[Column] Is the truth of Fukushima health problems concealed like Chernobyl ?

Note : If you are from the international mass media, Don’t read this site before taking a contact with me.

 

 

Recently I’m asked why I don’t write more about the health problems in Fukushima and Japan.

 

My answer is this, I’m not ignoring it but there is no objective statistics.

 

It’s easy to quote someone’s story, such as someone’s son got leukemia, someone’s friend died of heart attack etc.. I can collect those stories anytime, and I feel like those cases are increasing. but you can’t generalize it. We need the statistics to compare before 311.

 

Like yesterday, I spent almost the half day to look into the demographic statistics of 2013 from Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. but I couldn’t find any trend.

 

As I wrote before, I think something is in the “gap” of the statistics.

For example, abortion rate and still birth rate are separated. The surveys are conducted by the different governmental bodies, compiled in different statistics.

To make it worse, variety of data were not taken in the first few months after 311 in Fukushima and Miyagi for some reason. One of the most important parts of data is missing.

 

The statistics of the causes of death also has the “black hole” as “sudden death”. The deaths counted into the part are never categorized, so we will not to know what ever happened.

 

Fukushima Diary has been running for 3 years. I shouldn’t be reporting rumor. I should supply information objective enough to provide researchers and doctors, so they will start the further investigation.

 

From the protocol between Fukushima prefectural government and IAEA, if either of them requests, they can conceal the information related to health problems to share. IAEA is the one to report that most of the people had health problems from the stress and fear in Chernobyl (including malformation).

I’m very concerned the truth might be swallowed by the darkness, again.

 

I reject the international mass media to read this site without taking a contact with me.I know some of the mass media corporations read Fukushima Diary to understand the trend so they know when to report about Fukushima as if they were independently following it for a long time.
In short, they make you individual readers pay for this site while they pay nothing, and when they publish the “authorized news”, you pay for the “secondhand news”, which is nothing new for us.
This site is free for the individual readers, but not for corporations.In the world, this site is nearly the only source about Fukushima. I came here alone without any supporting organizations, background or anything. I’m not pleased to be exploited by the corporations that didn’t even properly report about Fukushima when 311 took place.

I demand them to take a contact with me BEFORE reading this site whatever the purpose is.

_____

Français :

[Édito] Les impacts sanitaires de Fukushima sont-ils censurés comme ceux de Tchernobyl ?
Note : Si vous êtes de la grande presse internationale, ne lisez pas ce site sans avoir préalablement pris contact avec moi.

 

On m’a récemment demandé pourquoi je ne parle pas plus de la situation sanitaire à Fukushima et au Japon.

Ma réponse est en ceci que je ne le néglige pas mais qu’il n’existe aucune statistique objective.

Il est facile de donner des histoires de gens comme son fils a une leucémie, son ami est mort d’une attaque cardiaque, etc. Je peux trouver tout de suite ce genre d’histoire et je sens que ces cas deviennent plus fréquents mais on ne peut pas généraliser à partir d’eux. On a besoin de statistiques pour pouvoir comparer avec avant le 11-3.

Comme hier, j’ai passé pratiquement la moitié de la journée dans les statistiques démographiques de 2013 du ministère de la Santé, du Travail et des Affaires Sociales mais je n’ai pas pu en sortir de tendance quelconque.

Comme je l’ai déjà écrit, je crois qu’il y a des choses dans ce “vide” statistique.
Par exemple, les fréquences des avortements et naissances sont séparées. Les campagnes sont menées par des administrations différentes, analysées en statistiques séparées.
Pour ne rien arranger, pendant les premiers mois qui ont suivi le 11-3 beaucoup de données n’ont pas été collectées dans les préfectures de Fukushima et de Miyagi. Une partie des données les plus importantes est manquante.

Les statistiques des décès ont aussi leurs “trous noirs” comme cette “mort subite”. Les morts comptabilisées ainsi ne sont jamais catégorisées, donc on ne saura jamais ce qui s’est passé.

Le Fukushima Diary publie depuis 3 ans. Je me dois de ne pas propager de rumeurs. Je dois donner des informations suffisamment objectives pour intéresser des chercheurs et des médecins, pour qu’ils puissent commencer à approfondir.

Selon les accords passés entre l’AIEA et la préfecture de Fukushima, n’importe quelle information de santé peut être censurée à la demande de n’importe lequel des d’eux. L’AIEA, ce sont ceux qui ont prétendu que la plupart des gens avaient eu des problèmes de stress et de peurs (malformations incluses) à Tchernobyl.

Je crains sérieusement que la vérité soit à nouveau enfouie au plus profond de la nuit.

 

J’interdis à la grande presse internationale de lire et d’utiliser ce site sans préalablement prendre contact avec moi. Je sais que certaines grandes sociétés de presse lisent le Fukushima Diary pour comprendre la tendance et trouver quand rendre compte de la situation de Fukushima comme s’ils la suivaient indépendamment depuis longtemps.
En résumé, ils vous font payer à vous, simples lecteurs, ce qu’ils prennent gratuitement dans ce site et lorsqu’ils publient des “nouvelles de première main” vous payez pour des “nouvelles resucées”, qui n’ont rien de nouveau pour nous.
Ce site est gratuit pour les lecteurs individuels, pas pour les sociétés. Ce site est pratiquement la seule source au monde sur Fukushima. Je viens ici seul sans aucun soutien d’organisation quelconque, ni références, ni rien. Je n’apprécie pas de me faire exploiter par ces sociétés qui n’ont même pas été foutues de relater correctement ce qui se passait à Fukushima quand a eu lieu le mois de mars 2011.

