national

Attempts to link Fukushima, Hiroshima upset some

40 Comments
By Yuri Kageyama

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

40 Comments
Login to comment

When it comes to other events besides Fukushima that involve both Japanese people and radiation and are sufficiently well known enough to resonate with the Japanese people there is what? Hiroshima and one more....Nagasaki. That's it. Its simple.

About the only alternative I can think of is "No more Sasado Sasakis". But they would probably complaint about that too.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

The motives were different but the results will be similar in so much as the later generations of Japanese will bear the damage. And this time there is no way to blame an enemy though.

Still, it is most likely that future generations will look back in disgust at us......

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

They also group the presence of the nuclear carrier George Washington along with the visits by US nuclear submarines in the same category as the A-Bombs. I hate to say it, but much of it is due to the ignorance ot the people in the protests in not knowing the difference between a nuclear reactor used for power generation, and that of atomic weapons.

Ships like the GW, and nuclear submarines can't go "boom" in the same manner as a nuclear weapon that was dropped on Japan. Can they explode, sure anything is possible, but it would not be what one would assume as an atomic attack. It would emit radiation but not the nuclear blast.

Protestors tend to run on emotion and not logic at times. The people who plan and stage these protests are banking on this to get their crowd support.

The more accurate protests for Japan should focus on making the government come clean about their nuclear program and holding people accountable for failure, and not trying to draw parallels to a natural disaster induced accident and an act of war.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Totally stupid political slogan, but then stupidity is par for the course for those.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

What a piece of propaganda tosh:

The Japanese government has detected 44 confirmed and suspected cases of thyroid cancer among the 217,000 youngsters, 18 and under, checked in Fukushima. Thyroid cancer among children is generally rare, estimated at only one in a million. The link to radiation is still inconclusive, and extensive testing of Fukushima children could account for the higher numbers. (Journalist)

What we don’t know, she told me, is whether these thyroid cancers are to do with the environment in Fukushima — or whether there is something about the genetics of the people monitored.

We also don’t know, she pointed out, whether the frequency is similar to that seen in other areas of Japan. In Chernobyl (where children were exposed to more than 100 times the maximum dose of radioactive iodine seen after Fukushima), thyroid cancers did not present themselves until four or five years after the disaster.

“Given what we know about radiation dose and time elapsed since the accident,” says Thomas, “I personally cannot see how this finding can be related to the radiation — the doses were too low and the time too short, based on what we know from Chernobyl.” (Professor Gerry Thomas, a world leader on thyroid cancer from radiation).

There's also lots of other data from Hiroshima which seems to have been overlooked in this article.

As for a balanced report on what happened, have a look here http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/09/fukushima_disaster_new_information_about_worst_case_scenarios.single.html

1 ( +7 / -6 )

"No one is known to have died from the Fukushima radiation"

Not what I have heard. Several of the workers cleaning it have gone, I heard.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

They are right. Just wait for the next earthquake to happen and the national disaster will get worse . The Abe Government has lost trust with the people. He is on a different plane with the people paying for his economic and political policies based on self-supporting fallacies.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When scientific illiteracy and historical illiteracy collide.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

wow a victim vs victim battle royal.........what next

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Robert Jacobs, professor at the Hiroshima Peace Institute, sees similarities between Hiroshima and Fukushima, calling the latter a “slow-motion nuclear war.” He said the cumulative radiation dosage from Fukushima could be quite significant because the leaks are likely to continue for decades

Assistant Professor Jacobs seems to have no technical qualifications to comment on this. His background is in the arts, and he studies the cultural effects of nuclear weapons.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Exactly. The whole article is complete tosh. And whilst the comments of the victims of Hiroshima may very well be valid, it is afterall their personal opinion, it's been presented in a manner devoid of science and full of conjecture.

Much like most of the news on this subject.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

“I oppose connecting the two simply because they both involve radiation.”

I was saying this right from the start when all those idiots were waving the "No Nukes!" signs. Nukes= nuclear weapons, NOT nuclear power plants.

One reason is that they feel closer than ever to finally achieving their goal of nonproliferation, or at least winning an international commitment to that goal. Hopes are high that U.S. President Barack Obama will visit Hiroshima before his term ends. If realized, it would mark the first ever visit by an American president in office. And they fear that allying with Fukushima too much may derail that effort.

So, instead of any actual important reason, they would rather go for the stupid slap on the back "we-brought-a-serving-president-here" reason.

