FUKUSHIMA A RECORD OF LIVING THINGS

“The Fukushima nuclear disaster must have brought about huge damage not only to us humans, but also to countless animals”
A sad video from 2016, by director Masanori Iwasaki
in 4 episodes, about 3mins each
Advertisements

Vietnam’s ex-president admits Fukushima disaster played role in ditching foray into atomic power

n-namnuke-a-20171204.jpg
HO, CHI MINH CITY – Vietnam last year abandoned plans to build its first nuclear power plants with Japanese and Russian assistance due to heightened concern over the safety of atomic power following events including the Fukushima disaster, according to former President Truong Tan Sang.
“The situation in the world had changed,” Sang, 68, said in an interview in Ho Chi Minh City on Thursday. “Due to the fluctuations of the world situation, the Vietnamese people were very worried, especially the people in the area where the nuclear power plants were to be located. They had reactions. Therefore, we had to temporarily halt (the plans).”
The interview was his first with a foreign media outlet since stepping down from the post in April last year.
In scrapping the plans to build two multibillion-dollar nuclear plants in November last year, the government cited the country’s tight financial situation, claiming at the time that safety was not an issue.
On Vietnam’s territorial row with China in the South China Sea, Sang said his country welcomes the concerns of countries in and outside the region to contribute to ensuring peace and stability in the strategic waterway.
“We protect our interests on the basis of international law, and at the same time we also respect the interests of the countries concerned on the basis of international law,” he said.
“Japan is very close to Vietnam’s view,” he added, expressing hope for Tokyo’s continued support for its stance in the dispute.
On the economic front, he praised Japan for its active promotion of globalization, especially after U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free trade agreement signed by 12 nations, including Vietnam and Japan.
“(Prime Minister) Shinzo Abe was one of the first leaders to promote and connect remaining countries together. As a result, at the APEC meeting in Danang recently, the TPP 11 meeting successfully took place,” he said.
On bilateral relations, he said the relationship between the two countries is “very good. There is no obstacle.”
“The extensive strategic partnership in all areas has been strengthened, bringing clear benefits,” he said.
By taking advantage of Japan’s advanced technology and Vietnam’s abundant natural and human resources, he expressed hope for greater cooperation in areas such as high-quality infrastructure, high-tech agriculture and renewable energy.
“Vietnam learns from the experience and realities of countries around the world to perfect the organizational model of our political system,” he said, indicating the necessity of reform of Vietnam’s ruling Communist Party and government based on global trends and the domestic situation.

Marine radioecology after the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear accident: Are we better positioned to understand the impact of radionuclides in marine ecosystems?

1-s2.0-S0048969717330747-fx1_lrg.jpg
Highlights
• Marine radioecology studies at the FDNPP coast: process-based modelling and field investigations
• Dynamic modelling of transfer between seawater, sediments and the biological compartments
• New data on submarine groundwater discharges and ocean circulation of radionuclides
• We formulate a strategy for marine radioecology based on processes-based research.
• We highlight the need for more ecology knowledge in marine radioecology.
Abstract
This paper focuses on how a community of researchers under the COMET (CO-ordination and implementation of a pan European projecT for radioecology) project has improved the capacity of marine radioecology to understand at the process level the behaviour of radionuclides in the marine environment, uptake by organisms and the resulting doses after the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear accident occurred in 2011. We present new radioecological understanding of the processes involved, such as the interaction of waterborne radionuclides with suspended particles and sediments or the biological uptake and turnover of radionuclides, which have been better quantified and mathematically described.
We demonstrate that biokinetic models can better represent radionuclide transfer to biota in non-equilibrium situations, bringing more realism to predictions, especially when combining physical, chemical and biological interactions that occur in such an open and dynamic environment as the ocean. As a result, we are readier now than we were before the FDNPP accident in terms of having models that can be applied to dynamic situations.
The paper concludes with our vision for marine radioecology as a fundamental research discipline and we present a strategy for our discipline at the European and international levels. The lessons learned are presented along with their possible applicability to assess/reduce the environmental consequences of future accidents to the marine environment and guidance for future research, as well as to assure the sustainability of marine radioecology. This guidance necessarily reflects on why and where further research funding is needed, signalling the way for future investigations.

Fukushima Cover-Up and Denial

735185_10204102131913471_4250740721271640913_n
Adam Broinowski, visiting research fellow at The Australian National University, 2017
Faced with the post-3.11 reality of government (and corporate) policy that protects economic and security interests over public health and well-being, the majority of the 2 million inhabitants of Fukushima Prefecture are either unconscious of or have been encouraged to accept living with radioactive contamination…
As Fukushima city resident Shiina Chieko observed, the majority of people seem to have adopted denial as a way to excise the present danger from their consciousness. Her sister-in-law, for example, ignored her son’s ‘continuous nosebleeds’, while her mother had decided that the community must endure by pretending that things were no different from pre-3.11 conditions. [Source: Shiina Chieko, interview with the author]…
Some, such as Yokota Asami (40 years old), a small business owner and mother from Kōriyama (60 km from FDNPS), demonstrated initiative in voluntarily evacuating her family. She decided to return (wearing goggles and a mask, she joked) in September 2011 when her son’s regular and continuous nosebleeds (in 30-minute spells) subsided. The Yokotas found themselves the victims of bullying when they called attention to radiation dangers… Her son was the only one to put up his hand when he was asked along with 300 fellow junior high school students if he objected to eating locally produced school lunches. He also chose not to participate in outdoor exercise classes and to go on respite trips instead. When it came time to take the high school entrance exam, he was told by the school principal that those who took breaks could not pass. He took the exam and failed. When he asked to see his results he found that he had, in fact, enough points to pass (the cut-off was 156 while he received 198 out of 250 points). [Source: Yokota Asami, interview with the author]…
Asami reported that doctors undertook paediatric thyroid operations while denying any correlation (inga kankei) with radiation exposures. They also urged their patients to keep their thyroid cancer a secret… Yokota also indicated she knew of students having sudden heart attacks and developing leukaemia and other illnesses. [Source: Yokota Asami, interview with the author]
This seems to be supported by Mr Ōkoshi, a Fukushima city resident, whose two daughters experienced stillbirths after 3.11. While Ōkoshi found that doctors have regularly advised women in the area to abort after 3.11, presumably to avoid miscarriages and defects, they do not discuss direct causes. He also observed regular illnesses experienced by many of his friends, and some sudden deaths. After a friend (62 years old) started saying strange things, he was diagnosed with brain dysfunction. He died quickly. Another friend (53 years old) was advised by a doctor to monitor a polyp in her breast. When she sought second opinions, she discovered she had accumulated an internal dose of 22 mSv and had a rapidly developing liver cancer. She also died quickly. [Source: Mr Ōkoshi, interview with the author]
There are many more such stories that are being actively ignored by the authorities. As Shiina put it, ‘we’re getting leukaemia and cataracts and we die suddenly. The TEPCO registrar has been inundated with complaints’. [Source: Shiina Chieko, interview with the author]

Fukushima Darkness, Part Two

9193574-16x9-large
by Robert Hunziker
The impact of Fukushima Daiichi’s nuclear meltdown extends far and wide, as the hemispheric ecosystem gets hit by tons of radioactive water. Additionally, surreptitiousness surrounds untold death and illness, yet it remains one of the least understood and deceitfully reported episodes of journalism in modern history.
At the same time as Japan passed its totalitarian secrecy act in December 2013, it passed an obstructive Cancer Registration Law, which made it illegal to share medical data or information on radiation-related issues, denying public access to medical records, with violators subject to fines of two million Yen or 5-10 years in prison, a pretty stiff penalty for peeking into medical records, giving the appearance of somebody running scared.
Furthermore, and more egregiously yet, a confidentiality agreement to control medical information about radiation exposure was signed in January 2014 by IAEA, UNSCEAR, and Fukushima Prefecture and Fukushima Medical University. Thereafter, all info of illness from radiation is reported to a central repository run by Fukushima Medical Centre and IAEA. In turn, the Fukushima Centre for Environmental Creation was created in 2015 to communicate “accurate information on radiation to the public and dispel anxiety.” Ahem!