Je leur demande de prendre contact avec moi AVANT de lire ce site dans quelque but que ce soit.








3/30から5/5まで、おれ氏はキプロスを調査しておりもす。


オラソダ調査の時に何度も弁護士の口から出てきた国、キプロスで起業→オラソダで支店開設をすれば同じ要領で世界中の国でビザが(σ・∀・)σゲッツ!!出来るのか。理論上では可能ですが、実際に出来るのかは誰か暇な奴が確かめてみないといけません。ということで、世界で幼稚園児の次に暇な男、おれ氏がやってきます。

調査費は自腹で、見積もりを出す以前にキプロスに飛び込んでしまいましたが、未開の地を開拓するサソタ・オレオ号にみなさんのオレオを投資して頂けると嬉しいです。費用は全部で切りのいいところで222.5オレオになる見込みですたい。1オレオ(10$、オレオ数はQuantityで変更可能)〜から、顔本、たそぶらーの専用ページへアクセス出来もふ!

現在の総オレオ/目標オレオ:76/222.5

You can edit Quantity
FacebookのURLかよく使うメアドをお願いします


毎月オレオ(オレアーの扉)
FacebookのリンクかTumblrのURL送付先メアド



Fukushima Diary can accept donation directly at bank.
Le Fukushima Diary peut recevoir des dons directement à sa banque.
Fukushima Diaryは銀行口座でも直接寄付を受けられます。
情報は以下のとおりです。

BANK : PIRAEUS BANK ROMANIA

USD
IBAN : RO37PIRB4203739401003000

EURO
IBAN : RO71PIRB4203739401002000

SWIFT : PIRBROBU
Beneficiary : FUKUSHIMA DIARY SRL (NOT Iori Mochizuki)
Bénéficiaire : FUKUSHIMA DIARY SRL (PAS Iori Mochizuki)
 

Thank you for your donation. Fukushima Diary genuinely runs on your support.
Merci pour vos dons. Le Fukushima Diary tourne fondamentalement par votre aide.
支援ありがとうございます。Fukushima Diaryは100%寄付で運営されています。
Donation

Recurring Donations. Monthly donation is very helpful.
Dons réguliers. Les dons mensuels aident beaucoup.
毎月引き落とし。とても助かるし応援されてる感じがします。
Monthly donation



Fukushima Diary can accept donation directly at PoBox too. You don't need to write the receiver's name (Only the address below is needed) but you can write it as Mochizuki Iori or Fukushima Diary SRL as well.

Le Fukushima Diary accèpte aussi les dons directement à sa boîte postale. Il est inutile de mettre un destinataire (l'adresse ci-dessous donnée seule suffit) mais vous pouvez l'adresser aussi bien à Iori Mochizuki ou à la Fukushima Diary SRL.

Fukushima Diaryは私書箱でも直接寄付などの郵便を受けられるようになりました。下記の住所が記載されていれば受取人の名前を書く必要はありませんが、Mochizuki Iori または Fukushima Diary SRLというように書いても問題ありません。

情報は以下のとおりです。

OFICIUL POSTAL BUCURESTI 22 ROMANIA CASUTA POSTALA 110
 

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

36 Responses to “[Column] Is the truth of Fukushima health problems concealed like Chernobyl ?”

  1. Bill Duff says:

    It appears to be willful deception, by my lights

    Dr. Brainwasher (Shunichi Yamashita) is one major plop of ‘happy-horse-chit!

    http://www.naturalnews.com/041720_Fukushima_radiation_Japanese_government_propaganda_brainwashing.html Wednesday, August 21, 2013 by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, Editor of NaturalNews.com

    Natural News exclusive: Fukushima victim exposes Japanese government’s attempted bizarre brainwashing of radiation victims

    This blogspot website has located and translated several key brainwashing phrases uttered by Dr. Yamashita as part of the Japanese government’s propaganda campaign. The following statements span several online videos featuring “Dr. Brainwasher.” Each of these statements is a total propaganda fabrication. The comments in ALL CAPS are my own:

    • “To tell you the truth, radiation doesn’t affect people who are smiling. Only those who are worried. This has clearly been demonstrated by animal studies.” (HUH? WHAH?)

    • “Laughter will remove your radiation phobia.” (COOL, ‘CUZ I’M LAUGHING ALREADY!)

    • “If you laugh, radiation won’t get you.” (NOW I CAN SAFELY WORK AT A MAMMOGRAPHY CLINIC!)

    • “Internal exposure has 10 times less health risk than external exposure.” (SO IF I EAT URANIUM, IT’S SAFER THAN USING IT AS A SKIN WHITENING CREAM?)