They are also ignoring the obvious, screamingly obvious, point about how Hiroshima and Fukushima are different: Hiroshima happened because Japan started a war with the U.S. and it's allies after decades of barbarism in Asia; Fukushima was caused by a disaster and incompetence.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Remember Sadako Sasaki? She died in 1955, ten years after Hiroshima. She died from leukemia. If she instead had thyroid cancer, she no doubt would have died from that too.

Of course when today's kids get thyroid cancer from Fukushima it will be treatable. And at least 12 children from Fukushima have gotten it so far. Besides Fukushima, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, can you think of anything else that led to a bunch of kids getting thyroid cancer all the sudden?

Even after Hiroshima, it took several years to notice the rise in leukemia among children. Sadako's leukemia was not found until 1954. Did you think Fukushima would be faster?

Why are some of you so hell bent on denying the nuclear/radiation connections between Fukushima and Hiroshima? We are talking about a level 7 nuclear event here. You may not fully realize the severity until 2020 AD, but I don't think we need to wait around until we get "2020" hindsight to make the comparison.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

And at least 12 children from Fukushima have gotten it so far.

Did you think Fukushima would be faster?

You've just contradicted yourself. .

But just to repeat what I posted earlier:

Given what we know about radiation dose and time elapsed since the accident,” says Thomas, “I personally cannot see how this finding can be related to the radiation — the doses were too low and the time too short, based on what we know from Chernobyl.” (Professor Gerry Thomas, renowned scientist on thyroid cancer from radiation'.)

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

ControlFreak,

The government checked kids elsewhere in Japan with the same type of equipment used for the thyroid checks in Fukushima. They found the rates similar, and the rates for large cysts and lumps were lower in Fukushima than in the other areas.

Here's the link:

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201303090076

Also, there was a news report on NHK last week about the kids in Namie, who were funded by the town to take a chromosomal aberration test to see if they were suffering from radiation-induced damage. There was not a stats breakdown, but the kid who was the focus of the piece had no abnormalities found. Surprised that no one is reporting on how that study is progressing. Good news is no news perhaps?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

You've just contradicted yourself.

@Heda_Madness--Only one who has not appreciation for the complexity of the situation would say that. The accident is ongoing. Making direct traces to the accident will be impossible. But with Hiroshima, there was no internal resistance to the obvious source of the sicknesses. Now we are up against big money and their shills. I use the term "we" loosely.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

ControlFreak,

More like we are up against conspiracy theorists and those who profit from their theories. There are a wide range of people who either wish the people of Fukushima to suffer from radiation-induced diseases, or want them to think they will, in order to boost their public profiles. Facts cannot be allowed to get in the way of that.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Really - you've said that already 12 children have thyroid cancer as a result of Fukushima. And then you've said that it won't be felt for years.

Yet the experts are saying that the health risks have been, and continue to be massively over played.

In the town of Miharu, about 50 km from the stricken power plant, Hayano’s team monitored 95 percent of schoolchildren (aged 6-15). The radioactive cesium in the bodies of all the children was below the detection limit. In other words, they are emphatically not eating food contaminated with radiation. JapanTimes, September 2013. There are plenty of other similar stories. But it seems that you're not interested in facts or science.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@Star-viking--You know, its odd. You tell us that Fukushima has a similar rate of child thyroid cancer as everyone else with a link dating from March. I punch the relevant info into a search engine and get info from August saying that in 2006 46 young adults and children under 20 developed thyroid cancer in all of Japan. 46. How does that compare to the 18 who have it and the 25 suspected in Fukushima alone? Fukushima is only one prefecture among 47, and is ranked 17th by population. One kid for every prefecture in 2006 but now 18 confirmed for Fukushima alone?

http://nuclear-news.net/2013/08/22/normally-rare-in-children-thyroid-cancer-in-18-fukushima-children/

And like I keep saying, the disaster is ongoing and many of not most cases take years to develop. But we have 18 already.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

But we have 18 already. “I personally cannot see how this finding can be related to the radiation — the doses were too low and the time too short, based on what we know from Chernobyl.”

Dr Gerry Thomas. http://www.imperial.ac.uk/AP/faces/pages/read/Home.jsp?person=geraldine.thomas&_adf.ctrl-state=17hfrfx8yh_3&_afrRedirect=873759610203024

Perhaps you could post your expertise and say why she, the person who has been studying this for the past 20 years is wrong.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

@Heda Madness--What did Dr. Thomas say that you accuse me of contradicting? BTW, your first link in this thread does not work. If its there, I can't see it.

