcript of her presentation has been translated into English below.
*****

My name is Mako Oshidori. I am sorry I speak in Japanese.

I would like to express my gratitude to the IPPNW, the Protestant church, and people in Germany, for giving me this opportunity to speak here today. This means a lot as there are not many opportunities given within Japan to widely publicize issues regarding the current situation in regards to the nuclear accident. Therefore, I was really surprised to discover, on this trip to Europe, that Europeans consider Japan as a free, democratic country.

As a journalist, I have attended the TEPCO press conferences more than anybody. I am considered a veteran journalist despite my younger age. The pressure is placed on me from different sources when I try to disseminate the information in media. 

If I write one article about the nuclear accident for a magazine, the utilities industry group would demand to have pro-nuclear articles to be published in the same magazine three times. At the end, the magazine ended up not publishing my article. There was also the pressure from sponsors not to let me use the words such as a “nuclear accident” and “Tokyo Electric (TEPCO)” at all on television, when I would talk about the TEPCO nuclear accident. As a result, I was not able to go on television. 

Japanese electric companies like to use nuclear power, and it was when the Japanese government decided to restart nuclear power plants, in order to continue using nuclear power last fall, that the government agents began following me for surveillance. I heard about it from researchers who were my friends as well as some government officials. I will show you a photo I secretly took of the agent, so you know what sort of surveillance I mean.



When I would talk to someone, a surveillance agent from the central government’s public police force would come very close, trying to eavesdrop on the conversation. The person I am talking to would ask me if the man was my manager. I would tell them that I had no idea who the man was and that I thought he was perhaps one of my groupies. Thus we are not given freedom of broadcasting whatever we want. There are some journalists belonging to major media outlets who do serious reporting on the nuclear accident, but they are under such pressure that the Japanese people are not informed of the realities of the nuclear accident even within Japan.

Next, I would like to talk a little about my interview of a nurse who used to work at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant (NPP) after the accident. 



I would like to tell you about the realities of the nuclear power plant workers. He was a nurse at Fukushima Daiichi NPP in 2012. He quit his job with TEPCO in 2013, and that’s when I interviewed him. 



As of now, there are multiple NPP workers who have died, but only the ones who died on the job are reported publicly. Some of them have died suddenly while off work, for instance, during the weekend or in their sleep, but none of their deaths are reported. Not only that, they are not included in the worker death count. For example, there are some workers who quit the job after a lot of radiation exposure, such as 50, 60 to 70 mSv, and end up dying a month later, but none of these deaths are either reported, or included in the death toll. This is the reality of the NPP workers. There is too much pressure for me to write an article on this issue, so not many Japanese people know about it.

Next, I would like to briefly talk about when I interviewed some Fukushima mothers. 



They collect signatures for a petition appealing to the local government not to use foods produced in Fukushima in school lunches for their children. Currently, not many people are purchasing Fukushima produce for fear of radiation contamination. So the policy was established to feed it to children first to appeal the safety of the food. In Fukushima Prefecture, 70% of the areas was originally using Fukushima produce in school lunches prior to the accident. Even in the areas which were not using Fukushima produce before the accident, the policy now is to feed it to children in order to appeal to the public how safe the Fukushima produce is. The mothers are opposed to it and want to have officials use food from uncontaminated areas in school lunches. There are various arguments in regards to this, such as a need for measuring the radiation levels of food, but their claim is that it is wrong to take advantage of children in appealing the safety of food.

This is from when I visited Fukushima Prefecture in 2012 with a Belarusian researcher, Alexey Nesterenko, who is the head of BELRAD. 



He was most surprised about an elementary school in Date City, Fukushima Prefecture. As you can see, in the section right by the fence next to the swimming pool, the radiation monitor is registering 27.6 μSv/h. 



He asked me if the children at the school had evacuated, and I told him they were in class right then. He was extremely astonished and said that was the radiation level which would necessitate immediate, mandatory evacuation of the children in Belarus. He said he thought Japan was a wealthy country and wondered why children were in class there as if nothing ever happened. This area has an especially high radiation level. There are hot spots like this in Fukushima.

Next thing I would like to talk about is the health survey in Fukushima Prefecture. This is from when Fukushima Prefecture and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), an organization which promotes peaceful use of nuclear energy, signed an agreement of cooperation in health survey and other information relating to the nuclear accident. It covered cooperation in the health survey and the decontamination effort. 




However, at the information session, Fukushima residents strongly opposed having IAEA, a pro-nuclear agency, involved with their health survey. After the press conference, I directly asked the Governor of Fukushima Prefecture what he thought of more than half the residents opposing to the cooperation between IAEA and Fukushima Prefecture. He answered that the residents would just have to understand it was necessary. 



The agreement by IAEA and Fukushima Prefecture is a problem, but there is another problematic document. This is a document which was released in May 2011 by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology to universities, academic societies and research institutions all over Japan. I am really sorry this is only available in Japanese. 