    • “Children can play outdoors.” (AS LONG AS YOU DON’T MIND THEM DYING)

    • “No effect on health below 100 millisieverts radiation exposure.” (UNLESS YOU ARE A MAMMAL)

    • “Adults over 20 years have very little sensitivity to radiation. Almost zero.” (UNLESS THEY HAPPEN TO STILL BE ALIVE…)

  2. Bill Duff says:

    The lies of Dr. Brainwasher (Shunichi Yamashita) are infamous in Japan, and are increasingly, and openly ridiculed in the USA.

    http www naturalnews com/ (041720_Fukushima_radiation_Japanese_government_propaganda_brainwashing) html Wednesday, August 21, 2013 by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, Editor of NaturalNews.com

    Natural News exclusive: Fukushima victim exposes Japanese government’s attempted bizarre brainwashing of radiation victims

    This blogspot website has located and translated several key brainwashing phrases uttered by Dr. Yamashita as part of the Japanese government’s propaganda campaign. The following statements span several online videos featuring “Dr. Brainwasher.” Each of these statements is a total propaganda fabrication. The comments in ALL CAPS are my own:

    • “To tell you the truth, radiation doesn’t affect people who are smiling. Only those who are worried. This has clearly been demonstrated by animal studies.” (HUH? WHAH?)

    • “Laughter will remove your radiation phobia.” (COOL, ‘CUZ I’M LAUGHING ALREADY!)

    • “If you laugh, radiation won’t get you.” (NOW I CAN SAFELY WORK AT A MAMMOGRAPHY CLINIC!)

    • “Internal exposure has 10 times less health risk than external exposure.” (SO IF I EAT URANIUM, IT’S SAFER THAN USING IT AS A SKIN WHITENING CREAM?)

    • “Children can play outdoors.” (AS LONG AS YOU DON’T MIND THEM DYING)

    • “I can tell you this, the health effects [of Fukushima radiation exposure] are minimal.” (TO COCKROACHES)

    • “We don’t have to worry about the health effects of ordinary people.” (BECAUSE WE DON’T REALLY CARE IF ORDINARY PEOPLE DIE ANYWAY)

  3. Me2 says:

    Call it rumor or not, I lived in Tokyo for only 2 months and my health suffered as a result.

    • Bill Duff says:

      Anecdotal evidence and verifiability:

      The expression ‘anecdotal evidence’ refers to ‘personal testimony’, and similar 2nd person and 3rd person accounts.

      Because of the small sample, and in this case anonymity, there is a larger chance that it may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases. Anecdotal evidence is generally accepted only in lieu of more solid evidence. This is true regardless of the veracity of individual claims.

      The term is often used in contrast to reproducible scientific evidence. which are types of formal accounts.

      Misuse of anecdotal evidence is an informal fallacy and is sometimes referred to as the “person who” fallacy (“I know this dude, who…”). Accurate determination of whether an anecdote is “typical” requires statistical evidence.

      The term is sometimes used in a legal context to describe certain kinds of testimony.

      • Dud says:

        Despite Me2′s anonymity, i find his (or her) eye-witness testimony strengthened by Mochizuki-san’s visitors eye-witness testimony a few months ago.
        They noted improved health and lesser symptoms after leaving Japan.
        I do not recall if they lived in or around Tokyo, though.

        “Is the truth of Fukushima health problems concealed like Chernobyl”?
        The methodology does seem similar at minimum, does it not?
        I would go as far as to state that i believe that Fukushima health problems are indeed concealed here in “NAFTA-zone”.

        WHAT OTHER RELEASES HAVE BEEN HIDDEN FROM THE PUBLIC WORLDWIDE?

        I have heard no new word about the Chinese reactor that had a release of unknown (to me) magnitude in October of 2011, for instance.
        That “new” “nukular” fleet of theirs must have had at least some “teething” issues that few have heard of. Only the successful “lowest-bidders” may know the full potential range of likely mishaps.

  4. Bill Duff says:

    Meanwhile, the ‘Team Nuke’ lies are accelerating.

    I have not yet discovered, the specific payoffs of this apparent ‘Team Nuke’ propaganda effort. Time will no doubt bring the matter to light. Meanwhile kids are being deceived.

    https www youtube com/ (watch?v=1ZqcxI_XATI)

    Fukushima Radiation: What You’ve Heard are LIES!

    Discovery DNews

    https docs google com/ (document/d/1PK8U_PmidyQ70EDPzLItzKU0gxw3abfaESITPhnJ2oo/edit?pli=1)

    DISCOVERY NETWORK – INVESTIGATION DISCOVERY SHOW
    ADVERTISING SPONSORS
    December 28, 2012

    • Dud says:

      The tighter “Team Nukular” clenches it’s grubby little protuberances,
      the more systems will slip through their fingers and into retirement.

      “May the Force be with you.”

  5. VyseLegendaire says:

    The truth will not be swallowed by the darkness, not this time. The oligarchs may control the major media but they will never clamp down on all of the new educated voices out there by way of the internet.

  6. Chand Bakshi says:

    Sorry , just out of curiosity what is the source for “From the protocol between Fukushima prefectural government and IAEA, if either of them requests, they can conceal the information related to health problems to share. ”

    Is that protocol published somewhere?