Why do think the situation in the tiny town of Miharu in the middle of Fukushima can possibly hold a candle to my comparison of nation-wide data and that pertaining to the entire prefecture?? How does that prove an over-playing of fears? Do you think the plume of radioactive debris spread evenly over the prefecture? The tiny town of Miharu may have been missed altogether.

Really - you've said that already 12 children have thyroid cancer as a result of Fukushima. And then you've said that it won't be felt for years.

That is not what I said. I said it took several years to notice the rise of leukemia in Hiroshima. Leukemia is not thyroid cancer. And of course the 1950s were a lot different to the 2010s with our understanding of radiation related illnesses and our ability to detect them. Regardless, its going to take years to realize the full impact.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

The first links hows how the meedia have got it all wrong. At least according to American scientists.

I used that story as it came from a peer reviewed report by scientists. There are many, many similar reports from scientists that say that this is not as bad as you say it is.

I am genuinely interested to know your scientific background. I'm presuming you have a doctorate in something relevant. Or are all of your posts based on radiation = death.

Thyroid cancer didn't show in Chernobyl for about 5 years. People around Chernobyl had far greater contamination from the initial explosion and then continued to ingest radiation through milk and other foodstuffs. Didn't happen in Japan. So despite the fact it's less radiation. That the children haven't eaten anywhere near the level of contamination that the children of Chernobyl had and despite everything the experts say. You claim that 12 children have thyroid cancer as a direct result of Fukushima.

Of the 90,000 who survived Hiroshima, there were 527 cancer deaths and 103 Leukaemia. And you think that 12 people have already got thyroid cancer as a direct result of something that is incomparable.

You haven't produced any facts, or any science. And that's for a reason.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

You haven't produced any facts, or any science.

18 kids have thyroid cancer in Fukushima. This is known because the prefecture gave kids free medical checks. I guess they were not smart enough to wait 5 years. You saying that were dumb to check for thyroid cancer? You saying the 18 are a fiction?

Thyroid cancer didn't show in Chernobyl for about 5 years.

The accident was 1986. Thyroid cancers in children though were shown to increase in only one year.

Typical latency time of radiation-induced thyroid cancer is about 10 years, but the increase in childhood thyroid cancers in some regions was observed as early as 1987.

From wiki under the article Effects of the Chernobyl disaster under the sub-heading "civilians".

I am genuinely interested to know your scientific background. I'm presuming you have a doctorate in something relevant. Or are all of your posts based on radiation = death.

And I am genuinely interested to know why you have this chip on your shoulder. Does it come with ad space for rent?

My posts only say that radiation=cancer. Do I need a doctorate to say that now?

Do I need a doctorate to read what an article clearly says? Or to tell the difference between leukemia and thyroid cancer? The difference between children and adults?

0 ( +5 / -5 )

I'm not disputing that 18 children have cancer. I'm disputing that that cancer is as a direct result of Fukushima. Which is precisely what the experts have said. The person who's studied it for 20 years is disputing it. As are countless other scientists around the world.

I know that the accident happened in 1986, I studied it. And thanks for the personal attack, that usually happens when you don't have any substance to hold an argument. So you resort to name calling.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

ControlFreak,

If you consider that the normal way Thyroid Cancer is detected is for people to attend the doctor with lumps on their thyroid that can be felt, as opposed to having a very accurate ultrasound inspection, that can explain the apparent leap in thyroid cancers found in Fukushima.

The main form of thyroid cancer is very slow growing, but with the ultrasound examination even these can be found. Normally these cancers wold have taken years to grow large enough to be felt in a normal examination, so what we are finding are not only cancers that would naturally be found in children - but also those which would have shown up years later, when the children become adults. The stats for kids are not appropriate here.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Heda:

Of the 90,000 who survived Hiroshima, there were 527 cancer deaths and 103 Leukaemia. And you think that 12 people have already got thyroid cancer as a direct result of something that is incomparable.

What was the amount and types of radionuclides in Hiroshima vs. Fukushima from 3/11 and on-going?

What is your prognostic for radiation/contamination induced illnesses by these three core meltdowns and on-going releases in 20 years?