This documents is in regards to various research such as health studies carried out in the disaster areas and the contaminated areas after the Great East Japan earthquake, and it basically says detailed study should not be done without permission for the reason of avoiding burden on the residents. Before this document was released in May 2011, various university researchers and research institutions were in Iitate Village and other heavily contaminated areas in Fukushima Prefecture in March and April. Many research teams left Fukushima after this document was released. Currently, a large-scale health survey in Japan is being conducted only at Fukushima Medical University, designated by the Japanese government. Other studies are hardly being conducted now.

Lastly, I would like to talk about the Act on Protection of Specified Secrets. Last December, the Diet passed the law called the Act on Protection of Specified Secrets, which actually has numerous issues. The government explains the law mostly concerns Specified Secrets about terrorism, but indeed it would punish not only government officials and national researchers who leak Specified Secrets designated by the government but also individuals who instigated the leak. The issue about this act is that it has not at all been decided what constitutes Specified Secrets or what kind of punishments will be applied to those who leak them. The details are to be determined over the course of this year: The only thing determined is that those who leak whatever is considered Specified Secrets, which is undecided at this point, would be punished. As you can see here, the nuclear accident isn’t the only thing that is bringing people out to a demonstration. This is a photo of the demonstration by the Japanese citizens against what-was-then the Specified Secrets Protection bill. 



Every night, quite a number of people would show up to demonstrate. This is an interesting photo, although I hesitated to show it to people in Germany. Demonstrators wanted to say the current cabinet resembled Nazis. In fact, last August, the deputy prime minister Taro Aso said they should begin altering the constitution inconspicuously as Nazis did. 



That prompted many demonstrations claiming the current cabinet was extremely problematic. 



As you can see, you can’t say democracy is protected and human rights are respected in current Japan, and there will be pressure placed on you if you try to broadcast it. Therefore, I really feel thankful for this opportunity to speak to all of you in Germany, courtesy of IPPNW.

*****

Transcription by Takashi Mizuno
Translation by @YuriHiranuma

Seven More Confirmed Thyroid Cancer Cases: Total of 33 Cancer in Fukushima Children--A Synopsis of Results

Fourteenth Prefectural Oversight Committee convened on February 7, 2014, releasing the results of the latest thyroid examination as part of the prefectural health management survey.

English translation of the results is available here.


A summary of the results is provided below:

Total number of children examined as of December 31, 2013: 269,354

Total number of children whose initial examination results are confirmed: 254,280
(up to the November 15, 2013 examination)
     
     Assessment A1  134,805 (53.0%) (no nodules or cysts found)
     Assessment A2  117,679 (46.3%) (nodules 5.0 mm or smaller or cysts 20.0 mm or smaller)
     Assessment B     1,795 (0.7%) (nodules 5.1 mm or larger or cysts 20.1 mm or larger)
     Assessment C         1 (0.0%) (requiring immediate secondary examination)


Initial examination progress status



Number and proportion of nodules and cysts





Secondary examination includes more detailed thyroid ultrasound, blood and urine tests, and fine-needle aspiration biopsy if warranted.

      1,796 are eligible for secondary examination
      1,490 have actually undergone secondary examination
      1,342 finished the secondary examination

Secondary examination progress status




Summary of fine-needle aspiration biopsy results (as of December 31, 2013)






In summary, there were 7 more cancer cases confirmed since the last report on November 12, 2013. One case was confirmed in a female from Namie Town, 5 in Koriyama City, and 1 in Izumizaki Village. 

The total number of cases confirmed or suspected of cancer is 75. Of these, 34 had surgeries as of December 31, 2013, and 1 turned out to be a benign nodule, 32 were confirmed to be papillary thyroid cancer, and 1 still has no confirmed cytological diagnosis but listed as poorly differentiated thyroid cancer. (The total number of cases confirmed or suspected of cancer is often reported as 74 in news report, excluding the case confirmed to be benign).

Shinichi Suzuki, a Fukushima Medical University physician in charge of the thyroid ultrasound examination, cautioned against jumping to the conclusion about this "poorly differentiated cancer" which normally is associated with a poor prognosis. Although he did not elaborate on details, he said the diagnostic criteria for poorly differentiated thyroid cancer have recently changed. This was the case which, initially thought of as papillary thyroid cancer, was undergoing cytological reevaluation by pathologists who are still not sure about the exact subtype. 

Interestingly, the first thing Suzuki mentioned, when it was his turn to present the thyroid examination results at the committee meeting, was the news post published today in multiple newspapers regarding the Fukushima Medical University beginning a genetic analysis of the cancer tissues. The news post states that Fukushima Medical University will use the thyroid cancer tissues, excised during surgeries, to analyze for genetic alterations to help figure out why the cancer originated. What was odd was that Suzuki, as if avoiding a swarm of questions, offered an explanation that such genetic analyses are routinely performed on adult cancer specimen using the special research money and approved by the University's ethics committee. He emphasized that the genetic analysis was totally separate from the thyroid ultrasound examination. He asked for an understanding as he felt it was the mission of Fukushima Medical University to conduct the genetic analysis in order to watch over the children's future.

As for the perceived "slow" speed of confirming the cancer cases, Suzuki said that some of the cases suspected of cancer did not warrant immediate surgeries, allowing for the children to live their lives with close monitoring. 