Well now, isn’t that convenient, a central depository controlled by the International Atomic Energy Agency –IAEA- to report on Fukushima Daiichi radiation exposure and medical illness. It’s not hard to figure that’s rotten to the core, sounding a lot like words lifted directly off the pages of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949).
Meanwhile, much, but not all, mainstream media reports about radiation-induced illnesses and deaths at Fukushima are feeble grossly incompetent journalism, as follows: “The latest update (in April) by the World Nuclear Association re the Fukushima disaster: There have been no deaths or cases of radiation sickness from the nuclear accident…” (Source: Michael W. Chapman, 5 Years Later, Deaths Caused by Radiation Leak at Fukushima -O-, CNS News, May 11, 2016).
According to The World Nuclear Association, as of October 2017: “There have been no deaths or cases of radiation sickness from the nuclear accident, but over 100,000 people were evacuated from their homes to ensure this. Government nervousness delays the return of many.”
Here’s one more statement of zero deaths at Fukushima, by Hannah Ritchie, published in Our World in Data, July 24, 2017: “In the case of Fukushima, although 40-50 people experienced physical injury or radiation burns at the nuclear facility, the number of direct deaths from the incident are quoted to be zero.”
And one more, an article in Forbes by Dr. James Conca, an expert on energy, nuclear and dirty bombs, “After Five Years, What Is The Cost Of Fukushima?” d/d March 10, 2016: “Strangely, the costs that never materialized were the most feared, those of radiation-induced cancer and death… No one received enough dose, even the 20,000 workers who have worked tirelessly to recover form this event.”
Au contraire, it is believed that official reports of Fukushima radiation-induced sicknesses and deaths are horribly underreported and/or intentionally manipulated to show few, if any, cases. Based upon numerous testimonials obtained by independent journalists and researchers in Japan and U.S, attorneys, there is considerable evidence of radiation-induced deaths and sicknesses.
Seemingly, somebody is dead wrong on the issue of radiation-induced deaths, whether it’s (1) official sources via mainstream news or (2) independent researchers/journalists/U.S. attorneys that claim to personally know of deaths. One of those two sources is dead wrong and seriously misleading the world, which, in and of itself, should be classified as a criminal act, like the Nazi Nuremberg trials (1945-49). In point of fact, if it can be proven that people are covering up and/or lying about Fukushima radiation-induced illness and death, they should be tried and imprisoned, similar to Nazi war criminals. The implications of widespread radiation are not a trifle.
When it comes to uncontrollable radiation, there’s an ecumenical obligation for full transparency as a basic right for all humanity, worldwide.
“It’s a real shame that the authorities hide the truth from the whole world, from the UN. We need to admit that actually many people are dying. We are not allowed to say that, but TEPCO employees also are dying. But they keep mum about it,” Katsutaka Idogawa, former mayor of Futaba (Fukushima Prefecture), Fukushima Disaster: Tokyo Hides Truth as Children Die, Become Ill from Radiation – Ex-Mayor, RT News, April 21, 2014.
Individual medical doctors in Japan have reported serious radiation-related problems, for example: “In April 2014, Dr Tsuda Toshihide, an epidemiologist at Okayama University, declared this a ‘thyroid cancer epidemic’ and predicted multiple illnesses from long-term internal radiation below 100 mSv/y and advocated for a program of outbreak (emergency or rapid) epidemiology in and outside Fukushima.” (Source: Adam Broinowski, PhD (author of 25 major academic publications and Post Doctoral Research Fellow, Australian National University): “Informal Labour, Local Citizens and the Tokyo Electric Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Crisis: Responses to Neoliberal Disaster Management,” Australian National University, 2017.
“Similarly, a Tokyo-based physician, Dr Mita Shigeru, circulated a public statement notifying his colleagues of his intention to relocate his practice to Okayama due to overwhelming evidence of unusual symptoms in his patients (roughly 2,000). Given that soil in Tokyo post-Fukushima returned between 1,000 and 4,000 Bq/kg, as compared to an average of 500 Bq/kg (Cs 137 only) in Kiev soil, Mita pointed to a correlation between these symptoms and the significant radiation contamination in Tōhoku and metropolitan Tokyo.” (Broinowski)
“The ashes of half a dozen unidentified laborers ended up at a Buddhist temple in a town just north of the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant. Some of the dead men had no papers; others left no emergency contacts. Their names could not be confirmed and no family members had been tracked down to claim their remains. They were simply labeled “decontamination troops” — unknown soldiers in Japan’s massive cleanup campaign to make Fukushima livable again five years after radiation poisoned the fertile countryside,” (Source: Mari Yamaguchi, Fukushima ‘Decontamination Troops’ Often Exploited, Shunned, AP & ABC News, Minamisona, Japan, March 10, 2016).
Mako Oshidori, director of Free Press Corporation/Japan, investigated several unreported worker deaths, and interviewed a former nurse who quit TEPCO: “I would like to talk about my interview of a nurse who used to work at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) after the accident… He quit his job with TEPCO, and that’s when I interviewed him… As of now, there are multiple NPP workers that 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.” (Source: The Hidden Truth about Fukushima by Mako Oshidori, delivered at the International Conference, Effects of Nuclear Disasters on Natural Environment and Human Health held in Germany, 2014 co-organized by International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War).
“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… 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,” Ibid.
Greenpeace has been conducting radiation readings throughout Fukushima ever since 311. Accordingly, Greenpeace/Japan Press Release -Tokyo, 21 February 2017: “The Japanese government will soon lift evacuation orders for 6,000 citizens of Iitate village in Fukushima Prefecture where radiation levels in nearby forests are comparable to the current levels within the Chernobyl 30km exclusion zone – an area that more than 30 years after the accident remains formally closed to habitation. Seventy-five percent (75%) of Iitate is contaminated forested mountains.”
Over time, high levels of radiation from the mountains leach onto cleaned up areas down below. In point of fact, based upon several Greenpeace analyses throughout Fukushima Prefecture, former inhabitants of several communities are returning to towns and villages where spot checks show unacceptable levels of radiation.
“Faced with the post-311 reality of government (and corporate) policy that protects economic and security interests over public health and well-being, the majority of the 2 million inhabitants of Fukushima Prefecture are either unconscious of or have been encouraged to accept living with radioactive contamination. People dry their clothes outside, drink local tap water and consume local food, swim in outdoor pools and the ocean, consume and sell their own produce or catches. Financial pressure after 311 as well as the persistent danger of social marginalisation has made it more difficult to take precautionary measures (i.e. permanent relocation, dual accommodation, importing food and water) and develop and share counter-narratives to the official message. Nevertheless, some continue to conceal their anxiety beneath a mask of superficial calm.” (Broinowski)
“As Fukushima city resident Shiina Chieko observed, the majority of people seem to have adopted denial as a way to excise the present danger from their consciousness. Her sister-in-law, for example, ignored her son’s ‘continuous nosebleeds’; while her mother had decided that the community must endure by pretending that things were no different from pre-311 conditions.” (Broinowski)
Radiation exposure shows up years later as one of several illnesses. This gives the nuclear industry an advantage of time lapses in its position statements about the safety of nuclear energy. After all when enough time lapses, who knows for sure the cause of death?
However, Chernobyl provides a perfect case study of radiation-caused deaths of workers with a direct link, “liquidators,” exposed to Chernobly radiation (1986), keeping in mind that radiation takes several years to show up as cancer and other severe ailments:  “By 2001, of 800,000 healthy Russian and Ukrainian liquidators (with an average age of 33 years) sent to decontaminate, isolate and stabilise the reactor, 10 per cent had died and 30 per cent were disabled. By 2009, 120,000 liquidators had died, and an epidemic of chronic illness and genetic and perigenetic damage in nuclear workers’ descendants appeared (this is predicted to increase over subsequent generations). The full extent of the damage will not be understood until the fifth generation of descendants. By the mid-2000s, 985,000 additional deaths between 1986 and 2004 across Europe were estimated as a direct result from radiation exposure from Chernobyl.” (Broinowski)
Chernobyl likely foreshadows a dismal future for those exposed to Fukushima radiation whether residents, workers, or untold recipients throughout the extent of flowing seas, which is universal.