Why bothering and spending billions to try to contain this mess if there is no risk? Just let it go!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Well the international experts say that few cancers will develop because of this. They highlight that there hasn’t been that much radiation released and that it hasn’t entered the food chain. These are the people who base their careers on these statements. The ones who are the world leader’s in their field. Their findings have also been picked up from the leading mainstream science magazines such as the New Scientist, Discovery and other leading publications such as Forbes. As quoted above even the Japan Times has picked up on it. See their article talking about Fukushima as a PR crisis. Dr Geraldine Thomas has gone on record as saying ‘ "None of this is going to do anything health-wise,"’ Now you may think she’s a crank but her credentials are unquestionable. She’s just one of a multitude of experts who say that the risk from Fukushima is nowhere near what has been reported in the media and repeated by bloggers. It’s based on Science and facts. Not conjecture.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

After the explosions and meltdowns at Fukushima the Japanese government blocked the release of data showing the amount of radioactivity released.Radiation has and is being released from the melted fuel,the broken fuel rods in the spent fuel pool and the myriad other pieces of exploded reactor debris scattered here and there. All experts in the field or otherwise are working with 'incorrect data' thus whatever opinion given on this basis is false.

At present data is being collected on genetic abnormalities but not released to the public. The official government line is that nobody has died from radiation poisoning. The Japanese government has a history of colluding with industrial polluters to smother the facts. The Minata poisoning case is an example of this,failure to compensate victims of air pollution is another.

Radioactive emissions cause damage at the cellular level and will cause humans (at the top of the food chain) a myriad of problems.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

After the explosions and meltdowns at Fukushima the Japanese government blocked the release of data showing the amount of radioactivity released.

But none of the independent researchers have shown anything other than what would be expected.

Radiation has and is being released from the melted fuel ,the broken fuel rods in the spent fuel pool and the myriad other pieces of exploded reactor debris scattered here and there. All experts in the field or otherwise are working with 'incorrect data' thus whatever opinion given on this basis is false.

So EVERY expert in the world is wrong? What an incredible statement.

At present data is being collected on genetic abnormalities but not released to the public. The official government line is that nobody has died from radiation poisoning. The Japanese government has a history of colluding with industrial polluters to smother the facts. The Minata poisoning case is an example of this,failure to compensate victims of air pollution is another. Radioactive emissions cause damage at the cellular level and will cause humans (at the top of the food chain) a myriad of problems.

Yet the scientists say differently. But then again, you’ve already dismissed their work as based on incorrect information. I look forward to you receiving your Nobel Prize for Science. You’re clearly better placed than the scientific community.

None of the naysayers have produced anything other than conjecture. Because you can't.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

These are the people who base their careers on these statements.

@Heda_Madness--And those who say positive things will surely make more money than those who say negative things. John Q Public does not pay nearly as well as Montgomery Burns.

We have a level 7 nuclear accident that is on-going, we have people doing decontamination work with nothing but pressure hoses, and every bit of important information we get late, leaving people to wonder what really happened at a time its too late to confirm anything via independent sources.

We have a government that suddenly raised their acceptable limits for radiation in food and decided to ship Fukushima debris all around the country to be incinerated despite those incineration facilities having no means of holding back radioactive particles. We have the original incompetence of TEPCO that caused the accident in the first place, and we have their ongoing incompetence which has led to massive radioactive water dumps in the ocean. We have farmers plowing the top soil under before properly scrapping off the surfaces in places where farming should just plain be banned. Fishing off the coast has resumed just in time for the Olympics. There is so much hanky panky and hocus pocus going on I scarcely know how anyone could have confidence that even the most honest experts have enough facts to say much of anything.

I am doing my best to take each piece of information as it comes and weigh it against all else that is available. As such I am neither positive about all this nor am I predicting mass doom and gloom and certain death. There are going to be problems, that is for sure. But what disturbs me most of all is how this is going to affect children. There is little doubt that there will be increases in cancers among them. There is about as much sense in downplaying that as there is saying they will all get cancer. There are going to be cancer increases for sure in the next ten years, dozens at least, but more likely hundreds, perhaps even thousands. Bet on it. Its not Chernobyl, but its bad enough.

And as such I find comparing Fukushima to Hiroshima apt as far as the radiation goes.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

This board is incredible. We want non Japanese opinion. Yeah but those guys work for the nuclear industry.

Incredible. Everyone. Scientists. New Scientist. Forbes. Discovery Magazine. WHO. ALL. Cancer specialists. Every single one of them. They all work for the nuclear industry.

