nuclear-news

How UNSCEAR fooled the world on health effects on Fukushima children

“…There are also some other inconsistencies in the UNSCEAR report regarding the Fukushima thyroid examinations.
While the report was released in April of 2014, it only used the data ofthe thyroid examinations up to July 31st, 2013. More current publications by Fukushima Medical University from November 12th, 2013 and February 7th, 2014 were not included, even though the number of diagnosed thyroid cancers has increased from the 9 cases mentioned in UNSCEAR’s report to the current number of 33…”

“….UNSCEAR fails to mention, however, that the cohorts were not matched for age, sex or other demographic characteristics and consisted primarily of students from institutions associated with national universities, not representative of the general population…..”

“….”The prevalence of clinically occult small papillary thyroid cancers could be as high as 35% in many parts of the world,” suggesting that the high rates of cancers found in the Fukushima thyroid examinations are simply screening effects and that other pediatric populations would have similar rates of cancer if screened . This statement, however, is solely based on a Finnish autopsy study, which, interestingly enough, mentions a prevalence of 27% and not 35% and specifically found
no clinically occult thyroid cancers in children under the age of 18….”

Image source ; http://blogs.reuters.com/photographers-blog/2014/03/10/fukushimas-children/

Comment by Shaun McGee

Contributer to Nuclear-news.net

Posted on 7 June 2014

These are extracts from a new report that has analysed the UNSCEAR 2013 fukushima report on the health effects from the Fukushima nuclear disaster of 2011. This critique of the methodology employed by UNSCEAR to form their report was done by a number of health professionals from around the world. This part of the report looks at the issues concerning the reports of “no health effects on children from radiation from the nuclear disaster” that is claimed by many pro nuclear officials. The full report is here;

http://www.fukushima-disaster.de/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/english/Akzente_Unscear2014.pdf

A recent meta-analysis found that “qualitative and quantitative physiological and epidemiological evidence supports infants being more vulnerable to cancer” and estimated that infants have about 10 times higher radiation risks per unit close when it comes to radioactive fallout than adults,265 while the more conservative International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) assumes that the sensitivity to ionizing radiation in young children and fetuses is higher than in adults by only a factor of 3.266 Several international studies also found that thyroid nodules in children have a much higher malignancy rate than in adults, between 2 and 50%.

It becomes clear that any assessment of thyroid pathologies in the wake of a nuclear disaster needs to adopt a differentiated approach towards the different age groups. Looking at the methodology of the UNSCEAR close assessments, it is highly questionable whether all of these factors were appropriately taken into consideration.

Image source ;https://nuclear-news.net/2013/03/22/fukushima-deletes-radiation-data-needed-for-exposure-assessment/

While it is often claimed by the nuclear lobby that the rise of thyroid cancer is of relatively small concern clue to
good treatment options, we should not underestimate the impact of such diseases on children and their families.
The necessary operation and removal of the entire thyroid carries with it notjust a psychological impact, but also
certain perioperative risks connected with general anesthesia and the close proximity of the vagus nerve to the
operation field.

The lifelong need to take artificial thyroid hormones, frequent medical follow-ups, blood tests, ultrasounds, possibly fine-needle biopsies and the constant fear of a possible relapse are all very serious issues for the individual patients and their families. The US National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) estimates that 7% of thyroid cancers caused by radiation would be fatal. This would mean that of the approximately 1,000 estimated excess cases of thyroid cancers, about 70 would lead to death. The number of non-fatal cases, which lead to substantial hospitalization and loss of quality of life cannot be adequately assessed, but also have to be taken into consideration.

In addition to the predictions of future thyroid cancer cases on the basis of close estimates, there is already epidemiological data available from the first round of thyroid examinations on children aged 18 or less on 11 March
2011, performed between October 2011 and March 2014. It is important to note that from this first round
of screening, it is not possible to make assertions regarding the incidence of thyroid cancer, as the screening of
the entire cohort of children in the prefecture yields the prevalence (i.e. the total number of cases in the population) of thyroid cancers and only future screenings will reveal the incidence (i.e. the rise in numbers from year to year).

So far, the prevalence of tumor-suspect thyroid biopsies in Fukushima is 29.1 per 100,000 children under the age of 18 (absolute number: 74) and the prevalence of confirmed cases of thyroid cancer 13.0 per 100,000 (absolute number 33). In comparison, the incidence of thyroid cancer in Japanese youths (< 19 years) in the years 2000 to 2007 was 0.35 per 100,000.22” While we cannot directly compare the prevalence found in the screening program to the incidence levels before the Fukushima disaster, this is nonetheless a worrying number, with the numbers of detected thyroid cancers higher than expected.

The assurance in the UNSCEAR report that these cases of thyroid cancer in Fukushima are “consistent with results
from a study of a cohort of Ukrainians (the “UkrAm cohort”) who had been exposed during childhood or adolescence to 131I from the Chernobyl accident” is difficult to accept, as it is not explained how supposed “non-radiation-related” thyroid cancer cases were differentiated from those with a “radiation-relation” in a population of irradiated children in the Soviet Union in the late 1980’s, when modern ultrasound devices were not available and where, clue to governmental restrictions and limited resources, little scientific workup actually took place.

There are also some other inconsistencies in the UNSCEAR report regarding the Fukushima thyroid examinations.
While the report was released in April of 2014, it only used the data ofthe thyroid examinations up to July 31st,
2013. More current publications by Fukushima Medical University from November 12th, 2013 and February 7th,
2014 were not included, even though the number of diagnosed thyroid cancers has increased from the 9 cases mentioned in UNSCEAR’s report to the current number of 33, with another 42 suspect malignancy cases waiting for further diagnostics. Even with an understanding that the Fukushima thyroid examination is an ongoing process and that secondary examination for the first round is not yet complete, UNSCEAR could strive to incorporate the latest results with an accurate number of cancer cases, instead of mentioning just part of the available results.

Moreover, UNSCEAR cites an ultrasound examination in the prefectures of Aomori, Nagasaki and Yamanashi as a
comparison study, supposedly representing the normal baseline risks.
UNSCEAR fails to mention, however, that the cohorts were not matched for age, sex or other demographic characteristics and consisted primarily of students from institutions associated with national universities, not representative of the general population. In addition, the length of ultrasound examination was said to be longer for this study, potentially leading to more detailed examination than the Fukushima examination.

Instead, UNSCEAR cited a review article published on December 3rd, 2013, stating, “The prevalence of clinically
occult small papillary thyroid cancers could be as high as 35% in many parts of the world,” suggesting that the high
rates of cancers found in the Fukushima thyroid examinations are simply screening effects and that other pediatric
populations would have similar rates of cancer if screened . This statement, however, is solely based on a Finnish autopsy study, which, interestingly enough, mentions a prevalence of 27% and not 35% and specifically found
no clinically occult thyroid cancers in children under the age of 18. This fact is not mentioned by UNSCEAR, as it
contradicts the screening effect hypothesis.

Contributers to critique

June 7, 2014 - Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized