SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A child is screened for radiation contamination before entering an evacuation center in Fukushima, Japan, Friday 1 April 2011. (Photograph: Wally Santana/AP)
Despite Warning for Women, WHO Report on Fukushima Slammed as 'PR Spin'
Greenpeace says report 'shockingly downplays' increased cancer risk for thousands of Japanese
Feb 28, 2013
A new study released by the World Health Organization says that women, and especially female infants, exposed to radiation released following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan are at a significant risk of developing cancer later in life.
Despite those announcements by the WHO, critics of the new report say that overall the organization has done a great disservice by downplaying the overall dangers posed by the leaked radiation and accused the report of hiding "crucial information" about the ongoing dangers faced by those living in and beyond the Fukushima Prefecture.
"The WHO report shamelessly downplays the impact of early radioactive releases from the Fukushima disaster on people inside the 20 km evacuation zone who were not able to leave the area quickly," said Dr. Rianne Teule, Greenpeace International nuclear radiation expert.
"The WHO should have estimated the radiation exposure of these people to give a more accurate picture of the potential long-term impacts of Fukushima. The WHO report is clearly a political statement to protect the nuclear industry and not a scientific one with people's health in mind."
Specifically focused on the threat to girls and women, Reuters reports on the WHO findings by explaining:
In the most contaminated area, the WHO estimated that there was a 70% higher risk of females exposed as infants developing thyroid cancer over their lifetime. The thyroid is the most exposed organ as radioactive iodine concentrates there and children are deemed especially vulnerable.
Overall, however, it was the WHO's conclusion that "predicted risks" of cancer for Japanese generally "are low and no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated," that Greenpeace aggressively pushed back against.
Pointing out that the WHO only releases its radiation assessments only with the approval of the International Atomic Energy Agency--often criticized as an advocate for, not a regulator of, the global nuclear industry--Greenpeace says the entire report should be looked on suspiciously as more "public relations spin" than good science.
According to Greenpeace scientists, the WHO "shockingly downplays" the cancer impacts on the population by emphasizing small percentages increases in cancers, but fails to adequately describe how those seemingly small numbers translate into the risks posed ot many thousands of people.
"The WHO's flawed report leaves its job half done," said Teule. "The WHO and other organizations must stop downplaying and hiding the impact of the Fukushima disaster and call for more emphasis on protecting the millions of people still living in contaminated areas."
___________________________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A new study released by the World Health Organization says that women, and especially female infants, exposed to radiation released following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan are at a significant risk of developing cancer later in life.
Despite those announcements by the WHO, critics of the new report say that overall the organization has done a great disservice by downplaying the overall dangers posed by the leaked radiation and accused the report of hiding "crucial information" about the ongoing dangers faced by those living in and beyond the Fukushima Prefecture.
"The WHO report shamelessly downplays the impact of early radioactive releases from the Fukushima disaster on people inside the 20 km evacuation zone who were not able to leave the area quickly," said Dr. Rianne Teule, Greenpeace International nuclear radiation expert.
"The WHO should have estimated the radiation exposure of these people to give a more accurate picture of the potential long-term impacts of Fukushima. The WHO report is clearly a political statement to protect the nuclear industry and not a scientific one with people's health in mind."
Specifically focused on the threat to girls and women, Reuters reports on the WHO findings by explaining:
In the most contaminated area, the WHO estimated that there was a 70% higher risk of females exposed as infants developing thyroid cancer over their lifetime. The thyroid is the most exposed organ as radioactive iodine concentrates there and children are deemed especially vulnerable.
Overall, however, it was the WHO's conclusion that "predicted risks" of cancer for Japanese generally "are low and no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated," that Greenpeace aggressively pushed back against.
Pointing out that the WHO only releases its radiation assessments only with the approval of the International Atomic Energy Agency--often criticized as an advocate for, not a regulator of, the global nuclear industry--Greenpeace says the entire report should be looked on suspiciously as more "public relations spin" than good science.
According to Greenpeace scientists, the WHO "shockingly downplays" the cancer impacts on the population by emphasizing small percentages increases in cancers, but fails to adequately describe how those seemingly small numbers translate into the risks posed ot many thousands of people.
"The WHO's flawed report leaves its job half done," said Teule. "The WHO and other organizations must stop downplaying and hiding the impact of the Fukushima disaster and call for more emphasis on protecting the millions of people still living in contaminated areas."
___________________________________
A new study released by the World Health Organization says that women, and especially female infants, exposed to radiation released following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan are at a significant risk of developing cancer later in life.
Despite those announcements by the WHO, critics of the new report say that overall the organization has done a great disservice by downplaying the overall dangers posed by the leaked radiation and accused the report of hiding "crucial information" about the ongoing dangers faced by those living in and beyond the Fukushima Prefecture.
"The WHO report shamelessly downplays the impact of early radioactive releases from the Fukushima disaster on people inside the 20 km evacuation zone who were not able to leave the area quickly," said Dr. Rianne Teule, Greenpeace International nuclear radiation expert.
"The WHO should have estimated the radiation exposure of these people to give a more accurate picture of the potential long-term impacts of Fukushima. The WHO report is clearly a political statement to protect the nuclear industry and not a scientific one with people's health in mind."
Specifically focused on the threat to girls and women, Reuters reports on the WHO findings by explaining:
In the most contaminated area, the WHO estimated that there was a 70% higher risk of females exposed as infants developing thyroid cancer over their lifetime. The thyroid is the most exposed organ as radioactive iodine concentrates there and children are deemed especially vulnerable.
Overall, however, it was the WHO's conclusion that "predicted risks" of cancer for Japanese generally "are low and no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated," that Greenpeace aggressively pushed back against.
Pointing out that the WHO only releases its radiation assessments only with the approval of the International Atomic Energy Agency--often criticized as an advocate for, not a regulator of, the global nuclear industry--Greenpeace says the entire report should be looked on suspiciously as more "public relations spin" than good science.
According to Greenpeace scientists, the WHO "shockingly downplays" the cancer impacts on the population by emphasizing small percentages increases in cancers, but fails to adequately describe how those seemingly small numbers translate into the risks posed ot many thousands of people.
"The WHO's flawed report leaves its job half done," said Teule. "The WHO and other organizations must stop downplaying and hiding the impact of the Fukushima disaster and call for more emphasis on protecting the millions of people still living in contaminated areas."
___________________________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.