That's the only possible conclusion isn't it. Because the alternative, that this has been blown out of all proportion and the risks have been overhyped by a media desperate for a story and none of it is scientific is out of the question. Because radiation is bad. Radiation causes cancer. And radiation kills. And everyone who says differently. The scientists. The doctors. What could they possibly know.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Heda,

No matter how much scientific proof you use to try to convince your opponents here, most will continue to insist/believe that everybody, all media, scientific institutions, etc. work for the nuclear industry. Everybody is in against them. Unfortunately, it shows how we humans would not even try to hear reason once we have decided that we are right about something.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Heda_Madness

Incredible. Everyone. Scientists. New Scientist. Forbes. Discovery Magazine. WHO. ALL. Cancer specialists. Every single one of them. They all work for the nuclear industry.

That's the only possible conclusion isn't it. Because the alternative, that this has been blown out of all proportion and the risks have been overhyped by a media desperate for a story and none of it is scientific is out of the question. Because radiation is bad. Radiation causes cancer. And radiation kills. And everyone who says differently. The scientists. The doctors. What could they possibly know.

In full agreement. There are people on this board who are literally waiting, wishing for kids to die to confirm their conspiracy theories. Anything which runs counter to those theories has to be rejected out of hand. The thing is, they may get their wish: what kind of lifestyle choices will kids take when they are told their lives are tainted? Tobacco, alcohol, drugs, and other forms of self-harm.

ControlFreak,

We have a government that suddenly raised their acceptable limits for radiation in food and decided to ship Fukushima debris all around the country to be incinerated despite those incineration facilities having no means of holding back radioactive particles.

Japanese limits for radiation is food are the most stringent in the world. As for the debris being shipped around the country - the debris came from the uncontaminated areas of Miyagi, Iwate and Fukushima. In fact, if you look at the contamination map of Tohoku it is largely inland - the tsunami debris comes from the coastal areas.

We have the original incompetence of TEPCO that caused the accident in the first place, and we have their ongoing incompetence which has led to massive radioactive water dumps in the ocean.

Don't forget the tsunami too. As for the "massive" radioactive water dumps - funnily enough these massive contamination events are not having a measurable effect on the ocean. Dilution, seemingly, works wonders.

We have farmers plowing the top soil under before properly scrapping off the surfaces in places where farming should just plain be banned. Fishing off the coast has resumed just in time for the Olympics.

Really? Do you have references for these farming areas?

As for the fishing, I'm sure that the fish caught will be pretty thoroughly examined.

There is so much hanky panky and hocus pocus going on I scarcely know how anyone could have confidence that even the most honest experts have enough facts to say much of anything.

And yet they say a lot. Dr Ken Buessler, who gets misquoted often by people who want to hype the fear, says there is little harm in eating fish caught off Fukushima. In fact, in checking the radioactive cesium levels in fish he caught in his cruise off Fukushima he found that the naturally-occuring polonium-210, the famous KGB poison, was present in amounts thousands of time more than cesium. This polonium is in every seafish you eat, and yet we still live.

Ref: http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=83397&tid=3622&cid=94989

I am doing my best to take each piece of information as it comes and weigh it against all else that is available.

Well why are you so fast to dismiss the findings of experts that I and Heda_Madness have detailed? Whose research causes you to dismiss these experts? Why do you insit there is an outbreak of thyroid cancer in Fukushima kids when the evidence suggests otherwise?

There are going to be cancer increases for sure in the next ten years, dozens at least, but more likely hundreds, perhaps even thousands. Bet on it. Its not Chernobyl, but its bad enough.

There may be a few, but even if there are, those increases will be outweighed by ill-health cause by stress, bad lifestyle choices, and fossil fuel pollutants that are currently being pumped into the atmosphere to cover the NPPs that are currently shuttered.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

So, this is why insects (short life cycle) are showing defects at a rate of 10% even now? Much more than by chance - what causes genetic abnormality? Yes Heda work it out yourself....

http://news.keitousagi.com/archives/435

In Japanese, but links to sites reporting in English.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Is and has the Japanese government coveried up figures on released radiation? Yes PM Abe has blatantly assured the world that Fukushima has and never will cause a problem when 1.radioactively contaminated 'everything' is being spread all over Japan. 2.Why has the US banned food imports from 14 Japanese prefectures that reach as far south as Chiba? 3.Why are professors finding 10% of insect species ( aphids) in Fukushima without legs or eyes?