    • Bill Duff says:

      The 1959 AGREEMENT is between the IAEA and the WHO.

      http www theguardian com/ (commentisfree/2009/may/28/who-nuclear-power-chernobyl)

      Fifty years ago, on 28 May 1959, the World Health Organisation’s assembly voted into force an obscure but important agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency – the United Nations “Atoms for Peace” organisation, founded just two years before in 1957. The effect of this agreement has been to give the IAEA an effective veto on any actions by the WHO that relate in any way to nuclear power – and so prevent the WHO from playing its proper role in investigating and warning of the dangers of nuclear radiation on human health.

      “The subordination of the WHO to IAEA is a key part of the systematic falsification of nuclear risk which has been under way ever since Hiroshima, the agreement creates an unacceptable conflict of interest in which the UN organisation concerned with promoting our health has been made subservient to those whose main interest is the expansion of nuclear power. Dissolving the WHO-IAEA agreement is a necessary first step to restoring the WHO’s independence to research the true health impacts of ionising radiation and publish its findings.”

      • Bill Duff says:

        TEXT of IAEA-WHO Agreement:

        http www iaea org/ (Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/inf20.shtml#note_c)
        III. World Health Organization
        A. Agreement
        As indicated in the Protocol that follows, this Agreement came into force on 28 May 1959.
        Agreement Between the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organization
        ARTICLE I
        Co-operation and Consultation

        The International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organization agree that with a view to facilitating the effective attainment of the objectives set forth in their respective constitutional instruments, within the general framework established by the Charter of the United Nations, they will act in close co-operation with each other and Will consult each other regularly in regard to matters of common interest.

        In particular, and in accordance with the Constitution of the World Health Organization and the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and its agreement with the United Nations together with the exchange of letters related thereto, and taking into account the respective co-ordinating responsibilities of both organizations, it is recognized by the World Health Organization that the International Atomic Energy Agency has the primary responsibility for encouraging, assisting and co-ordinating research and development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful uses throughout the world without prejudice to the right of the World Health Organization to concern itself with promoting, developing, assisting and co-ordinating international health work, including research, in all its aspects.

        Whenever either organization proposes to initiate a program or activity on a subject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult the other with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual agreement.

    • Bill Duff says:

      Perhaps,

      There does not appear to be any such ‘Source’, for a prefectural agreement. Only a comment from a ‘Suzuki Hiroshi’ which he posts everywhere, without a link to his source, beyond ‘Asahi Shimbaum.

      Looks like DisInformation, probably.

      Sincerely,

      Bill Duff

    • Bill Duff says:

      Revise and Extend:

      It appears, upon further review; that there may be an explicit agreement, between government entities and the IAEA.

      Quite a bizarre and heinous document, it would appear.

      Sincerely,

      Bill Duff

      • Bill Duff says:

        http translate google com/
        http www tokyo-np.co.jp/ (article/national/news/CK2013123102000114) html

        Secret designation clause Fukushima IAEA, Fukui share private information

        Morning December 31, 2013

        It found that the memorandum of mutual cooperation that connects Fukushima and (IAEA), Fukui prefectures International Atomic Energy Agency, one upon request or province or IAEA, terms that can be private information that you are sharing is included were. For this provision, it is not seen as a problem in prefectural assembly, there is also the voice of criticism that “in the lead ahead of the particular secret protection law”.

        The Memorandum of Understanding with the IAEA, in December last year, Fukushima Prefecture were signed respectively in October this year, Fukui Prefecture.

        In Fukushima Prefecture, Prefectural University of Medicine has concluded with the IAEA for the health impact study prefecture, radiation for the management of radioactive waste and decontamination. There are “exemplary arrangements” document as detailed MOU provisions marked to be “to ensure the confidentiality of information designated as confidential by the other party” is included in the document.

        I signed a cooperation with the IAEA in relation to human resource development of the nuclear field in Fukui Prefecture, there was a secret language specified in the memorandum.

        Both county, you are not information that is secret specified at this stage, but measured data and accident information, for such thyroid cancer in children, IAEA or province side, you secret designated as such as “stir up anxiety of residents” For example, there is a possibility that the information will not be published.

        Person in charge of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs played a memorandum of adjustment that “because it is negotiated every international, it can not be said either of the IAEA and Japan may or sought secret designation clause” in the interview.

        However, according to people familiar with the matter of prefectures, when the exchange memorandums and government agencies in each country, that there are rules that incorporate the wording of the secret specified in the IAEA.

        The IAEA has compiled a report and “there was no modulation of Health by exposure” in the Chernobyl nuclear accident.

        Muto Ruiko head of the Fukushima nuclear power plant prosecution team is concerned, “there is a precedent that has the hidden information about the health effects of Chernobyl IAEA. Fukushima also become the Ninomai” he said.

  7. Mikkai says:

    Dr. Alfred Körblein: “Infant mortality in Japan was significantly increased in May und December 2011, 2 and 9 months after the Fukushima reactor accident (+18.6%, P=0,011 und +16,8%, P=0,023).
    In Fukushima Prefecture, infant mortality in May 2011 was increased by a factor of 2.9 relative to the expected trend value”: http://alfred-koerblein.de/fukushima/english/index.htm

    “In Japan, the number of live births is significantly decreased in December 2011, 9 months after the Fukushima nuclear accident (-4,7%, P=0,007). In Fukushima Prefecture the effect is highly significant (-15.4%, P=0.0001).”. http://alfred-koerblein.de/fukushima/english/index.htm

    “The sex ratio (ratio of male to female live births) is significantly decreased in October 2011, 7 months after the Fukushima reactor accident. The sex ratio in October 2011 is lowest in the whole study period (January 1998 through March 2013).” http://alfred-koerblein.de/fukushima/english/index.htm

    It takes years, decades and generations for the Fukushima Health Effect to fully develop.
    But the first victim was already the truth.
    And the second vicitms were the many many unborn or stillbirths – not appearing in any statistic, but in parent’s souls.