As usual, no information was offered such as the type of nodules and also details of each surgical case which, as part of regular medical care, are considered beyond the scope of the screening and thus inaccessible to the Health Management Survey team.

*****
Below is a reference table showing the 2008 thyroid cancer incidence rate per 100,000 in Japan, compiled from the National Cancer Center (2012) Cancer incidence from cancer registries in Japan (1975–2007) on the website of Center for Cancer Control and Information Services, National Cancer Center, Japan. Due to an intense interest, domestically and internationally, in the pediatric thyroid cancer occurrence in Japan, the tables focused on the relevant age groups.

Thyroid cancer incidence rate in Japan by age and sex (2008) (per 100,000)
SourceDownload “2. Incidence (National estimates)” and go to the “rate” tab on bottom. 
See lines #1775 for male and #1809 for female.



This shows “incidence,” representing the rate of occurrence of new cases in a given period. On the other hand, Fukushima thyroid examination is mass screening, which yields “prevalence,” the proportion of the total number of cases to the total population.



It is important to note that incidence and prevalence are not directly comparable, so the incidence rates shown above are only a relative measure of comparison.



Radiation Testing of Seafood by Washington State Seafood Companies: Radioactive Strontium and Cesium

Vital Choice Wild Seafood and Organics, a Washington state seafood company, has been conducting radiation testing on Pacific ocean fish since 2012. Recently they released the results of testing for strontium 90 in King Salmon, Sockeye Salmon, and Albacore Tuna, which are posted here with their permission.

No strontium found:
Article dated 1/09/2014 
Results PDF 
"Last summer, the first reports appeared suggesting that a longer-lived radionuclide called strontium 90 (Sr-90) was leaking from the stricken nuclear plant.
So to ensure safety, we sent more fish to be tested for Sr-90, in the fall of 2013."

Strontium testing was performed by Pace Analytical Services, Inc. Review was performed by SGS North America, Inc.

Received on 10/30/2013. Analyzed on 11/12/2013.

Sockeye Salmon   -0.00130 ± 0.0210 pCi/g (MDC 0.0513 pCi/g) or -0.0481 ± 0.777 Bq/kg   (MDC 1.8981 Bq/kg) 
King Salmon           0.0228 ± 0.0292 pCi/g (MDC 0.0635 pCi/g) or 0.8436 ± 1.0804 Bq/kg (MDC 2.3495 Bq/kg)
Albacore Tuna       -0.0151 ± 0.0167 pCi/g (MDC 0.0456 pCi/g) or -0.5587 ± 0.6179 Bq/kg (MDC 0.6247 Bq/kg)

Results are shown as the activity ± uncertainty. The original results in pCi/g are followed by values converted to Bq/kg (1 pCi = 0.037 Bq).
Entire fish, including skin and bone, was tested according to Vital Choice, which is important as strontium accumulates in the bone.
 MDC is minimum detectable concentration. (Also described as MDA, minimum detectable activity). (Note 1)

Vital Choice seafood harvest areas are described on this page.

    ”All of our Pacific seafood – salmon, sablefish, halibut, cod, prawns, shrimp, Dungeness crab, mussels, and clams – is caught or harvested off Alaska, Washington State, Oregon, and British Columbia (BC), between 4,000 and 5,000 miles east of the nuclear plant.
    The sole exceptions are albacore tuna and king crab. Our albacore is caught off Midway Island, and our king crab is caught in the Bering Sea. Both areas are located about 2,500 miles east of the plant.”

Vital Choice has also done three rounds of radiation testing for iodine 131 and cesium 134 and 137.

1st test reported on 3/29/2012
"Eurofins Laboratories tested 15 species of fish and shellfish for cesium-134, cesium-137, and iodine-131, and found none."

Cesium 134: None to trace levels (MDA 1.0 Bq/kg)
    Most species  <1.0 Bq/kg
    Albacore 1.4 Bq/kg
    Halibut 1.3 Bq/kg

The trace levels found in our albacore and halibut are less than 15% of the maximum combined level of Cesium 137 + 134 normally found in fish (10 Bq/kg). (See Note 2)

And those trace levels are just 0.1% of the FDA’s level of concern (DIL) for combined Cesium 137 + 134 levels in foods (1200 Bq/kg). (See Note 3)

Cesium 137: None detected (MDA 1.0 Bq/kg)
Iodine 131: None detected (MDA 2.0 Bq/kg)
This means that all seafood tested contained less than 1.2% of the FDA’s Derived Intervention Level (DIL) for Iodine 131 (170 Bq/kg). Iodine 131 decays to safe forms within about two weeks after its creation. (See Note 3)

2nd test reported in September 2012
"Eurofins Laboratories tested our Pacific albacore and our Alaskan halibut, sockeye salmon, and cod. They found no cesium-134 or iodine 131, and only a barely detectable, clearly safe level of Cesium 137 in a sample of cod."