As Chernobyl clearly demonstrates: Over time, radiation cumulates in bodily organs. For an example of how radiation devastates human bodies generation by generation, consider: According to USA Today, Chernobyl’s Legacy: Kids With Bodies Ravaged by Disaster, April 17, 2016: “There are 2,397,863 people registered with Ukraine’s health ministry to receive ongoing Chernobyl-related health care. Of these, 453,391 are children — none born at the time of the accident. Their parents were children in 1986. These children have a range of illnesses: respiratory, digestive, musculoskeletal, eye diseases, blood diseases, cancer, congenital malformations, genetic abnormalities, trauma.”
As for Fukushima’s direct impact on Americans that helped at the time of the meltdowns, former Senator John Edwards is representing cancer-ridden sailors who interceded on a humanitarian basis aboard the USS Ronald Reagan. According to Edwards: “We have all these sailors. Sailors whose case is now five years old, who have died or are in the process of dying right now.” Edwards noted that some of his sailor clients have children born with birth defects. (Source: Bianca Bruno, Dying Navy Sailors Push for Trial on Fukushima Meltdown, Courthouse News.com, September 1, 2017).
Attorney Charles Bonner, representing US service members exposed to Fukushima fallout, Jul 21, 2015 (at 10:45 in on YouTube): We now have a 250+ young sailors with all kinds of illnesses, we’ve had three die. We had one of the sailors who came home and impregnated his wife. They gave birth to a little baby born with brain cancer and cancer down the spine, lived for two years, and just died in March of this year. (Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0zGbG2dTvo&feature=youtu.be&t=645)
TEPCO’s attorney Gregory Stone claims his client accepts responsibility for the radiation released but maintains the amount sailors were exposed to was negligible. Stone: “People get sick at different times of their lives for different reasons.”
As people unceremoniously, more times than not anonymously, die from radiation exposure, the Abe administration keeps a tight lid on the reality and the potency of Fukushima Daiichi radiation. And, when faced with the prospect of not knowing what to do, bring on the Olympics! That’s pretty good cover for a messy situation, making it appear to hundreds of thousands of attendees, as well as to the world community “all is well.”
But, is it really?
Postscript: “These sailors are supposed to be very healthy. It’s not a normal situation. It is unbelievable that just in four or five years that these healthy sailors would become sick… I think that both the U.S. and Japanese government have something to hide.” Former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan 2001-06 quoted in New York Times 12/31/2016.

Fukushima Darkness

“Japan is a totalitarian corporate state where corporate interests are protected from liability by layers of subcontractors and by vested interests of powerful political bodies and extremely harsh state secrecy laws. As such, it is believed that nuclear safety and health issues, including deaths, are underreported and likely not reported at all in most cases. Therefore, the worldview of nuclear power, as represented in Japan at Fukushima Daiichi, is horribly distorted in favor of nuclear power advocacy.”
Screen-Shot-2017-11-21-at-10.09.36-PM.png
The radiation effects of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant triple meltdowns are felt worldwide, whether lodged in sea life or in humans, it cumulates over time. The impact is now slowly grinding away only to show its true colors at some unpredictable date in the future. That’s how radiation works, slow but assuredly destructive, which serves to identify its risks, meaning, one nuke meltdown has the impact, over decades, of 1,000 regular industrial accidents, maybe more.
It’s been six years since the triple 100% nuke meltdowns occurred at Fukushima Daiichi d/d March 11th, 2011, nowadays referred to as “311”. Over time, it’s easy for the world at large to lose track of the serious implications of the world’s largest-ever industrial disaster; out of sight out of mind works that way.
According to Japanese government and TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company) estimates, decommissioning is a decade-by-decade work-in-progress, most likely four decades at a cost of up to ¥21 trillion ($189B). However, that’s the simple part to understanding the Fukushima nuclear disaster story. The difficult painful part is largely hidden from pubic view via a highly restrictive harsh national secrecy law (Act on the Protection of Specially Designated Secrets, Act No. 108/2013), political pressure galore, and fear of exposing the truth about the inherent dangers of nuclear reactor meltdowns. Powerful vested interests want it concealed.
Following passage of the 2013 government secrecy act, which says that civil servants or others who “leak secrets” will face up to 10 years in prison, and those who “instigate leaks,” especially journalists, will be subject to a prison term of up to 5 years, Japan fell below Serbia and Botswana in the Reporters Without Borders 2014 World Press Freedom Index. The secrecy act, sharply criticized by the Japanese Federation of Bar Associations, is a shameless act of buttoned-up totalitarianism at the very moment when citizens need and in fact require transparency.
The current status, according to Mr. Okamura, a TEPCO manager, as of November 2017: “We’re struggling with four problems: (1) reducing the radiation at the site (2) stopping the influx of groundwater (3) retrieving the spent fuel rods and (4) removing the molten nuclear fuel.” (Source: Martin Fritz, The Illusion of Normality at Fukushima, Deutsche Welle–Asia, Nov. 3, 2017)
In short, nothing much has changed in nearly seven years at the plant facilities, even though tens of thousands of workers have combed the Fukushima countryside, washing down structures, removing topsoil and storing it in large black plastic bags, which end-to-end would extend from Tokyo to Denver and back.
As it happens, sorrowfully, complete nuclear meltdowns are nearly impossible to fix because, in part, nobody knows what to do next. That’s why Chernobyl sealed off the greater area surrounding its meltdown of 1986. Along those same lines, according to Fukushima Daiichi plant manager Shunji Uchida: ”Robots and cameras have already provided us with valuable pictures. But it is still unclear what is really going on inside,” Ibid.
Seven years and they do not know what’s going on inside. Is it the China Syndrome dilemma of molten hot radioactive corium burrowing into Earth? Is it contaminating aquifers? Nobody knows, nobody can possibly know, which is one of the major risks of nuclear meltdowns, nobody knows what to do. There is no playbook for 100% meltdowns. Fukushima Daiichi proves the point.
“When a major radiological disaster happens and impacts vast tracts of land, it cannot be ‘cleaned up’ or ‘fixed’.” (Source: Hanis Maketab, Environmental Impacts of Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Will Last ‘decades to centuries’ – Greenpeace, Asia Correspondent, March 4, 2016)
Meanwhile, the world nuclear industry has ambitious growth plans, 50-60 reactors currently under construction, mostly in Asia, with up to 400 more on drawing boards. Nuke advocates claim Fukushima is well along in the cleanup phase so not to worry as the Olympics are coming in a couple of years, including events held smack dab in the heart of Fukushima, where the agricultural economy will provide fresh foodstuff.
The Olympics are PM Abe’s major PR punch to prove to the world that all-is-well at the world’s most dangerous, and out of control, industrial accident site. And, yes it is still out of control. Nevertheless, the Abe government is not concerned. Be that as it may, the risks are multi-fold and likely not well understood. For example, what if another earthquake causes further damage to already-damaged nuclear facilities that are precariously held together with hopes and prayers, subject to massive radiation explosions? Then what? After all, Japan is earthquake country, which defines the boundaries of the country. Japan typically has 400-500 earthquakes in 365 days, or nearly 1.5 quakes per day.
According to Dr. Shuzo Takemoto, professor, Department of Geophysics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University: “The problem of Unit 2… If it should encounter a big earth tremor, it will be destroyed and scatter the remaining nuclear fuel and its debris, making the Tokyo metropolitan area uninhabitable. The Tokyo Olympics in 2020 will then be utterly out of the question,” (Shuzo Takemoto, Potential Global Catastrophe of the Reactor No. 2 at Fukushima Daiichi, February 11, 2017).
Since the Olympics will be held not far from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident site, it’s worthwhile knowing what to expect, i.e., repercussions hidden from public view. After all, it’s highly improbable that the Japan Olympic Committee will address the radiation-risk factors for upcoming athletes and spectators. Which prompts a question: What criteria did the International Olympic Committee (IOC) follow in selecting Japan for the 2020 Summer Olympics in the face of three 100% nuclear meltdowns totally out of control? On its face, it seems reckless.