    The new Secret Defense Law also stops doctors and media from talking. Let’s got into the depth:

    Who understands the thyroid cancer phenomenon? A frightening text:
    There are two main findings. Only the first will be understood and is always mentioned, by doctors, media: 1) The increase of thyroid cancer, in children. And: The increase of cysts and other changes. Not so understood: These are usually the precursor of cancer. Digested? Well,
    then there is 2) Thyroid Cancer WAS uncommon. Totally. One out One Million. Before the Atomic Age (During the period 1935 – 1944: less than one in a million cases, it was declining. http://tekknorg.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/figures-gould.jpg – It increased 5 fold since 1945). AND: It was a cancer of OLD people. NOT children. Dear readers, friends. Nuclear Reactors make us more mortal – They lead to an earlier onset of diseases that only older people had. It is a kind of an accelerated evolution. Now it becomes clear why are more and more ill, and also EARLIER. Diseases – of which no one knows WHY. Alzheimer’s, dementia, diabetes type 1, Preemies, mental illness, autism, stillbirths… And these few generations living and born since the nuclear age, are only one second of a long journey. If the invisible disguises itself by taking the shape of The Known… it is no wonder, experts fail to blame the real offender. Parents pay the killer of their children, with the monthly electricity bill. Nuclear Safety and dose limits allow peaceful murder. Victims of the nuclear cellular apocalypse are simply called “cancer patients.” Then even laws are passed, so is not reported on nuclear issues. I ask: Who dares to look into it’s face and rip the mask away? If the self-evident became an offense. If you do, you’re welcome. We can not count on experts per se, but on the new thinking. Remember what Einstein said: the possibility of a chain reaction “never occurred to me”.

    quote by Dr. Rosalia Bertell, November 1999 issue of The Ecologist, pp. 408-411: http://ratical.org/radiation/NAvictims.html

    The main way in which the “radiation protection industry” has succeeded in hugely underrating the ill-health caused by nuclear power is by insisting on a group of extremely restrictive definitions as to what qualifies as a radiation-caused illness statistic. For example, under IAEA’s criteria:

    > If a radiation-caused cancer is not fatal, it is not counted in the IAEA’s figures

    > If a cancer is initiated by another carcenogen, but accelerated or promoted by exposure to radiation, it is not counted.

    > If an auto-immune disease or any non-cancer is caused by radiation, it is not counted.

    > Radiation-damaged embryos or foetuses which result in miscarriage or stillbirth do not count

    > A congenitally blind, deaf or malformed child whose illnesses are are radiation-related are not included in the figures because this is not genetic damage, but rather is teratogenic, and will not be passed on later to the child’s offspring.

    > Causing the genetic predisposition to breast cancer or heart disease does not count since it is not a “serious genetic disease” in the Mendelian sense.

    > Even if radiation causes a fatal cancer or serious genetic disease in a live born infant, it is discounted if the estimated radiation dose is below 100 mSv [mSv= millisievert, a measurement of radiation exposure. One hundred millsievert is the equivalent in radiation of about 100 X-Rays].

    > Even if radiation causes a lung cancer, it does not count if the person smokes — in fact whenever there is a possibility of another cause, radiation cannot be blamed.

    > If all else fails, it is possible to claim that radiation below some designated dose does not cause cancer, and then average over the whole body the radiation dose which has actually been received by one part of the body or even organ, as for instance when radio-iodine concentrates in the thyroid. This arbitrary dilution of the dose will ensure that the 100 mSv cut-off point is nowhere near reached. It is a technique used to dismiss the sickness of Gulf War veterans who inhaled small particles of ceramic uranium which stayed in their lungs for more than two years, and in their bodies for more than eight years, irradiating and damaging cells in a particular part of the body.

    From Alexey Jablokov:
    “In the period 1987-88 is a well-documented increase in infant mortality in the leaves radioactive contaminated areas of Ukraine (Grodzinsky, 1999; Omelianetz, Klementjew, 2001, Dubowaja, 2010), Russia (Fetisow, 1999; Hworostenko, 1999; Komogortseva, 2001, Utka et al. 2005, ZYB et al., 2006) and Germany (Korblein, 2006 notice) was found. After the Chernobyl Accident increased infant mortality affects even the entire demographic Statistics of a number of countries. In the more contaminated areas of Ukraine and Russia an increased Overall mortality observed. (The most recent 1995;. Omelianets et al, 2001; Оmelianets, Klement’ev, 2001, Grodzinsky, 1999;. Golubchikov et al, 2002, Kaschirina, 2005; Sergeeva et al. 2005; Dubowaja, 2010, Kaschirina, 2005; Sergeewa et al, 2005;. Fetisow, 1999; Sukalska et al.
    2004 and many others).