Cesium 134: None detected (MDA 1.0 Bq/kg)
Cesium 137: Cod 1.2 Bq/kg (MDA 1.0 Bq/kg)
Iodine 131: None detected (MDA 2.0 Bq/kg).

3rd test reported in September 2013
"Eurofins Laboratories tested our salmon (pink, king, sockeye, silver), tuna, cod, halibut, and sablefish for cesium-134, cesium-137, and iodine-131, and found none."

Cesium-134: None detected (MAD 1.0 Bq/kg)
Cesium-137: None detected (MDA 1.0 Bq/kg)
Iodine-131: None detected (MDA 2.0 Bq/kg)

*****

Also, Loki Fish Company in Seattle, Washington, just released their radiation test results conducted by Eurofins Analytical Laboratories.
A family owned and operated business, Loki Fish Company harvest wild salmon and halibut from southeast Alaska and Puget Sound. 

January 7, 2014 post by Loki Fish Company "No Elevated Levels of Radiation Found in North Pacific Salmon Samples"
Test results 
"Tests were conducted on Pink, Keta, Coho, Sockeye and King salmon from southeast Alaska, and Pink and Keta salmon from Puget Sound."

Cesium-134: Alaskan Pink Salmon 1.2 Bq/kg (MDA 1.0 Bq/kg)
Cesium-137: Alaskan Keta Salmon 1.4 Bq/kg (MDA 1.0 Bq/kg)
Iodine-131: None detected (MDA 2.0 Bq/kg)

*****
Note 1: For reference, MDC for strontium testing by the Japanese Fisheries Agency was in the range of 0.01-0.04 Bq/kg.

Note 2: Is it true that maximum of 10Bq/kg of combined Cs134 AND Cs137 can be found in fish under the normal circumstance? Should there be any Cs134 normally found in fish? Upon an inquiry, Vital Choice said this information came from Eurofins. According to this study, no Cs134 was detected and Cs137 was 1.4 Bq/kg in Pacific Blue Fin Tuna in 2008).

Note 3: US FDA's DIL (Derived Interventional Level)  is 160 Bq/kg for strontium 90, 170 Bq/kg for iodine 131, and 1,200 Bq/kg for cesium 134 and 137 for any food. Standard limits for radioactive cesium in Japan are 100 Bq/kg for general food and 50 Bq/kg for infant food and milk, taking into account the contribution from radioactive strontium and plutonium, etc. It should be noted that these limits are considered too high by those who believe internal radiation doses have stronger effects than equivalent external radiation exposure doses. For instance, report by foodwatch and German IPPNW (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War) calls for lowering of EU cesium limits of 600 Bq/kg for all foodstuffs and 370 Bq/kg for baby food and milk products to 16 Bq/kg and 8 Bq/kg, respectively.

Furthermore, on the Vital Choice information page, the section called "Radiation experts see no cause for concern," refers to a study called "Evaluation of radiation doses and associated risk from the Fukushima nuclear accident to marine biota and human consumers of seafood.

Excerpt from the abstract:
"The additional dose from Fukushima radionuclides to humans consuming tainted PBFT in the United States was calculated to be 0.9 and 4.7 µSv for average consumers and subsistence fishermen, respectively. Such doses are comparable to, or less than, the dose all humans routinely obtain from naturally occurring radionuclides in many food items, medical treatments, air travel, or other background sources. Although uncertainties remain regarding the assessment of cancer risk at low doses of ionizing radiation to humans, the dose received from PBFT consumption by subsistence fishermen can be estimated to result in two additional fatal cancer cases per 10,000,000 similarly exposed people."

First of all, 
the internal dose described in μSv (microsievert) and applied to general population is misleading, as sensitivity to radiation can vary with age and gender. In addition, comparison of manmade fission products, such as radioactive cesium, to natural background radiation, such as radioactive potassium in bananas, is also misleading as such comparison tolerates and nearly justifies the environmental existence of the fission products. One must ask the question, "Should it really be there?" Also, exposure to medical diagnostic and therapeutic radiation (internal or external) is not exactly "background," and it is not harmless as seen in this study. Air travel is hardly comparable to ingestion of cesium as the former is external exposure while the latter internal.

One must understand these distinctions, often blurred in convenient explanations, to be able to make an intelligent decision about whether or not to consume contaminated foodstuff. Since there is no safe dose of radiation, it is ultimately an individual decision whether or not to accept the risk. However, a higher vulnerability of certain populations, such as babies, infants, children and pregnant women, and women with reproductive potential, should be taken into consideration. 

Note 4: In both Vital Choice and Loki Fish tests, Cs 134 was found alone without Cs 137 in some fish. This seemed odd, as the presence of Cs 134 is the signature for Fukushima radiation contamination as opposed to Cs 137 alone which could be due to past nuclear testing. When Vital Choice was asked about this, they had no information on it. They just stated that Eurofins was expert in radionuclide testing. 

US Physicians Claim Radiation Risks Due to the Fukushima Nuclear Accident

The following is the English translation of the The Wall Street Journal Japan Online article posted on November 13, 2013. Permission for translation was obtained from the author, Misako Hida.

Disclaimer: Wall Street Journal Japan Online is not responsible for the translation.

Note: Although most of the links were not part of the original article, they were provided within the translation for easy accessibility to appropriate information at the discretion of the translator.

******

NY Report by Misako Hida
November 13, 2013

US physicians claim radiation risks due to the Fukushima nuclear accident

Intake of radioactively contaminated air, water and food brings radioactive material inside the body, causing internal radiation contamination. It is a critical responsibility of adults to protect lives and health of children, who will carry on the future, from radiation exposure.

Last month, there was a symposium held in New York City to discuss the "Fukushima Report" by United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effect of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). A former president of a non-governmental organization (NGO) "Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR)" and Assistant Clinical Professor in Department of Medicine at University of Iowa, John W. Rachow, M.D., urged not to underestimate the risks of health effects on Fukushima children, by excerpting the following quote by President Kennedy.

"The number of children and grandchildren with cancer in their bones, with leukemia in their blood, or with poison in their lungs might seem statistically small to some, in comparison with natural health hazards. But this is not a natural health hazard-and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of even one human life, or the malformation of even one baby-who may be born long after all of us have gone-should be of concern to us all. Our children and grandchildren are not merely statistics towards which we can be indifferent."


This was part of the July 27th Radio and Television Address to the American People by President Kennedy, the day after the United States and the former USSR reached an agreement to sign the Partial Test Ban Treaty in 1963, in the midst of Cold War when the United States and the former USSR were engaged in the arms race.

A Fukushima child being tested for radiation exposure (March 13, 2013). (Photo courtesy of Reuters)

"A 50-year-old speech by President Kennedy fits the UNSCEAR report just right," says Rachow.

The symposium, co-sponsored by PSR and Human Rights Now, the Japanese human rights organization, places an emphasis on "human rights" rather than "statistics." It was held in response to the summary report by UNSCEAR, submitted to the Fourth Committee of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in October 2013, which stated, "No discernible increased incidence of radiation-related health effects are expected among exposed members of the public." Its purpose was to demand that UNSCEAR re-recognize uncertainties accompanying estimation of exposure doses as well as health effects, and encourage improvements in the completion of the final report.

According to the critique about the report, co-authored by PSR and the German branch of the US NGO "International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)," UNSCEAR report failed to accurately portray the true extent of radiation exposure, ignored the ongoing radioactive emissions, and excluded non-cancer effects of radiation. 

Moreover, it also questions the reliability of TEPCO's worker dose assessment and the neutrality of the data used in the report, suggesting that monitoring should occur for non-cancer diseases and genetic radiation effects. The critique also sounds the alarm that the comparisons between nuclear fallout and background (natural) radiation, often used when minimizing the risks of radiation exposure, can be misleading.

According to Dr. Rachow, the critique was sent to UNSCEAR by e-mail, and "a polite and quick reply" was received. "I felt that our concerns and suggestions would be considered, and we felt encouraged."

In regards to the summary report, UNSCEAR released an interim report in May 2013, stating, "No immediate health risks were seen" from the Fukushima nuclear accident. This column also featured a two-part interview of Dr. Wolfgang Weiss, Chair of the UNSCEAR report and Head of the Department of Radiation Protection and Health of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS).

At first, the entire report was to be presented at UNGA this fall. However, after the interim report came out, it was revealed that the Japanese government and TEPCO did not have an accurate assessment of the status of worker exposure. In October, UNSCEAR announced the postponement of the completion of the report, citing the underestimation of internal exposure dose of workers by about 20% due to radioactive iodine 133 (half-life 20 hours) not being reflected in dose estimation of workers.

According to the United Nations press release, Carl-Magnus Larsson, the Chair of the UNSCEAR,  announced in a briefing at the Fourth Committee of UNGA, that just as in the interim report in May, human exposure to radiation was "low or generally low, with no immediate health effects."

However, regarding children, Larsson explained, because of "the difference between the ways atomic energy affected children as compared to adults," more caution was required. Consequently there had been a major thyroid screening program of 360,000 children conducted in Japan. However, it was unclear whether higher than usual rates of thyroid cancers and abnormalities detected were due to radiation exposure, as they are "indistinguishable" from cancers due to other causes.

Dr. Rachow dismisses UNSCEAR's views that it is not possible to prove increased cancer risks due to radiation exposure. "It is typical tautology to state, 'Since radiation-induced cancers are indistinguishable from cancers caused by other causes, in the case of Fukushima, increase in cancer attributable to radiation exposure is not expected'," says Rachow. (Tautology refers to repetition of synonymous words, guaranteeing the truth of the proposition in rhetoric).

The symposium also featured Anand Grover, Special Rapporteur to the United Nations Human Rights Council who submitted a report to the UN this May, recommending the Japanese government to strictly regulate radiation limits based on "human rights." He stated, "Nation should not breach 'the right for attainment of health' for citizens. It has the duty to respect and protect its people."

Meanwhile, briefings at the Fourth Committee of UNGA suggested unspoken pressure on UNSCEAR by the Japanese government. According to the UN press release mentioned earlier, the Japanese delegate indicated that UNSCEAR report had a possibility of "causing misunderstanding." It's because some Japanese media's articles "incorrectly" reported that "the report had concluded that the Government of Japan had underestimated the amount of internal exposure of workers at the plant.