This article, in part, is based upon an academic study that brings to light serious concerns about overall transparency, TEPCO workforce health & sudden deaths, as well as upcoming Olympians, bringing to mind the proposition: Is the decision to hold the Olympics in Japan in 2020 a foolish act of insanity and a crude attempt to help cover up the ravages of radiation?
Thus therefore, a preview of what’s happening behind, as well as within, the scenes researched by Adam Broinowski, PhD (author of 25 major academic publications and Post Doctoral Research Fellow, Australian National University): “Informal Labour, Local Citizens and the Tokyo Electric Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Crisis: Responses to Neoliberal Disaster Management,” Australian National University, 2017.
The title of Dr. Broinowski’s study provides a hint of the inherent conflict, as well as opportunism, that arises with neoliberal capitalism applied to “disaster management” principles. (Naomi Klein explored a similar concept in The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, Knopf Canada, 2007).
Dr. Broinowski’s research is detailed, thorough, and complex. His study begins by delving into the impact of neoliberal capitalism, bringing to the fore an equivalence of slave labor to the Japanese economy, especially in regards to what he references as “informal labour.” He preeminently describes the onslaught of supply side/neoliberal tendencies throughout the economy of Japan. The Fukushima nuke meltdowns simply bring to surface all of the warts and blemishes endemic to the neoliberal brand of capitalism.
According to Professor Broinowski: “The ongoing disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station (FDNPS), operated by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), since 11 March 2011 can be recognised as part of a global phenomenon that has been in development over some time. This disaster occurred within a social and political shift that began in the mid-1970s (ed. supply-side economics, which is strongly reflected in America’s current tax bill under consideration) and that became more acute in the early 1990s in Japan with the downturn of economic growth and greater deregulation and financialisation in the global economy. After 40 years of corporate fealty in return for lifetime contracts guaranteed by corporate unions, as tariff protections were lifted further and the workforce was increasingly casualised, those most acutely affected by a weakening welfare regime were irregular day labourers, or what we might call ‘informal labour.”
In short, the 45,000-60,000 workers recruited to deconstruct decontaminate Fukushima Daiichi and the surrounding prefecture mostly came off the streets, castoffs of neoliberalism’s impact on “… independent unions, rendered powerless, growing numbers of unemployed, unskilled and precarious youths (freeters) alongside older, vulnerable and homeless day labourers (these groups together comprising roughly 38 per cent of the workforce in 2015) found themselves not only (a) lacking insurance or (b) industrial protection but also in many cases (c) basic living needs. With increasing deindustrialisation and capital flight, regular public outbursts of frustration and anger from these groups have manifested since the Osaka riots of 1992.” (Broinowski)
The Osaka Riots of 25 years ago depict the breakdown of modern society’s working class, a problem that has spilled over into national political elections worldwide as populism/nationalism dictate winners/losers. In Osaka 1,500 rampaging laborers besieged a police station (somewhat similar to John Carpenter’s 1976 iconic film Assault on Precinct 13) over outrage of interconnecting links between police and Japan’s powerful “Yakuza” or gangsters that bribe police to turn a blind eye to gangster syndicates that get paid to recruit, often forcibly, workers for low-paying manual jobs for industry.
That’s how TEPCO gets workers to work in radiation-sensitive high risks jobs. Along the way, subcontractors rake off most of the money allocated for workers, resulting in a subhuman lifestyle for the riskiest most life-threatening jobs in Japan, maybe the riskiest most life-threatening in the world.
Japan has a long history of assembling and recruiting unskilled labor pools at cheap rates, which is typical of nearly all large-scale modern industrial projects. Labor is simply one more commodity to be used and discarded. Tokyo Electric Power Company (“TEPCO”) of Fukushima Daiichi fame adheres to those long-standing feudalistic employment practices. They hire workers via layers of subcontractors in order to avoid liabilities, i.e. accidents, health insurance, safety standards, by penetrating into the bottom social layers that have no voice in society.
As such, TEPCO is not legally obligated to report industrial accidents when workers are hired through complex webs or networks of subcontractors; there are approximately 733 subcontractors for TEPCO. Here’s the process: TEPCO employs a subcontractor “shita-uke,” which in turn employs another subcontractor “mago-uke” that relies upon labor brokers “tehaishilninpu-dashi.” At the end of the day, who’s responsible for the health and safety of workers? Who’s responsible for reporting cases of radiation sickness and/or death caused by radiation exposure?
Based upon anecdotal evidence from reliable sources in Japan, there is good reason to believe TEPCO, as well as the Japanese government, suppress public knowledge of worker radiation sickness and death, as well as the civilian population of Fukushima. Thereby, essentially hoodwinking worldwide public opinion, for example, pro-nuke enthusiasts/advocates point to the safety of nuclear power generation because of so few reported deaths in Japan. But, then again, who’s responsible for reporting worker deaths? Answer: Other than an occasional token death report by official sources, nobody!
Furthermore, TEPCO does not report worker deaths that occur outside of the workplace even though the death is a direct result of excessive radiation exposure at the workplace. For example, if a worker with radiation sickness becomes too ill to go to work, they’ll obviously die at home and therefore not be reported as a work-related death. As a result, pro-nuke advocates claim Fukushima proves how safe nuclear power is, even when it goes haywire, because there are so few, if any, deaths, as to be inconsequential. That’s a boldfaced lie that is discussed in the sequel: Fukushima Darkness – Part 2.
“As one labourer stated re Fukushima Daiichi: ‘TEPCO is God. The main contractors are kings, and we are slaves’. In short, Fukushima Daiichi clearly illustrates the social reproduction, exploitation and disposability of informal labour, in the state protection of capital, corporations and their assets.” (Broinowski)
Indeed, Japan is a totalitarian corporate state where corporate interests are protected from liability by layers of subcontractors and by vested interests of powerful political bodies and extremely harsh state secrecy laws. As such, it is believed that nuclear safety and health issues, including deaths, are underreported and likely not reported at all in most cases. Therefore, the worldview of nuclear power, as represented in Japan at Fukushima Daiichi, is horribly distorted in favor of nuclear power advocacy.
DW article cited in Fukushima Darkness: http://www.dw.com/en/the-illusion-of-normality-at-fukushima/a-37885120 “Robots and cameras have already provided us with valuable pictures,” says Uchida, adding: “But it is still unclear what is really going on inside.”
And Full-text (PDF) of Adam Broinowski’s cited research paper is available here:

Informal Labour, Local Citizens and the Tokyo Electric Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Crisis: Responses to Neoliberal Disaster Management (Part 5)

11870834_10203478220396073_589184629922887326_n
By Adam Broinowski
Conclusions
From this discussion, it is evident how an advanced capitalist nation-state deploys a disposable population of informal labour to absorb the dangers inherent to the use of large-scale nuclear technologies and its private extractive and accumulation practices. Since its inception, nuclear power has been regarded by some as a symbol of Japan’s postwar civilisational progress.100 At the same time, the health of many thousands of people has been endangered in exposures to radiation while harms have been perpetrated upon local communities and nuclear workers and the environment more broadly as millions of people have been integrated within the centralising and concentrating dynamic of the transnational nuclear power industry.
On the mediated surface, Fukushima Daiichi has been used to prove to the world that a nuclear disaster of significant scale can be overcome and that people can survive and return to their normal lives. The government has concentrated on proving that it is safe for the Olympics, safe for tourism, safe to consume local produce, and safe to restart nuclear reactors (with 25 reactors expected to be supplying 20 per cent total energy by 2030). The neoliberal disaster model adopted, in which the state prioritises the profit of private corporations and their wealth-creating strategies while minimising public services and pursuing deregulation (e.g. of labour conditions), is indicated not only in the official intention to rebuild the local economy of Fukushima Prefecture, but also to expand, including through its transnational nuclear industry, Japan’s financial, military and industrial sector after Fukushima. This reflects the priority given to both the interests of the utilities, banks and construction companies involved in the reconstruction program, and those of multinational corporations, foreign governments and international regulatory and financial institutions involved in this sector.