Want to buy Japanese sushi in Korea?

You can't can you!

Why have Mongolia and Russia refused Japanese cars?

It isn't due to their high levels of radioactivity is it?

So, the world is incorrect and Japan is correct?

I could go on and on but I'm trying to locate my greens sourced away from Tohoku.....

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

kurisupisu,

Is and has the Japanese government coveried up figures on released radiation? Yes

Rubbish. The NRAs provides up-to-date radioation data for Japan and the area around Fukushima Daiichi:

http://radioactivity.nsr.go.jp/en/

1.radioactively contaminated 'everything' is being spread all over Japan.

Please elaborate, especially what you mean by 'everything'

2.Why has the US banned food imports from 14 Japanese prefectures that reach as far south as Chiba?

The US FDA targets only food from Japan thich is likely to contain radionuclide contamination. id does so using a list of products that are banned from public sale in Japan.

Refs:http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/publichealthfocus/ucm247403.htm http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_621.html

3.Why are professors finding 10% of insect species ( aphids) in Fukushima without legs or eyes?

Not professors, but Professor. He has only had a news story posted in a local newspaper about aphid deformations, and has not reported on his checks in Chiba or Hokkaido yet, and not published a scientific paper on the matter - even though the newspaper story is over one year old. Maybe he's found his research is not solid enough?

I could go on and on but I'm trying to locate my greens sourced away from Tohoku.....

Why not try greens from Gunma, Ibaraki, or Tochigi?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

1.radioactively contaminated 'everything' is being spread all over Japan.

Radioactively contaminated everything at levels substantially higher than anything seen in Japan were being spread all over Western Europe in 1986. And with the obvious exception of the immediate surrounding area around Chernobyl we haven't seen any obvious health issues.

2.Why has the US banned food imports from 14 Japanese prefectures that reach as far south as Chiba?

The US has banned food that is also banned in Japan. Certain foods are more susceptible for radiation which is why there were so many issues in Chernobyl. The government continued to allow food to be supplied to the people despite what scientists have said. Incidentally, the US has a safety limit for radiation in food that is 12 times that of Japan. In other words, the US has banned food in complete disregard to their own standards.

Want to buy Japanese sushi in Korea? You can't can you!

Of the 196 countries, one has banned sushi. A country which traditionally has issues with Japan.

Why have Mongolia and Russia refused Japanese cars? It isn't due to their high levels of radioactivity is it?

Radioactive cars? Ludicrous.

So, the world is incorrect and Japan is correct?

You've listed 4 countries in the world. One of which is copying precisely what Japan has done, even though it's acceptable levels are different.

I could go on and on but I'm trying to locate my greens sourced away from Tohoku..

Please continue to go on. I'll keep Googling and find the responses.h

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Because the alternative, that this has been blown out of all proportion and the risks have been overhyped by a media desperate for a story and none of it is scientific is out of the question.

Pointing out the fact that it will take years for most of the cancers to develop is not blowing anything out of proportion.

Pointing out the fact that Fukushima already has 18 children with thyroid cancer in a country that had only one for every prefecture in 2006 is not over-hyping anything. And is scientific.

Some people will take facts and extrapolate beyond reason, but that does not mean we should cover up and tip-toe around facts.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Pointing out that 18 children have cancer in Fukushima have cancer is a fact. Saying that they are caused as a direct result of Fukushima accident is not a fact and not scientific. It's disputed by the international science community, by the doctors who have the expertise.

It's your opinion that these cancers have been caused as a direct result of the Fukushima incident.

The world's experts on the matter don't agree and I'd like to know why you are better qualified to say that they are than the people who spend their professional life living and breathing this subject.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

ControlFreak,

Pointing out the fact that Fukushima already has 18 children with thyroid cancer in a country that had only one for every prefecture in 2006 is not over-hyping anything. And is scientific.

And as I described on sept 30th at 8:15pm, there are good reasons why more cancers than the normal rate are being detected: the detection method is much more powerful than the usual one. It's like comparing counting all the stars in the sky by eye, then doing so with the Hubble Space Telescope: the Hubble will find more, but that does not mean that more stars have suddenly appeared in the sky.

Being scientific means being prepared to dig deeper, verify sources, and acknowledging new information and ideas. What do you think of my new information?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites