

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Speaking both with top university researchers in Japan and international scientists who have traveled to study the effects of the nuclear fallout, the New York Times reports that many attempts to study the radiation have been obstructed by lack of funding or support. In some cases, professors were told explicitly not to measure radiation in the surrounding prefectures and to steer clear of data that might cause public "concern."
Timothy A. Mousseau, a professor of biological sciences at the University of South Carolina who has written widely on Chernobyl, told the Times that his multiple research trips to the country were "difficult," with Japanese colleagues dropping out of a joint research paper because they "could not risk association with his findings."
"It's pretty clear that there is self-censorship or professors have been warned by their superiors that they must be very, very careful," he said. He added, however, that the "more insidious censorship" is the lack of funding at a national level for these kinds of studies.
"They're putting trillions of yen into moving dirt around and almost nothing into environmental assessment," he said, referring to the ongoing effort to remove radioactive soil from the surrounding area.
"Getting involved in this sort of research is dangerous politically," added Joji Otaki, a biologist at Japan's Ryukyu University who has relied on private donations and crowd-funding for his work.
Following publication of the article, the New York Times printed this corrective statement: "An earlier version of the headline with this article misstated the actions of the Japanese government. There are deep differences over how to determine the health impact of the Fukushima disaster. The authorities are not 'squelching' efforts to measure the effects of the accident."
_____________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. 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. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

Speaking both with top university researchers in Japan and international scientists who have traveled to study the effects of the nuclear fallout, the New York Times reports that many attempts to study the radiation have been obstructed by lack of funding or support. In some cases, professors were told explicitly not to measure radiation in the surrounding prefectures and to steer clear of data that might cause public "concern."
Timothy A. Mousseau, a professor of biological sciences at the University of South Carolina who has written widely on Chernobyl, told the Times that his multiple research trips to the country were "difficult," with Japanese colleagues dropping out of a joint research paper because they "could not risk association with his findings."
"It's pretty clear that there is self-censorship or professors have been warned by their superiors that they must be very, very careful," he said. He added, however, that the "more insidious censorship" is the lack of funding at a national level for these kinds of studies.
"They're putting trillions of yen into moving dirt around and almost nothing into environmental assessment," he said, referring to the ongoing effort to remove radioactive soil from the surrounding area.
"Getting involved in this sort of research is dangerous politically," added Joji Otaki, a biologist at Japan's Ryukyu University who has relied on private donations and crowd-funding for his work.
Following publication of the article, the New York Times printed this corrective statement: "An earlier version of the headline with this article misstated the actions of the Japanese government. There are deep differences over how to determine the health impact of the Fukushima disaster. The authorities are not 'squelching' efforts to measure the effects of the accident."
_____________________

Speaking both with top university researchers in Japan and international scientists who have traveled to study the effects of the nuclear fallout, the New York Times reports that many attempts to study the radiation have been obstructed by lack of funding or support. In some cases, professors were told explicitly not to measure radiation in the surrounding prefectures and to steer clear of data that might cause public "concern."
Timothy A. Mousseau, a professor of biological sciences at the University of South Carolina who has written widely on Chernobyl, told the Times that his multiple research trips to the country were "difficult," with Japanese colleagues dropping out of a joint research paper because they "could not risk association with his findings."
"It's pretty clear that there is self-censorship or professors have been warned by their superiors that they must be very, very careful," he said. He added, however, that the "more insidious censorship" is the lack of funding at a national level for these kinds of studies.
"They're putting trillions of yen into moving dirt around and almost nothing into environmental assessment," he said, referring to the ongoing effort to remove radioactive soil from the surrounding area.
"Getting involved in this sort of research is dangerous politically," added Joji Otaki, a biologist at Japan's Ryukyu University who has relied on private donations and crowd-funding for his work.
Following publication of the article, the New York Times printed this corrective statement: "An earlier version of the headline with this article misstated the actions of the Japanese government. There are deep differences over how to determine the health impact of the Fukushima disaster. The authorities are not 'squelching' efforts to measure the effects of the accident."
_____________________