At the same time, the sovereign duty to protect the fundamental needs of the population and reflect majority will is secondary to these priorities. Unlike a natural disaster, owing to the materiality of radiation that continues to be dumped and vented into the environment, facilitating the return to pre-disaster conditions by forgetting and rebuilding communities in contaminated areas is a practice of illusion. Despite the claims of the Abe administration and other nuclear promoters, Japan’s safety standards cannot adequately insure against the seismic activities or extreme weather events and their impacts on that archipelago. The authorities have furnished people with the means by which to normalise sickness and pathologise anxiety to justify the return to nuclear power reliance, while suppressing those who seek to resist it. The wealth of a healthy society and environment cannot be traded for the putative convenience and economic benefits of nuclear power generation as they are not comparable values. Official denial of the steady accumulation and exposure to ‘low-level’ internal radiation in a growing segment of the population only aggravates rather than protects the affected communities from the stresses related to Fukushima Daiichi. This inescapably leads to the need to address greater systemic problems that underlie such disasters.
As the previous organic life of village communities in contaminated zones is transformed into retirement villages and ad-hoc industrial hubs for temporary workers, this alienation from food, land, community, history, the human body and nature itself is a warning of the growing negative costs of the rapid expropriation and consumption of the planetary commons under a globalised system. Just as nuclear energy is not the solution to climate disruption caused by reliance on fossil fuels in a global capitalist economy, nor are radiation exposures comparable to everyday risks in modern society (i.e. transport accidents). If introducing ‘mistakes’ into the human genome is to be wagered against the daily conveniences of ‘modern’ life then this aspect of modernity is unsustainable. Although somewhat anthropocentric, it is a timely reminder that the Nobel Prize laureate (1946) Herman Müller stated in 1956, ‘the genome is the most valuable treasure of humankind. It determines the life of our descendants and the harmonious development of the future generations’.101
And so we return to the basic problem that no nuclear reactor can operate without radiation-exposed labour, particularly of informal or irregular workers. If these populations refused to work and joined in support with a network of translocal groups on informal and alternative life projects for greater self-sufficiency such as micro-financing, small-scale and permaculture farming on non-contaminated land, renewable and decentralised energy production and distribution, or campaigns for greater distribution of wealth, better public education and health improvement, these communities and workers could be active agents in devising models that could eventually become viable for adaptation to larger human populations. This application at scale cannot come too soon in the present context of imminent exhaustion of the planetary commons from the systemic demands for relentless economic growth and accumulation of wealth and power for the few.
Acknowledgement
Research for this chapter was made possible by the author’s ARC DECRA project, ‘Contaminated Life: ‘Hibakusha’ in Japan in the Nuclear Age’ (DE130101746).
1 Paul Jobin, ‘Radiation Protection after the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster 3.11’, The Journal of Ohara Institute for Social Research, August 658 (2013): 3 (14–30).
2 Anonymous, Association Franco-Japonaise (ASUKA), Témoignages No.1 [Statements by Fukushima genpatsu kokuso-dan] (2014): 6. For a copy contact: http://www.asuka-association.org/contact/.
3 Jeff Kingston, ‘How to become an Activist: Start as a Japanese Part-Timer’, Bloomberg, 29 May 2015, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-29/how-to-become-an-activist-start-as-a-japanese-part-timer. Accessed 16 July 2015.
4 The Osaka riots of 1992 are known as the ‘anti-unemployment riots’ in the Kamagasaki day labour centre in Nishinari ward. Day labourers who could no longer pay the rent demonstrated on the streets in protest. As distinct from the 1990 riots in the same location, which were specifically targeted against corrupt ties of the Nishinari police with a yakuza group, a large number of youths joined the day labourers in 1992 to protest against unemployment. See M. Yang, K. Haraguchi and T. Sakurada, ‘The Urban Working-Class Culture of Riot in Osaka and Los Angeles: Toward a Comparative History’, in B. Fraser ed., Marxism and Urban Culture (New York: Lexington Books, 2014), 230–31.
5 Mike Davis, Planet of the Slums (London and New York: Verso, 2006), 185.
6 Brett Nee, ‘Sanya: Japan’s internal colony’, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars 6, no. 3 (1974): 14.
7 Sugita Yoneyuki, Pitfall or Panacaea: The Irony of US Power in the Occupation of Japan 1945–1952 (New York: Routledge, 2003), 52–68.
8 Funamoto Shūji, Damatte notare jinuna Funamoto Shūji ikoshū [Don’t Die Silently by the Roadside: Posthumous Writings of Funamoto Shūji] (Tokyo: Renga Shobo Shinsha, 1985), 199–200.
9 Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth (New York: Grove Press, 2004), 4–5.
10 Toshihiro Okuyama, ‘Radiation Doses 4 Times Larger for ‘Outside Workers’ at Nuclear Plants, Asahi Shimbun, 26 July 2012, ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201207260071 (subscription only).
11 Eighty-eight per cent of 83,000 workers in Japan’s nuclear sector and 89 per cent of 10,303 workers at Fukushima Daiichi are in subcontracting service positions. See Editors, ‘Radiation doses 4 times larger for “outside workers” at nuclear plants’, Asahi Shimbun, 26 July 2012, ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201207260071. Accessed 14 January 2015.
12 Kazumi Takaki, ‘Listen to Their Silent Cry: The Devastated Lives of Japanese Nuclear Power Plant Workers Employed by Subcontractors or Labour-brokering Companies’, Bulletin of Social Medicine 31, no. 1 (2014): 10.
13 Yuki Tanaka, ‘Nuclear Power Plant Gypsies in High-tech Society’, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 18, no. 1 (1986): 12. See also Takaki, ‘Listen to Their Silent Cry’, 9.
14 For perspective, the estimated completion of decommissioning of Chernobyl is 2086.
15 Editors, ‘Fukushima daiichi genshiryoku hatsudensho sagyōsha no hibaku senryōen no hibaku se ni tsuite’, TEPCO, 31 July 2015, http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/betu15_j/images/150731j0604.pdf. Accessed 1 August 2015.
16 See Hiroko Tabuchi, ‘Unskilled Recruited for Fukushima Duty’, The Age, 18 March 2014, http://www.theage.com.au/world/unskilled-recruited-for-fukushima-duty-20140318-hvk08.html; Saito Mari and Antoni Slodowski, ‘Japan’s Homeless Recruited for Murky Fukushima Clean-up’, Reuters, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-fukushima-workers-idusbre9bt00520131230.
17 Michael Okwu, ‘Gangsters and “Slaves”: The People Cleaning Up Fukushima’, Al Jazeera America, 8 January 2014, america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/america-tonight-blog/2014/1/7/fukushima-cleanupworkerssubcontractors.html.
18 Editor, ‘Yajuku rōdōsha no genpatsu hibakusha no jittai o tekisuto shite itadakimashita’, Sanya Blog – Yajuku-sha shitsugyō sha undō hōkoku, 15 April 2011, san-ya.at.webry.info/201103/article_11.html. Accessed 19 January 2016.
19 On methods of dosimetry camouflage see Paul Jobin, ‘Radiation Protection After the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster 3.11’, The Journal of Ohara Institute for Social Research 658 (August 2013): 9.
20 Jobin, ‘Radiation Protection’, 9.
21 In the 1980s, it was standard practice at the Tsuruga plant of the Japan Atomic Power Company (JAPC) to reset accumulated doses to zero on four days of every month. See Tanaka Yuki, ‘Nuclear Power Plant Gypsies’, 9.
22 Kazumi Takaki, ‘Listen to their Silent Cry’, 10.
23 See, for example, Fukushima Daiichi genshiryoku hatsudensho no jōkyō ni tsuite, 30 July 2016, TEPCO, http://www.tepco.co.jp/press/report/2016/1314410_8693.html.
24 Mixed-Oxide fuel (MOX) combines uranium (U238) and plutonium (Pu 239-240) in nuclear fission. The plutonium component makes the fuel even more toxic as well as producing longer-lived waste than with uranium fuel.
