Long-term care planned for firefighters who worked at Fukushima plantTOKYO, Dec. 6, Kyodo
The Fire and Disaster Management Agency aims to conduct physical checkups and mental health care for some 260 firefighters who were mobilized to work at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant after the March earthquake and tsunami, agency sources said Tuesday.
The firefighters will be screened for illnesses such as leukemia and cataracts. The checkups will also be offered in 2013 and beyond if agreed even after the firefighters have retired.
Those eligible for the checkups are the firefighters who doused the No. 3 reactor of the nuclear power complex with water between March 19 and 25 in an attempt to prevent the spread of large quantities of radioactive matter into the air. The firefighters were dispatched from Tokyo, Yokohama, Kawasaki and Osaka.
Between January and March, medical staff will gauge the amounts of radiation inside the firefighters' bodies and test them for leukemia. From 2014, they will be tested for cataracts.
Observers say such long-term care might possibly be provided also to Self-Defense Force and police personnel who worked at the Fukushima Daiichi complex after the nuclear crisis was triggered by the March 11 natural disasters.
==Kyodo
english.kyodonews.jp by Edano 12/6/2011 10:41:35 AM
Meiji to replace cesium-tainted powdered milkMajor Japanese food company Meiji says it will replace about 400,000 cans of powdered milk for free, after samples of the product were found to contain radioactive cesium.
Meiji says 30.8 becquerels of radioactive cesium per kilogram was found in powdered milk produced from March 14th to the 20th. The level is below the government safety limit of 200 becquerels per kilogram, but Meiji decided to replace all of the powdered milk it produced during the period.
The product was tested after consumers questioned its safety last month.
Meiji says all of its powdered skim milk used as a base for other powdered milk products was made before the March 11th disaster.
Some of it was made in Hokkaido in northern Japan, but a large part was imported from Australia and other areas of Oceania, and processed at a plant in Saitama Prefecture, near Tokyo, after March 11th.
Meiji says it has yet to determine the cause of the contamination, but that it may have resulted from exposure to radioactive cesium from the Fukushima Daiichi plant when the processing facility was ventilated to dry the product.
Tuesday, December 06, 2011 16:51 +0900 (JST)
www3.nhk.or.jp by Edano 12/6/2011 10:43:59 AM
@Edano I'm back on RT in an hour talking about the strontium water. Is there anything you can tell via in terms of the medical risks that I should know? I'm trying to gather a broad perspective of things to mention.
by bo 12/6/2011 10:57:18 AM
For instance, I have heard from data from the atmospheric testing era that all people had traces of strontium in their teeth and bones. How is it that this would not present as cancer eventually? How can all people have taken up strontium 90 and not all gotten sick? I only ask because you are a doctor!
by bo 12/6/2011 10:58:30 AM
@bo you always have a brand of isotopes in an element. a very small part is radioactive Sr90.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:00:30 AM
So what many people had present in their teeth and bones was a different isotope?
by bo 12/6/2011 11:01:14 AM
the carbon in every organic matter has always a little part of radioactive c14.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:01:30 AM
@bo no, all kinds of isotopes, including Sr90.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:02:08 AM
So internalizing Sr90 does not guarantee a cancerous presentation?
by bo 12/6/2011 11:02:47 AM
people from testing areas will have more radiostrontium than others.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:03:03 AM
The AEC study, Project Sunshine, in the 50s claimed that all people, even in Tiera del Fuego, had Sr90 in their teeth.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:03:53 AM
@bo people nowadays mainly die from cancer.... and you cannot say the cause. but the radiostrontium is one aspect of the truth.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:04:11 AM
Certainly. Thanks.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:04:39 AM
@bo every organism has sr90 in teeth and bones. you can make a dating of fossils by its strontium90 percentage.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:05:36 AM
But it does not always result in a cancer? Or at least in a definitive causation?
by bo 12/6/2011 11:06:23 AM
Also, was this the case, that all organisms have this, before atmospheric testing?
by bo 12/6/2011 11:06:48 AM
@bo we have the problem that we cannot predict the health effects of low doses of radiation. but the older the man gets, the more probable he dies of cancer.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:08:58 AM
@Edano thanks a lot for your insight.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:09:38 AM
Not sure if that makes me want to grow old or not!
by bo 12/6/2011 11:10:13 AM
maybe it always results in cancer, but it needs a long time to develop, a longer life span than a human life. we do not know for sure.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:10:24 AM
a higher dose will cause cancer more rapidly.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:10:49 AM
@bo you mean the reiss study ?
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:11:40 AM
No, the AEC ran their own study in the mid-50s, Project Sunshine.
www.rand.orgby bo 12/6/2011 11:13:37 AM
Through the RAND Corp.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:13:50 AM
RAND was the think tank of the US Air Force that originated much of the US nuclear war fighting policy.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:16:06 AM
the cancer thing is very difficult to prove. it is the sum of all toxic agents that causes cancer.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:17:16 AM
And that provides a fantastic screen to hide behind for those who contribute toxins to the environment.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:17:55 AM
all you can do are statistical surveys that indicate a higher leukemia rate among people that have a high sr90 concentration in bones and teeth.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:19:05 AM
but it won't be accepted as a proof.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:21:03 AM
And still, I imagine, it can be argued that other factors were neglected. Right, not accepted as direct proof.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:21:25 AM
if you put it on the molecular level, every quantum of high energy will cause damage. sometimes this leads to cell death, sometimes to a mutation, and sometimes the body can repair it.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:23:16 AM
Right. Since Sr90 mimics calcium, it is very likely to be taken up by seaweed and then work its way higher up the food chain. So the entry of so much Sr90 into the sea is very likely to emerge over time in both fish and humans, right?
by bo 12/6/2011 11:24:58 AM
@bo yes, definitely.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:26:00 AM
it accumulates in cow milk.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:30:49 AM
And given the longer half life, compared to iodine, this remains a problem over a much longer period. That is for something that uses cow milk as an entry into human bodies.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:31:47 AM
it will circulate until it has decayed.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:33:23 AM
Nice. A real legacy. And of course we are nowhere near distant enough from the atmospheric testing era for it to have diminished substantially from that era. So it is still circulating in the ecosystem from that time today.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:34:36 AM
pandora's box.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:35:18 AM
if we stop nukes now we will be free of rad´strontium and rad cesium in 300 years.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:37:00 AM
Hope springs eternal.
by bo 12/6/2011 11:37:51 AM
@Pedro Jesus yes of course.
by Edano 12/6/2011 11:55:13 AM
not sure what they mean. every cancer type has its typical spreading scheme. this will not be affected by the radiation. cancer is cancer. but higher doses will result in an earlier occurrence of the cancer.
by Edano 12/6/2011 12:02:19 PM
@Edano "a higher dose will cause cancer more rapidly." Really?by Pedro Jesus 12/6/2011 11:54:40 AM
hudebnik
alblee
UKVal
Oliver (ScribbleLive)
Jonathan Keebler
Matt (ScribbleLive)
kaykodh
PKelley
Markfm
dean
Angie
Deb
Mid Valley
Pedro Jesus
George Gibb
elainekirk
lillymunster
IanGoddard