ICRP, WHO and UNSCEAR and their effect on the Fukushima children
“….the Ordinance on Prevention of Ionizing Radiation Hazards in Japan,
which requires that areas where radiation dose shall not exceed 50mSv/year and 100mSv/5years ….”
Published by nuclear-news.net
28 May 2013
Below are some extracts from the recent report responding to the report that Anand grover compiled in November 2012. The extracts describe The Japanese Governments responses and requests for amendments. As i read through the document and especially the section at the end of the document, highlighting all the changes that were requested and acted on, it became apparent that the ICRP, WHO and UNSCEAR were quoted.
Doses were not including internal doses of released radionuclide’s. The Japanese Government also noted that they had no interest in specific isotopes such s Strontium 90 .
The normal background level in Japan is said to be 2.1 mSv/y and the USA and Europe are quoted as being nearly as bad at approx 3 mSv/y, making an extra 1 mSv/y from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan seem normal.
Oddly enough, as i sit here typing i am getting a steady 0.11 mcSv/hr after rain in London (one of the worst polluted cities in Europe because of nuclear MOX processing and waste – NO2 and associated radon Daughters), that gives me a normal background of just under 1 mSv/y. So how do the Japanese (supported by the ICRP and UNSCEAR) work the annual doses out to 3 mSv/y?
Also, according to Safecast citizen radiation monitoring, the levels are more in line with my London reading in many parts of Japan presently. The Japanese officials would have us believe a 3 mSv/y is only 1mSv/y more than background??
So, the citizens of Fukushima and Myagi have three times normal (not including hot spots – A term banned on the Japanese critique) than measured in the “real world” and added to that locals are also more likely to accumulate isotopes through their environment (food, air and water).
It is likely that these areas have statistically higher than the nationally estimated 50 percent of contaminated food (the reason for the lower allowable levels of Cesium in Japan at 100 bq/kg as opposed to the standard 1000 bq/kg elsewhere)
The blood tests that were mentioned may have included the recent chromosome based blood test for damage from ionising radiation that the Japanese government has recently rejected for the People of Fukushima on ethical grounds (It might find illegitimate children) . In this reports response the Japanese representatives do not want any blood tests at all it would seem.
I hope this helps to stimulate some discussion. The children of Fukushima need us to discuss this health issue as the nuclear lobby is having a lot of meetings and not telling anyone. They are changing the rules to suit the nuclear industry and mitigate any future legal claims made against them. No media are challenging this or even reporting it.
The rest of the report s here..
(c) Incorporate validated independent data, including that from the communities, to monitor radiation levels.
Concerning radiation monitoring, the central government has implemented
precise monitoring activities in cooperation with relevant organizations in line with the Overall Coordinated Radiation Monitoring Plan developed by the central government . Under the plan, it is required that the quality and validation of monitoring data taken and provided by relevant organizations should be ensured by making them open to the public. In this regard, the
organizations of radiation monitoring have been required to adhere to the plan described above . The central government has continued to implement radiation monitoring activities with the ensured quality and validation of monitoring data.
79. Regarding decontamination, the Special Rapporteur urges the Government to
adopt the following recommendations
(a)Formulate urgently a clear, time – bound plan to reduce radiation levels to less than 1mSv/year; It is a long – term goal in the areas with less than 20 mSv/year that additional exposure dose would become less than 1 mSv/year.
It is a long-term goal in the areas with less than 20 mSv/year that additional exposure dose would become less than 1 mSv/year.
In relation to compensation and relief, the Special Rapporteur urges the
Government to implement the following recommendations:
(a) Formulate, with the participation of the affected communities, the implementing framework under the Victims Support Law;
The Government of Japan is currently studying it. In the process, we are
listening to the views of victims.
(b) Include cost of reconstruction and restoration of lives within the relief package;
The Government of Japan has taken and will continue to take necessary measures for alleviating the burden on the victims.
One of the corrections to this document on Page 26
“…the Ordinance on Prevention of Ionizing Radiation Hazards in Japan,
which requires that areas where radiation dose exceeds 1.3mSv/quarterly
be designated as controlled zones the radiation exposure dose
“…shall not exceed 50mSv/year and 100mSv/5years…”
One of the documents recommended by the ICRP to prove their case and edit Anand Grovers report.
The annals of the ICRP Special Japanese nuclear disaster edition
8 Comments »
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- indigenous issues
- marketing of nuclear
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- weapons and war
- 2 WORLD
- MIDDLE EAST
- NORTH AMERICA
- SOUTH AMERICA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- global warming
- RARE EARTHS
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- World Nuclear