25 Yuri Oiwa, ‘Ministry Recognizes Link between Fukushima Nuclear Worker’s Leukemia and Radiation Exposure for 1st Time’, Asahi Shimbun, 20 October 2015, ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201510200086. Since the time of writing, this article has been made unavailable online. For verification, an online mirror link can be found at: http://www.fukushima-is-still-news.com/2015/10/worker-cancer-case-confirmed-2.html. It is worth recalling that in 2013 TEPCO, after an earlier underestimation of ‘only 178’ workers, had finally admitted that 1,973 workers had been exposed to over 100 mSv/y. See ‘Nearly 2000 at Fukushima No. 1 Face Higher Thyroid Cancer Risk’, Japan Times, http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/07/19/national/1973-fukushima-plant-workers-show-higher-risk-for-thyroid-cancer/#.V9ff_LXgwXg.
26 Okwu, ‘Gangsters and “Slaves”’.
27 There is discrepancy on this measurement. Officially, the Japanese Government calculates 0.23 microSv/h = 1 mSv/y based on an average eight hours/day outdoors per person. The ICRP, however, calculates 0.08 microSv/h = 1 mSv/y. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert-ICRP_definition_of_the_sievert. When including normal background radiation, calculations normally vary between 0.11 and 0.18 microSv/h. This is complicated by the fact that radiation from Fukushima Daiichi has been and continues to be distributed across the entirety of Japan, so that normal background post-3.11 is in fact abnormally elevated. See See Hiroshi Ishizuka, ‘Cesium from Fukushima Plant Fell all over Japan’, Asahi Shimbun, 26 November 2011, ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/aj201111260001. Since the time of writing, this article has been made unavailable online. For verification, an online mirror link can be found at: http://www.infiniteunknown.net/2011/11/27/cesium-from-fukushima-plant-fell-all-over-japan-even-on-okinawa-1700-km-from-nuke-plant/.
28 Kataoka Terumi on 18 May 2012 as recorded for the Fukushima kokusodan (Fukushima plaintiffs) presentation to the Fukushima district attorney’s office against 33 TEPCO past and present officers, government officials and medical experts made in 2013. See N. Field and M. Mizenko eds, Fukushima Radiation: Will You Still Say No Crime Was Committed?, Amazon Digital Services: Complainants for Criminal Prosecution of the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, 1st edition (12 May 2015), 360.
29 The Radiation Safety Level law permits nuclear workers 100 mSv over 5 years and no more than 50 mSv in any year; female workers no more than 5 mSv in 3 months; denies citizens entry to areas of 5.2 mSv/y, women are limited to 2 mSv/y; 5 mSv is the threshold for claims of occupational disease; food in general is measured below 1 mSv/y; 5 mSv and above prohibits residence and consumption of food and water.
30 Although it was reported by the end of 2015 that this number had dropped to below 100,000, there was some discrepancy in calculation as those who had bought houses in the locations they had evacuated to were no longer included as ‘evacuees’. See Editors, ‘Fukushima Nuclear Evacuees Fall Below 100,000’, Japan Times, 9 January 2016, http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/01/09/national/fukushima-nuclear-evacuees-fall-100000/#.VpDnE1LzN_l.
31 By the end of 2015, Fukushima Prefecture had built housing for around 17 per cent of the 43,700 Fukushima households that remained without a permanent home. This was based on the categorisation of ‘long-term evacuee’ as only pertaining to those who only wanted to remain evacuated until evacuation orders had been lifted. Those who wanted to remain evacuated permanently or until safety had been proven were not considered ‘long-term evacuees’. Editors, ‘Nuclear evacuees surveyed about living in public housing later became non-eligible’, The Mainichi, 5 December 2015, mainichi.jp/english/articles/20151205/p2a/00m/0na/013000c. Since the time of writing, this article has been made unavailable online. For verification, an online mirror link can be found at: dunrenard.wordpress.com/2016/page/153/.
32 SPEEDI monitoring system is the computer-based emergency response system linked to the Japan Weather Association and Science and Technology Agency of Japan to predict radiological impacts in local and workplace areas due to nuclear accident.
33 Takahashi Kei in Allain de Halleux, Fukushima e yōkosō, vol. 1 (at 4 min 40 sec), 14 June 2013, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjv1b6Zn9DY. Accessed 15 May 2015.
34 Wada Nanako (Hanawa-machi liaison for the incineration of radioactive debris and member of Fukushima kokuso-dan) in Anonymous, Témoignages No.1, Association Franco-Japonaise ASUKA 2014: 13 (1–18). For a copy, contact http://www.asuka-association.org/contact/. The calculation of radiation distributed in soil as it translates to potential damage to the human body has significant variables and is contested. The provisional safety limit was 500 Bq/kg, which was lowered to 100 Bq/kg in Japan after Fukushima. The ICRP calculated that a total body activity of 1,400 Becquerels would correspond to 20 Bq/kg of body weight in a 70 kg adult and is equivalent to 0.1 mSv/y exposure. That would make the internationally accepted limit of 1 mSv/y equate to 200 Bq/kg in a 70 kg adult or 14,000 Bq in soil. See Stephen Starr, ‘Implications of the Massive Contamination of Japan with Radioactive Cesium’, 11 March 2013, Helen Caldicott Foundation Symposium, New York Academy of Medicine. For an alternative calculation see fn 61.
35 Watanabe Miyoko (Tamura) observed that in spite of their protests, ‘400 tons per day of irradiated waste is burned everywhere. [This is planned] in our village factory’. ‘Témoignages No.1’, 2014. Further, Wada Nanako testified that ‘Incinerators have been built, sometimes secretly, in Samegawa, Sōma, Fukushima, Kōriyama [and Miyakoji in Tamura]. There will be 20 built in total’. ‘Témiognages No. 1’, 2014: 13.
36 Greenpeace, ‘Investigation Exposes Failure of Fukushima Decontamination Program’, 21 July 2015, http://www.greenpeace.org/japan/ja/news/press/2015/pr20150721/20150721-Press-Release-Greenpeace-investigation-exposes-failure-of-Fukushima-decontamination-program-/. Accessed 22 July 2015.
37 In other towns such as Naraha, where an estimated 46 per cent of 7,368 registered evacuees hope to return while only 780 are willing to return immediately, personal radiation monitors were distributed and radiation monitoring of tap water and water filtration systems implemented to reassure them that it was safe. See ‘Evacuation Order Lifted Completely in Naraha near Wrecked Fukushima Plant’, Japan Times, 5 September 2015, http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/09/05/national/japan-to-lift-evacuation-order-for-fukushima-town-of-naraha/.
38 Government of Japan (GoJ), The Prime Minister of Japan and his Cabinet, June 2015, japan.kantei.go.jp/97_abe/actions/201506/12article1.html.
39 Editors, ‘Fukushima Prefecture Looking to End Free Rent for Voluntary Disaster Evacuees in 2017’, The Mainichi, 16 June 2015, mainichi.jp/english/articles/20150616/p2a/00m/0na/015000c. Accessed August 2015.
40 Otsuki Noriyoshi, ‘Ban to be Lifted on Fukushima’s Worst Affected Zone by 2022’, Asahi Shimbun, 1 September 2016, http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201609010066.html.
42 Kazuki Jinno (35 years old) in Fukushima Radiation, 2015: 537.
43 IAEA, ‘Actions to protect the public in an emergency due to severe conditions at Light Water Reactor’, May (2013): 97, accessed August 2015, www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/EPR-NPP_PPA_web.pdf.
44 Editors, ‘Gan tōroku hō no seiritsu, kuni ga zenkoku no kanja jōhōhan wo database ni’, Huffington Post, 6 December 2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.jp/2013/12/06/cancer-datebace-japan_n_4396656.html. Accessed 15 July 2015.
45 The Act stipulates expanded health checkups; assessment of doses and their health effects; alleviation of health concerns; long-term support for radiation effects; support for choice of residence and settlement; provision of regular medical care; reduction of medical expenses for children (unborn included) and pregnant women; lifelong medical checkups for those from contaminated areas.