A former president of a non-governmental organization (NGO) "Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR)" and Assistant Clinical Professor in Department of Medicine at University of Iowa, John W. Rachow, M.D. (Photo courtesy of Dr. John Rachow)

Certainly, there is the fact that UNSCEAR indicated the possibility of underestimation after receiving new sets of data from TEPCO in regards to the workers, even though it is not the final report. It is a matter of fact to reflect any discrepancy in data. The statement by the Japanese delegate could be construed as indirectly demanding a change in "conclusion" in the final report.

In fact, according to the proceedings of Nuclear Safety Commission on September 9, 2011, Technical Advisor Kenzo Fujimoto and Expert Member Nobuhiko Ban made statements insinuating to restrain UNSCEAR's own data analysis at the first meeting of the "Domestic Support and Investigation Working Group for the UNSCEAR Fukushima Nuclear Accident Report," held prior to the start of the investigation by UNSCEAR.

"I say this out of concern, but if the Working Group makes efforts in collecting detailed and outstanding data and submitting them to UNSCEAR, foreigners will use them to make various assessments.(…) I think we have to assess them ourselves in Japan to prepare the data they can deal with, or else it would be embarrassing for us to appear as if we were a dependent country by submitting the data alone and leaving the assessment up to them.(…)" (Advisor Fujimoto).

In response to this, Expert Member Ban said, "I totally agree with what was just said." He continued on to say, "(…) it's something that should be approached with “the All Japan System,” which means we need to be careful with how and when the data should be submitted." In regards to the early exposure of thyroid gland to iodine, he referred to the necessity for the Japan side to do some analysis before asking for further analysis by UNSCEAR. He shared his concern, "If we simply submit the data, they might do whatever they want with the data, leading to the possibility that they might come out with some outrageous results."

In the first place, reliability of some data is questionable. For instance, according to the dust sampling measurement results by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology dated June 7, 2011, radionuclides were detected at various places such as Fukushima University on March 18, 2011, immediately after the Great East Japan Earthquake. However, even though 9,100 to 17,000 Becquerel of short-lived iodine 132 (half-life of about 2 hours) was detected, the parent nuclide Tellurium 132 (half-life about 3 days) was "undetected." However, according to Dr. Rachow, it is customary for Tellurium 132 to be detected along with the daughter nuclide iodine 132.

As "uncertainty" lingers not only in scientific effects of radiation exposure but also in the amount and the quality of data itself, how far can UNSCEAR approach what Dr. Rachow calls "firm commitment to the truth"? We look forward to the final report.

******
Addendum by the translator: 
Dust sampling measurement results mentioned above have also been translated as below. The questionable parts were contained within red squares.





Translation by @YuriHiranuma











Tokyo Shimbun Article Regarding Confidentiality Clause in the IAEA/FMU Pact, Complete Translation


Foreword

On December 31, 2013, the morning edition of Tokyo Shimbun published an article revealing the existence of a “confidentiality clause” in agreements signed by IAEA and Fukushima Medical University (FMU) as well as Fukui Prefecture. 

For clarification, when the memorandum regarding the IAEA/FMU pact was released on December 15, 2012, the details including the confidentiality clause were noted by Oshidori Mako, who attended the press conference. Fukui Prefecture signed the agreement on October 7, 2013, and again, the confidentiality clause was already included in the publicized agreement. 

Tokyo Shimbun might have written up the article, citing potential implication of the confidential clause as preemption to the State Secrecy Protection Law, which was steamrollered in December amid strong opposition and controversy.

These are some links to the relevant documents:

Signing of "Memorandum of Cooperation between Fukushima Prefecture and the International Atomic Energy Agency following the Accident at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station"

(Fact sheet) IAEA cooperation projects in Fukushima Prefecture

Practical Arrangements between Fukushima Medical University and the International Atomic Energy Agency on Cooperation in the Area of Human Health [PDF] (signed on December 15, 2012)

Practical Arrangement between the Fukui Prefectural Government and the International Atomic Energy Agency on Cooperation in the Areas of Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Safety, Nuclear Sciences and Applications [PDF] (signed on October 7, 2013)


******
Complete translation of the December 31, 2013 Tokyo Shimbun article
(Note: This is an unofficial translation, and Tokyo Shimbun is not responsible for the content).

Confidential clause in agreements between IAEA and Fukushima and Fukui Prefectures: shared information could be non-publicized

It was discovered that the memorandum of cooperation between the IAEA and Fukushima as well as Fukui Prefectures contain a confidentiality clause that will classify shared information if requested by either party. This clause was not discussed by the prefectural assembly, and critics say "it could be preempting the State Secrecy Protection Law."

The memorandum of cooperation with IAEA was signed in December 2012 by Fukushima prefecture as well as October 2013 by Fukui Prefecture.