    The methodological error of the epidemiological approach to determining the number of victims is based on the accounts of the radiation risk is that the estimation of the number of victims on the comparison of relatively well-documented mortality and morbidity rates (the number the sick and the dead carried out), while levels of radioactive Load can not be accurately determined. Moreover, this approach to determine the Number of victims is not capable of the effects of low radiation dose precisely to record (which have added even the inventor of this approach): “The currently available Epidemiological data provide no basis for reasonable assurance to the radioactive contamination attributable morbidity and mortality in test groups from the To predict the population of the three republics and other European countries, with a average dose of less than 30 mSv were charged in the past 20 years. Any rise in [the morbidity and mortality among these groups] would be lower than the Emerging scientific measurability. “(UNSCEAR, 2011, (97), p. 18).”

    Some estimates of the additional through by the ‘Chernobyl’ caused mortality Cancer, which made the epidemiological approach (“dose” method) were Based on the spread of the “dose” method estimates, which are set out in the table are more than 400 times higher than the usual scientific disagreement. You can with the Opinion of UNSCEAR agree that not a forecast of the number of victims work but with one caveat: This does not work only if the traditional “dose” – Method is applied.

    For the estimation of the total number of victims is another method (the so-called “Balance” method) reliable. It consists of the data of the health status of Population of the radioactively contaminated areas with high data. To compare health status of the population from the “clean” areas. The basic source data consist of physical instrumental measurements of radioactive Contamination of an area and the incidence rate and mortality (morbidity and mortality) in this area.

  8. Mikkai says:

    “In December 2011, 9 months after Fukushima, there is also a significant deficit in the number of live births in Japan. A similar decline in birth numbers was found in February 1987 in southern Bavaria, the German region most affected by Chernobyl fallout. In Japan as well as Bavaria, the effect is limited to a single month.” http://www.strahlentelex.de/Infant_mortality_in_Japan_after_Fukushima.pdf

    “The most important consideration is the generally accepted value judgment that early embryonic losses are of little personal or social concern.” Dr R. Mole, 1979, a member of ICRP – The international committee which makes the dose limits WORLDWIDE ignores LIFE. http://bjr.birjournals.org/content/52/614/89

    Children with oligophrenia have ZERO adaptive response (protection) against radiation and HIGH radiosensitivity (PAGE 208 – direct link below): http://books.google.de/books?id=JYk7efKZf7oC&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=oligophrenic&f=false

    NY TIMES 1996: “Inherited Damage Is Found In Chernobyl Area Children: changes in DNA in sperm and eggs. Such mutations are passed on from generation to generation.” http://www.nytimes.com/1996/04/25/world/inherited-damage-is-found-in-chernobyl-area-children.html

    “Possible scale of lost or impaired children after Chernobyl in all of Europe and the part of Asia covered – Missing Children: 2,5 Million.” PAGE 34 http://life-upgrade.com/DATA/RIGEinEuroandCNPPc.pd

    http://www.atomkongress.de/z_folien_busby.pdf – quote: “Nuclear site child leukemia and cancer clusters (Sellafield, Dounreay, La Hague, Aldermaston discovered in the period 1983-1996. Causality denied by
    ICRP, COMARE, UNSCEAR, BEIR, WHO, EU and Nuclear Industry.” and: “New research shows that if a cell is hit, its progeny are likely to suffer from an increased tendency to general mutation. This is called genomic instability.” PAGE 2 + 3

    Congenital Malformation and Stillbirth in Germany and Europe Before and
    After the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident: http://www.helmholtz-muenchen.de/ibb/homepage/hagen.scherb/CongenMalfStillb_0.pdf
    European stillbirth proportions before
    and after the Chernobyl accident: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/28/5/932.full.pdf

    Chernobyl: Evidence of Genetic or Teratogenic Damage to Environment and Humans: http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2013/03/31/chernobyl-evidence-of-genetic-or-teratogenic-damage-to-environment-and-humans/

    Direct Damage To People attributable to Chernobyl: http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/direct-damage-to-people-attributable-to-chernobyl/

    Kofi Annan about Chernobyl: “the exact number of victims may never be known, but that 3 million children require treatment and “many will die prematurely.” http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20000426&slug=4017441

  9. Lali says:

    Dear Mochizuki, Registering the lack of information or data in certain areas, is as important as writing about available info. Thanks!, Lali

    • Dud says:

      Indeed, that is very true.
      An absence of evidence should never be confused for evidence of absence.

    • Bill Duff says:

      Obstruction Justice

      Obstruction of Justice and the deliberate, sustained suppression of evidence, should NEVER be confused with the LACK of evidence and scientific understanding.

      Such is the case, regarding the KNOWN health damages of internal radionuclides, such as cesium, iodine, strontium, sulfur & plutonium.

      Sincerely,

      Bill Duff

  10. Bill Duff says:

    ‘The Cover-up of Radiation Damage’ has a LONG history.

    http japanfocus org/ (-Sawada-Shoji/3952) – Sawada Shoji Translated by Jason Buckley The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 23, No. 2. June 10, 2013.