46 Fukushima Prefectural Government, 19th Prefectural Oversight Committee Meeting for the Fukushima Health Management Survey, Fukushima Prefecture, 18 May (2015): 1, http://www.pref.fukushima.lg.jp/uploaded/attachment/115335.pdf.
47 Yuri Oiwa, ‘15 More Child Thyroid Cancer Cases Found in Fukushima’, Asahi Shimbun, 7 June 2016, http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201606070042.html.
48 The most contaminated area is Nakadōri (605 per million, 50 times higher than total) while other parts are 12 times the total. Editors, ‘Fukushima Government Terminated Iodine 131 Exposure Study, Citing it Might Concern Residents’, Simply Info, 14 June 2013, http://www.fukuleaks.org/web/?p=6243. Accessed January 2015.
49 Ministry of the Environment (MoE), 8th Expert Meeting, Status of Disaster Victims’ Health Management, 16 July 2014, in Editors, ‘Running Backwards on Health Support after the Nuclear Accident: Ministry of Environment Expert Meeting’, Tokyo Shimbun, 22 July 2014.
51 Keiichi Akahane et al., ‘NIRS External Dose Estimation System for Fukushima Residents after the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP Accident’, Nature Scientific Reports 2013 (3): 1670, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3628369/.
52 See ‘New Radiation Release Estimates Compiled’, Simply Info, 4 November 2013, accessed January 2015, http://www.fukuleaks.org/web/?p=11668.
53 See ‘Unbelievable Comment by Mr. Yamashita’, 8 May 2011, accessed 15 August 2015, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOgaBUDFeb4&feature=related. Another physician, Dr Arai from Asahi Nairyō Clinic, Kōriyama, who subscribes to the hormesis theory, augmented the description of ‘low level radiation’ (up to 50 mSv/y) as ‘an angel’s smile’, while claiming that food with small amounts of radiation would attract a premium, and that Fukushima would become the number one health land in the country. See Asahi Nairyō Clinic, December 2012, e.oisyasan.ne.jp/asahi-cl/topics/radi.html.
54 Such as ‘Public Opinion Policy Related to Nuclear Power’ by JAERO (Japan Atomic Energy Research Organisation/Nihon Genshiryoku Bunka Zaidan); ‘The Nuclear Power Story’ by the Ministry of Education (MEXT); ‘Nuclear Fuel Cycle lectures’ by the Ministry of Finance (MoF).
55 MEXT booklets designed for students at all levels assert that (a one-time external exposure dose) below 100 mSv/y is negligible; natural and man-made radiation have the same effect; cancer has multiple causes and is difficult to trace; and that radioactive materials are no longer harmful after they bond with soil. See http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shuppan/sonota/attach/1313004.htm. Further, Kataoka Terumi testified that public health leaflets in Kōriyama were distributed stating, ‘In the future, one in two children in your class will have a cancer, and ten of them will die’, as part of a program to familiarise children to the realities of cancer. Kataoka reports that the leaflets were subsequently withdrawn from circulation due to a negative public response.’ Association Franco-Japonaise (ASUKA), Témoignages No.1 [Statements by Fukushima genpatsu kokuso-dan] (2014): 7. For a copy contact: http://www.asuka-association.org/contact/.
56 The Chernobyl Forum, ‘Health effects of the Chernobyl accident and special health care programmes’, Vienna, April (2006): 113, accessed July 2015, http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/chernobyl/WHO%20Report%20on%20Chernobyl%20Health%20Effects%20July%2006.pdf.
57 See Alexey Yablokov, Vassili Nesterenko, Alexey Nesterenko, Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment (New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2009). This was recognised by President of the Academy of Sciences in Belarus in December 1999, and confirmed in April 2000 by Vice–Minister of Health of Belarus at a parliamentary hearing about the Chernobyl disaster. See also Wladimir Tchertkoff, ‘The Crime of Chernobyl – a Model for Fukushima’, IndependentWHO [April 2013], 5 February 2014, independentwho.org/en/2014/02/05/chernobyl-model-fukushima/. Accessed 10 July 2015.
58 Statement from the President of the Academy of Sciences in Belarus, in December 1999, confirmed by the Vice-Minister of Health of Belarus at a parliamentary hearing about the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster, in April 2000. See Tchertkoff, ‘The Crime of Chernobyl’, 2014.
59 Nechaev and Okeanov presented at the 1995 WHO-Geneva Conference, the Proceedings of which have remained inaccessible to the public. See Michel Fernex, ‘The Chernobyl Catastrophe and Health’, 3 May (2000): 5, accessed 1 July 2015, independentwho.org/media/documents_autres/michel_fernex_the_chernobyl_catastrophe_and_health_03may2000_en.pdf.
60 R. I. Goncharova and N. I. Ryabokon, ‘Dynamics of Gamma-emitter Content Level in Many Generations of Wild Rodents in Contaminated Areas of Belarus’, Radiobiological Consequences of Nuclear Accidents 2nd International Conference, 25–26 October 1994.
61 Yablokov et al., Chernobyl, 210.
62 ETHOS and CORE are products of the French nuclear industry, financed through Centre d’étude sur l’Evaluation de la Protection dans le domaine Nucléaire (CEPN), formed in 1976 by EDF, the Autorité de Sureté Nucléaire (ASN) and/or the Commissariat à l’Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives (CEA). The ETHOS co-directors (M. Henry Ollagnon, l’Institut National d’Agronomie Paris-Grignon; Gilles Hériard-Dubreuil, Mutadis Consultants; Jacques Lochard, CEPN) initiated the European CORE program, with the support of the Chernobyl Committee of the Government of Belarus, the United Nations Development Programme, French and German embassies, the European Commission, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation of Switzerland, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the World Bank and four districts of Belarus.
63 Professor Vassili Nesterenko (Institute of Nuclear Energy of the Academy of Sciences of Belarus) was removed from his post after demanding a 100 km mandatory evacuation zone in July 1987. He formed the Institute of Radiation Safety (Belrad) and organised 370 radiological monitoring centres in contaminated villages in Belarus to train doctors, teachers, nurses, parents and children in radioprotection ecanthropogammetric measures, pectin diets and information. Dr Yuri Bandazhevsky (Gomel Medical Institute) identified the etiology of low-level radiation impacts on organs and tissues. In 1994, Nesterenko and Bandazhevsky worked in the contaminated territories. Bandazhevsky found above 50 Bq/kg would lead to irreversible lesions to vital organs. From 1996, Belrad Institute measured internal contamination with spectrometers in the villages and Nesterenko used apple pectin as an absorbent of Cs137. This reduced Cs137 in the child’s body by 60–70 per cent. See Tchertkoff, ‘The Crime of Chernobyl’, 2014.
64 IAEA Conference, ‘One Decade after Chernobyl: Summing up the Consequences of the Accident’, 8–13 April 1996, www-pub.iaea.org/mtcd/publications/pdf/te_964v1_prn.pdf.
65 Nagataki stated that 99.8 per cent of 1,080 children measured in March 2011 were under 5 mSv and nobody exceeded 50 mSv. MoE Expert Group members include Nagataki Shigenobu—Emeritus Professor at Nagasaki University, former chairman of Radiation Effects Research Foundation, mentor of Yamashita Shunichi, chair of Cabinet Office Working Group; Niwa Otsura—Cabinet Office Working Group 2011, retired Kyoto University Professor (molecular biology and radiation biology), Special Professor at Fukushima Medical University, WHO Expert Group, editor Health Risk Assessment from the Nuclear Accident after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, Based on a Preliminary Dose Estimation (February 2013), ICRP member, funded by Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan (Denjirenkai), advocate of one-tenth of WHO estimates; Endo Keigo—Kyoto College of Medical Science president; Ban Nobuhiko and Honma Toshimitsu—2013 UNSCEAR Fukushima report authors; Sasaki Yasuhito—former Expert Group chairman.