In Fukushima Prefecture, it was the prefectural government that entered into an agreement with IAEA in the area of decontamination and radioactive waste management, whereas Fukushima Medical University entered into an agreement with IAEA in the area of the survey of radiological effect on human health. The memorandum includes detailed "Practical Agreements" which contained a clause stating, "The Parties will ensure the confidentiality of information classified by the other Party as restricted or confidential." 

Fukui Prefecture also entered into an agreement with IAEA in the area of development of human resources in the field of nuclear energy, and its memorandum also included a confidentiality clause.

Neither prefecture admits to any information having been classified confidential at this time, but if either the prefectures or IAEA decide to classify information for "they contribute to worsening of the residents' anxiety," there is a possibility that such information as the accident information, as well as radiation measurement data and thyroid cancer information may not be publicized.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs official who was involved in the making of the memorandum stated, upon interview, that "As this is an international agreement, I cannot reveal which party, Japan or IAEA, asked for the confidentiality clause."

However, officials of both prefectures stated that IAEA has a rule to include the confidentiality clause when signing the memorandum with the administrative body of each country.

IAEA has published reports, after the Chernobyl nuclear accident, stating "there were no health effects due to radiation exposure."

Ruiko Mutoh, representative of The Complainants for Criminal Prosecution of the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, expressed her concern that "IAEA has a history of hiding information about health effects in Chernobyl. The same thing could happen to Fukushima."



Testimony by a Voluntary Evacuee from Fukushima: A Mother Reveals Health Issues She and Her Children Had

Anonymous testimony of a Fukushima single mother made during the December 4, 2013 press conference by the Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial Team, and transcribed by Kiiko here. It was translated into English with permission of the woman, a voluntary evacuee to Yamanashi, who gave the testimony. She strongly feels stories like hers should be heard by others so that the severe reality faced by some Fukushima residents can be recognized.

*****

Testimony by a mother with two daughters and a grade-school age son who is the youngest.

I was born and raised in Fukushima Prefecture. I was living in Fukushima at the time of Great East Japan Earthquake and the nuclear accident. This summer, I decided to voluntarily evacuate to Yamanashi Prefecture due to health issues experienced by me as well as my children. I would like to describe how I came about deciding to evacuate and how things changed after the evacuation.

At the time of the earthquake and tsunami, the lifeline was disrupted. In order to obtain food and necessary goods, my family walked to a store we would normally drive to. We had to wait in line for hours to shop. The news of the nuclear accident came in the midst of it. I still remember how it was very hard for me and my children to breathe due to strange smell and difficulty taking a breath.

Every day the government and specialists said on TV, "There is no worry." and "There is no immediate health effect." Despite feeling anxious, I took those words as is, and we ate local vegetables and drank tap water.

My children had restrictions on outside activities at school. They could not play outside, and those were difficult days. We were just living a day-to-day life, and I was too busy with work and didn’t have time to  research radiation and radiation exposure. Time went by, and there was a thyroid ultrasound examination as part of Fukushima Health Management Survey one year after the accident. 

When the results came in mail. Two children who were examined both had nodules and were classified as "A2," and "No need for a follow-up until the examination in two years." I was in shock.

There were no ultrasound images, and I had no idea what kind of condition they were in. It was just a piece of paper, and I was full of mistrust.

I thought about evacuating from Fukushima then, but voluntary evacuation was not guaranteed to get financially compensated. As a single mother living with my parents, I had no courage or money to leave home to support my children, so I gave up.

I wanted to get thyroid ultrasound examinations on my own, but I had been told "No local hospital would conduct thyroid examinations." Time simply passed by while my worries continued.

When the new year came, I tried to get my children life insurance policy as I thought "anything could happen from now on." I reported the thyroid ultrasound examination results in the application form, and I was told later on that they were "unable to attach any special policy regarding cancer." I asked for reevaluation and managed to get policies, but this experience made me realize that "The fact that the insurance company came up with such a result is because they decided the (cancer) risk was that high." I was worried and tormented, and this made me begin to collect information regarding radiation and radiation exposure.

Later on I found a hospital that would conduct thyroid ultrasound examination. We all underwent the examination including the daughter who did not qualify for the thyroid examination by Fukushima Health Management Survey, and it turns out we all had thyroid cysts which were recommended to be followed up every 6 months.

I couldn't trust the whole body counter (WBC) examination conducted by Fukushima City or Fukushima Prefecture, we were tested by a non-profit organization. All of us had previous WBC test results below the detectable limit, but two of the children had cesium 137 six months later. I had no idea what to do. I cried every day, hiding from my children.

From that time on, I began to have dry coughs of unknown etiology. When I went to a hospital, I was told "An increasing number of people had the same symptom." As my cough would subside during a convalescent stay outside Fukushima Prefecture, I asked the doctor, "Do you think this is the effect of radiation?" I was simply told, "We have no such reports, so we don't know."

My son in grade school began to complain of bone pain in the sole of his feet. Furthermore, many others around us, at all ages, also complained of bone pain in the soles of their feet.