    Scientists and Research on the Effects of Radiation Exposure: From Hiroshima to Fukushima

    放射線影響の研究と科学者—広島から福島へ

    The beginning of nuclear weapons policy and the cover-up of radiation damage

    Research into the effects of radiation exposure from the nuclear fallout of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs has been greatly distorted by U.S. nuclear policy and policies to promote nuclear power. Agencies such as the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) have also failed to fulfilled their original role due to their subordination to nuclear policy, with the result that the social responsibility of scientists to bring to light the truth about the effects of radiation has not been fulfilled.

    In September 1945 at the beginning of the occupation, foreign journalists came to Japan to investigate the situation. On 5 September 1945, the Daily Express printed a dispatch from journalist Wilfred Burchett which said, “In Hiroshima, 30 days after the first atomic bomb destroyed the city and shook the world, people are still dying, mysteriously and horribly – people who were uninjured in the cataclysm – from an unknown something which I can only describe as the atomic plague.” On the same day William H. Lawrence of the New York Times reported, “The atomic bomb still is killing Japanese at a rate of 100 daily.”

  11. Bill Duff says:

    http independentwho org/ (en/who-and-aiea-aggreement/)
    http www organicconsumers org/ (articles/article_3288) cfm
    http www llrc org/ (health/subtopic/iaeawhoagreement htm)
    http www theguardian com/ (commentisfree/2009/may/28/who-nuclear-power-chernobyl)

    Toxic link: the WHO and the IAEA

    A 50-year-old agreement with the IAEA has effectively gagged the WHO from telling the truth about the health risks of radiation

    Oliver Tickell theguardian com, Thursday 28 May 2009 03.00 EDT

    Fifty years ago, on 28 May 1959, the World Health Organisation’s assembly voted into force an obscure but important agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency – the United Nations “Atoms for Peace” organisation, founded just two years before in 1957. The effect of this agreement has been to give the IAEA an effective veto on any actions by the WHO that relate in any way to nuclear power – and so prevent the WHO from playing its proper role in investigating and warning of the dangers of nuclear radiation on human health.

    “The subordination of the WHO to IAEA is a key part of the systematic falsification of nuclear risk which has been under way ever since Hiroshima, the agreement creates an unacceptable conflict of interest in which the UN organisation concerned with promoting our health has been made subservient to those whose main interest is the expansion of nuclear power. Dissolving the WHO-IAEA agreement is a necessary first step to restoring the WHO’s independence to research the true health impacts of ionising radiation and publish its findings.”

    After five decades, it is time the WHO regained the freedom to impart independent, objective advice on the health risks of radiation.

  12. Onedragon says:

    Bill Duff,
    YOU ROCK!!

  13. pat b says:

    graph birthrate and school enrollment data.

    See if you see anything.

    look at the prefectural level and then by region.

    • Bill Duff says:

      Not Happening:

      Japan is NOT releasing basic Public Health Information, to the best of my present information.

      Nor, if memory serves, are the prefectures and/or municipalities.

      Hell, even the most recent Japan Census Data is hidden from public view.

      Totally DARK

      Sincerely,

      Bill Duff

  14. Valeria says:

    Why not have new news?
    Not happening nothing? What is going on with the fluel remuval at unit 4?
    What is the situation with contraminated water?
    What is the reality with the Ice wall? It will realy build?
    My opinion it not will stop the radiation is going to the ocean because the soil already deeply contraminated and it is inpossible frose that deep the ground to stop the underground water flow. My opinion all the place will started sinking not only the sea side. You can not stop freezing the graund even if any problem occur that different them calculation………….

  15. Bill Duff says:

    Ice Wall

    The Fukushima Ice Wall, ‘The Last Best Hope’ of TEPCO, as expected, did NOT freeze the ground. The Liquid Nitrogen design of the USSR (CCCP) was feasible, but the TEPCO specified ‘chiller system’ was (OBVIOUSLY) NOT cold enough to establish an artificial permafrost level.

    The USSR Liquid Nitrogen Design was to battle a ‘China Syndrome’, at a single corium flow, and was never required at Chernobyl. It was a standby design.

    Japan has NOT released the corium locations and depths, so the need for a USSR Design Liquid Nitrogen system is unknown.

    Sincerely,

    Bill Duff

  16. Bill Duff says:

    New News: Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Prosecution Team

    If I read this correctly … http translate google com/
    http www tokyo-np.co.jp/ (article/national/news/CK2013123102000114) html

    Secret designation clause Fukushima IAEA, Fukui share private information

    Morning December 31, 2013

    The IAEA has compiled a report and “there was no modulation of Health by exposure” in the Chernobyl nuclear accident.

    Muto Ruiko head of the Fukushima nuclear power plant prosecution team is concerned, “there is a precedent that has the hidden information about the health effects of Chernobyl IAEA. Fukushima also become the Ninomai” he said.

    の舞 – にのまい – ninomai – Definition: all over again (repeating the same failure)

    Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Prosecution Team (Sounds Like New News) IMHO.

    Something may have been (probably was) lost in the translation.