66 This contradicts Ban Nobuhiko’s finding on leukaemia one to two years after irradiation of lab mice, http://www.oita-nhs.ac.jp/member/cat5_top/cat193/cat351/post_20.html; http://www.labome.org/expert/japan/oita/ban/nobuhiko-ban-572788.html. Leukaemia and thyroid tumours within one or two years was found in Belarus. See International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), Health Effects of Chernobyl: 25 years after the Reactor Disaster, April 2011, http://www.chernobylcongress.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/chernob_report_2011_en_web.pdf. Accessed March 2015.
67 Hiranuma Yuri, ‘Questioning the Very Status of the Ministry of the Environment Expert Meeting Regarding the Status of Disaster Victims’ Health Management’, Fukushima Voice version 2e, 3 August 2014, fukushimavoice-eng2.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/questioning-very-status-of-ministry-of.html; ‘Genpatsu jiko go no kenkō shiji de gyakusō: Kankyō shō’ no Senmonka kaigi’, Tokyo Shimbun, 22 July 2014, http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/tokuho/list/CK2014072202000168.html.
68 See, Yuri Oiwa, ‘NRA Plan to Implement Use of Personal Dosimeters No Easy Task’, Asahi Shimbun, 21 November 2013, ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201311210067. Since the time of writing, this link is no longer available. For verification, an online mirror link can be found at: http://www.fukushima-is-still-news.com/article-personal-dosimeters-easier-said-than-done-121232568.html.
70 ‘Genpatsu kanren shi 1368 nin ni honshi shūkei 1 nen de 136 ninzō’, Tokyo Shimbun, 6 March 2016, http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/national/list/201603/CK2016030602000127.html.
71 Alfred Körblein, ‘Increased Infant Mortality and Decline in Birth Rate after Fukushima’, 6 February 2014, accessed 15 June 2015, http://www.strahlentelex.de/Koerblein_infant%20mortality%20after%20Fukushima.pdf; Alfred Körblein, ‘Decline of Live Births Nine Months after Fukushima’, February (2016), http://www.researchgate.net/publication/292540026_Decline_of_live_births_in_Japan_nine_months_after_Fukushima; Alfred Köblein, ‘Perinatal mortality after the Fukushima accident’, February 2016, http://www.researchgate.net/publication/291818329_Perinatal_mortality_after_the_Fukushima_accident.
72 Ian Fairlie, ‘Summing up the Effects of the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster’, August 2015, http://www.ianfairlie.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Summing-up-the-Effects-of-the-Fukushima-Nuclear-Disaster-10.pdf. Accessed August 2015.
73 Chris Busby, ‘The Health Outcome of the Fukushima Catastrophe: Initial Analysis from Risk Model of the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR)’, 30 March 2011, Green Audit, Occasional Paper, presented at ECRR/ GSRP conference, Charite Hospital Berlin, July 2011.
74 See for example, the ICRP 2005 draft recommendations, http://www.icrp.org/docs/2005_recs_CONSULTATION_Draft1a.pdf.
75 Shiina Chieko, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 23 March 2015.
76 Yokota Asami, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 6 February 2015.
77 See Editor, ‘Fukushima Children’s Thyroid Examination: How Shunichi Yamashita Would like Doctors to Deal with the Results’, Fukushima Voice, 4 May 2012, fukushimavoice-eng.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/fukushima-childrens-thyroid-examination.html. Accessed 12 June 2015.
78 Yokota Asami, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 6 February 2015.
79 Mr Ōkoshi, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 24 March 2015.
80 Shiina Chieko, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 23 March 2015.
81 Shiina Chieko, interview with the author, 23 March 2015.
82 Nishiyama Chikako, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 24 March 2015.
83 ‘Netto kōsaku-in no seitai (Truth About Net Managers)’, 16 September 2014, ameblo.jp/64152966/entry-11925550749.html. Accessed 1 August 2015.
84 The class action also intends to prove that up to 70,000 American citizens were exposed to radiation from Fukushima Daiichi. See Charles Bonner, lawyer for the USS Ronald Reagan class action plaintiffs, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0zGbG2dTvo.
85 See non-government organisation founder of Social Uplift and journalist, and personal friend of Iwaji, Beverly Findlay-Kaneko at 12–17.45 mins. on Nuclear Hotseat, 16 September 2014, nuclearhotseat.com/2014/09/13/nuclear-hotseat-169-beverly-findlay-kaneko-on-journalist-iwajis-death-karl-grossman-on-nukes-in-space/. See also Beverly Kaneko-Findlay, ‘Update on Fukushima’, 14 September 2014, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm2oibl00ie. See also Imanishi Noriyuki, ‘Asahi TV Rage: Big Battle with Police at the Shoddy Decontamination Interview Site’, 21 December 2013, http://www.imanishinoriyuki.jp/archives/35811450.html.
86 Takenouchi Mari, ‘2nd Consultation to Kyoto Bar’, April 2014, accessed 1 July 2015, savekidsjapan.blogspot.jp/2014/04/2nd-consulation-to-kyoto-bar.html.
87 Shimoji Masaki, ‘Demand for the immediate and unconditional release of Associate Prof. Masaki Shimoji’, Civic Activity – an Organization Supporting Citizens Opposing Spread of Radiation, 15 December 2012, keepcivicactivity.jimdo.com/english/. See also, ‘Press Conference for the Apology and Immediate Release of Professor Masaki Shimoji and other People Unjustly Arrested for Opposing Debris Incineration in Osaka’, 15 December 2012, iwj.co.jp/wj/open/archives/46334; ‘Statement from Mr. Shimoji during unjust detention’, 13 December 2012, goo.ne.jp/garekitaiho1113/e/79c68fd4e86da4ec02b2e01a5188052b.
88 Dr Sugii, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 24 March 2015.
89 See Kamanaka Hitomi, Canon Dayori, vol. 4 (2015) (Independent DVD documentary, dir. Kamanaka Hitomi).
90 Toshihide Ueda, ‘Women in Tohoku Village Refused to Play Host to Nuclear Plant’, Asahi Shimbun, 2 September 2015, ajw.asahi.com/article/views/column/aj201509020011. Since the time of writing, this link is no longer available. For verification, an online mirror link can be found at: http://www.fukushima-is-still-news.com/2015/09/tanohata-women-against-nukes.html.
91 Sasaki Michinori (38 years old) in Fukushima Radiation, 848.
92 Hosokawa Kōmei, interview with the author, digital audio recording, 30 March 2015.
93 Uno Saeko in Kamanaka, Canon Dayori.
94 Mutō Ruiko, Fukushima Radiation, 268.
95 Hamada Kentaro, ‘Fukushima Operator’s Mounting Legal Woes to Fuel Nuclear Opposition’, Reuters, 17 August 2015, uk.reuters.com/article/japan-nuclear-tepco-legal-idUKL3N10E2G820150817. Accessed 17 August 2015.
96 Asada Mariko (63 years old), 27 April 2012, Fukushima Radiation, 303.
97 Furukawa Machiko (64 years old), 1 June 2012, Fukushima Radiation, 400.
98 Editors, ‘Indictment of TEPCO trio encourages Fukushima nuclear accident victims’, Asahi Shimbun, 1 August 2015, ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/aj201508010032. Since the time of writing, this link is no longer available. For verification, an online mirror link can be found at: http://www.fukushima-is-still-news.com/2015/08/teoco-s-indictment-a-sense-of-justice.html. Yayoi Hitomi (54 years old), 11 May 2012, Fukushima Radiation, 343; Matsutaka Chiwaki (41 years old), 8 June 2014, Fukushima Radiation, 343.
99 For more on this see Norma Field, ‘From Fukushima: To Despair Properly, to Find the Next Step’, The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 14, issue 11, no. 3, September 2016.
100 Kasai Yoshiyuki, Chairman of Central Japan Railways, described nuclear power as the nation’s ‘bloodstream of economic activity’ and the only way to obtain sustainable baseload electric power. Kasai Yoshiyuki, ‘Nuclear Energy is Indispensable for Japan’s Future’, November, Association of Japanese Institutes of Strategic Studies, Commentary No. 165, 2012, http://www.jiia.or.jp/en/commentary/201211/13-1.html. Accessed March 2014.
101 Herman Müller, ‘Radiation and Heredity’, American Journal of Public Health 54, no. 1 (1964): 42–50.