If we evacuate outside Fukushima Prefecture, can we make a living under such conditions? I was so worried about my children getting used to the new schools and a new life that I was not able to make a decision on evacuation. However, I finally decided when someone told me,"Your health and life take precedence over such little matters." I began to look for a place to evacuate to and eventually settle.

Most of the government-assisted evacuation arrangements had ended at the end of last year. The only option was to rely on a private group making evacuation arrangements. As I wanted to move to the west of Tokyo, we ended up evacuating to Yamanashi Prefecture.

Health of all the family members quickly deteriorated during the period awaiting evacuation. My work had necessitated me to walk around a high-radiation district a lot for several months. My dry cough got so bad to the point of nearly choking in the middle of the night.

Beginning with the soles of my feet, bone pain extended to arms and legs. Parts of arms and legs exposed to air had stingy pain and itchiness. Stuffy throat and phlegm gradually worsened.

There were occasions when a sudden episode of fatigue temporarily immobilized me in a car. The arm bone pain was so bad that I could barely open and close doors. I got so scared that I stopped walking the particular district, and soon the bone pain subsided.

My grade school age son continued to have nausea and headache upon awakening in the morning. When he went to the hospital, they found blood in his urine. His allergies had tripled what he already had. Doctors diagnosed allergies as the potential reason for not feeling well.

However, no medication relieved nausea and headache, and he often had diarrhea. I also began to have continuing nausea, headache and diarrhea.

When we went to a different hospital, we were told the symptoms were psychological, and the etiology remained unknown. At this point, my son's blood pressure had gone down to 82/50.

My son's health gradually deteriorated with the dark circles under his eyes expanding. He could barely go to school during the three months before evacuation.

Air dose level immediately outside the house was 0.8 μSv/h, but there were some spots with air dose level of 1.5-2.0 μSv/h inside the property boundaries. Even inside the house it was 0.3-0.5 μSv/h. That was the condition we lived in.

I discussed with the school principal the thyroid issues in my children and the anxiety I felt about my children walking to school through some areas with high radiation, but all I got back was an unbelievable answer, "I think even 5 mSv annually is fine. You can't live anywhere if you are worked about such matters.

When I checked the air dose levels at school on my own, there were multiple spots that were right around 1.5 μSv/h. However, the school would not release such data.

Then the school swimming pool reopened for swim classes after two years of closure. I was at a loss for word when the release form stated, "Any students who cannot participate in swim classes are required to turn in a medical certificate from a hospital."

My daughter already had a skin ailment of unknown etiology, which got much worse than ever. My son sensed abnormality of his ill health and sometimes would cry in bed asking, "Something like this never happened to me before. Why is it happening now?"

First week after we evacuated to Yamanashi, we had nausea, headaches, diarrhea and fatigue. We also had badly stuffed throat and phlegm. But gradually the frequency of theses symptoms decreased from every two days, every three days, and so on. I could tell the dark circles under my son's eye was gradually lightening up and  disappearing.

Soon after that, my children and I went to a hospital in Tokyo for thyroid examination. We were surprised to hear the results later, as all of us had results which were totally different from the results in Fukushima

My son continued to have blood in urine. We were told to "take him to a specialist as the blood test results are concerning." When I took him to a hospital in Yamanashi, he was diagnosed with "autonomic nervous system disorder."
However, the diagnosis was not convincing enough, considering his symptoms and my own ill health. I came to distrust hospitals, and we quit going to doctors.

About one month after evacuating, my children and I felt much better, and my son was able to go to school.

Although we don't feel well occasionally, we no longer have  abnormal symptoms we used to get in Fukushima. It was only when our health improved that we realized that "we were in a scary place," and recognized how scary radiation could be.

After we evacuated, we returned home to Fukushima twice. Each time our health worsened.

More people who remained in Fukushima are suffering from the same symptoms as mine. More people have died. There are more children who got leukemia, who began to have bloody noses and who have thyroid cancer. Children with thyroid cancer and their mothers are really suffering. Many parents want "at least children" to survive, but parents need to be healthy to be able to raise the children.

I wish both adults and children would be evacuated from high radiation areas as soon as possible.

Many evacuees, including me, are full of regrets that they didn't "evacuate sooner." I don't want any more people to feel the same way, regretting that they "could not fully protect the children."

I would like the government and TEPCO to reveal the truth and own up their responsibilities and do what they need to do.

In addition, they should get to know more about how we are burdened with double and triple suffering due to radiation even before our psychological damages are healed.
Thank you for listening.

*****
From the Q/A session:

Question: You said the thyroid examination results in Tokyo were different from those in Fukushima. How so?

Answer: In Fukushima, my son's thyroid ultrasound examination showed two cysts. When we went to another clinic, it still showed two cysts. When I took him to a hospital in Tokyo, he had not only cysts but also nodules; he was given a diagnosis of thyroid adenomatous goiter. In addition, he had lymphadenopathy with over 10 lymph nodes involved.



Fukushima Thyroid Examination February 2024: 274 Surgically Confirmed as Thyroid Cancer Among 328 Cytology Suspected Cases

Note: From this post onward, the terms "Age 25+ Survey" and "Age 30+ Survey" are to replace "Age 25 Milestone Scree...