    Sincerely,

    Bill Duff

    • Bill Duff says:

      Secrecy Pact

      The ‘Simply Info’ group has posted a (probably) better translation of the Asahi story. ‘Simply Info’ may not be a reliable source for ‘nuclear disarmament’ matters, due to a STRONG (irrational) unilateral disarmament bias. However, much of their nuclear reactor technical analysis is usually sound.

      http www fukuleaks org/ (web/?p=11993) – January 1st, 2014

      Fukushima Govt. & Fukushima Medical University Signed Secrecy Pact With IAEA

      Tokyo Shimbun has confirmed that the Fukushima prefecture government, and the Fukushima Medical University “did sign a secrecy agreement with the IAEA”. The medical university is the primary source for public radiation exposure data; and sets the medical ‘standards of care’ for the prefecture and region.

      “Muto Ruiko head of the Fukushima nuclear power plant prosecution team is concerned,”

    • Bill Duff says:

      http www mofa go jp/ (policy/energy/fukushima_2012/pdfs/fukushima_iaea_en_06) pdf

      ‘PRACTICAL ARRANGEMENTS’ between FUKUSHIMA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY and THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY on COOPERATION IN THE AREA OF HUMAN HEALTH

      … the IAEA will endeavour to organize conferences, seminars and workshops, in cooperation with the University, with the aim of enhancing public awareness of radiological effects on human health and addressing the issue of “radiation fear” and post-traumatic stress disorders in the Fukushima population; and …

      10. Privileges and Immunities – The Parties note that the Government of Japan accepted the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the IAEA on 18 April 1963.

      For the University: Mr. Shinichi Kikuchi President

      For the IAEA: Mr. Daud Mohamad, President Deputy Director General, Head of the Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications

      • Dud says:

        What a Faustian bargain!

        That has to involve one fat wad of (fiat) cash.
        Where does the money come from? Or are they simply collecting souls for payment?

        Why do i get the sense that it is paid for by the citizens of Japan, to deliberately and purposefully mislead the peoples of Japan (and elsewhere)?

  17. Bill Duff says:

    worsening anxiety

    http fukushimavoice-eng2.blogspot com/ (2014/01/tokyo-shimbun-article-regarding) html

    Tokyo Shimbun Article Regarding Confidentiality Clause in the IAEA/FMU Pact, Complete Translation

    On December 31, 2013, the morning edition of Tokyo Shimbun published an article revealing the existence of a “confidentiality clause” in agreements signed by IAEA and Fukushima Medical University (FMU) as well as Fukui Prefecture.

    Neither prefecture admits to any information having been classified confidential at this time, but if either the prefectures or IAEA decide to classify information for “they contribute to worsening of the residents’ anxiety,” there is a possibility that such information as the accident information, as well as radiation measurement data and thyroid cancer information may not be publicized.

    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs official who was involved in the making of the memorandum stated, upon interview, that “As this is an international agreement, I cannot reveal which party, Japan or IAEA, asked for the confidentiality clause.” However, officials of both prefectures stated that IAEA has a rule to include the confidentiality clause when signing the memorandum with the administrative body of each country.

    IAEA has published reports, after the Chernobyl nuclear accident, stating “there were no health effects due to radiation exposure.” Ruiko Mutoh, representative of The Complainants for Criminal Prosecution of the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, expressed her concern that “IAEA has a history of hiding information about health effects in Chernobyl. The same thing could happen to Fukushima.”

    • Bill Duff says:

      Concealed Hazards

      Willfully concealed hazards can “contribute to worsening of the residents’ anxiety”.

      Many people experience increased anxiety, when the hazards are invisible. For example in a ‘Land Mine Field’, driving in heavy fog, or hearing a rattlesnake in the dark.

      ‘Team Nuke’ is “too clever … by half”

  18. Valeria says:

    Hot spots at 1,400% baseline radiation levels on San Francisco-area coast — State: It’s “naturally occurring materials not radioactivity associated with Fukushima” — Expert: Don’t let babies or kids inhale or eat the sand
    It is true or a new trick o make blind people what is the true?

    • Bill Duff says:

      A poorly written follow-up story, but Cesium 134/137 not reported.

      http halfmoonbay patch com/groups/ (around-town/p/half-moon-bay-beach-radiation-not-from-fukushima-officials-say)

      http www hmbreview com/ (news/experts-say-beach-radiation-unrelated-to-fukushima/article_d3bb5b14-77ea-11e3-a37b-001a4bcf887a) html

      Half Moon Bay Review : News, Half Moon Bay, CA Posted: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 2:27 pm | Updated: 2:26 pm, Wed Jan 8, 2014, By Mark Noack [Email: mark –AT- hmbreview com

      Experts say beach radiation unrelated to Fukushima

      After watching the clip, El Granada electrical engineer Steven Weiss grabbed his own radiation measurement equipment to test the radiation reports for himself. After he verified the hotspot, he took a sample of the dark sediment and sent it to his company’s main offices in Sebastopol for analysis. International Medcom CEO Dan Sythe later put the dirt sample in a spectrum analyzer to view the radioactive “signature” of the particles, the photon energy associated with each isotope. What he found was different from cesium-137. He would know – since the 2011 meltdown, Sythe has visited Japan nine times to help map the cesium fallout.

      Instead he was seeing radium and thorium, naturally occurring radioactive elements.

      “It doesn’t mean that it‘s OK. It’s not something you’d want your baby playing in,” Sythe said. “All we’re saying is this radiation is not from Fukushima.”

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: penny auctions | Thanks to credit repair, seo services and st louis seo