Together with three friends from Fukushima Prefecture who are among the tens of thousands of victims of the March 11, 2011 nuclear disaster, I recently had a chance to join a study group to hear a lecture by one of the nation’s leading experts on radiology. Dr. Keiichi Nakagawa, an associate professor of the Department of Radiology, University of Tokyo Hospital, is in the forefront of cancer treatment.

　　　The topic of Dr. Nakagawa’s lecture -€ “The Effects of Radiology on The Human Body” -€ is of utmost concern to my Fukushima friends. One of the trio is Mrs. Yumiko Nishimoto, a mother of three sons (the eldest of whom is 36) who serves as the director of Happyroad.net, a non-profit organization (based in the township of Hirono in Futaba County) aimed at restoring hometowns for nuclear refugees. Mrs. Nishimoto explains:

　　　“Although every single evacuee is desperately wishing to recover from nuclear disaster and build new lives as soon as possible, taking a step forward is extremely difficult while being persistently fearful of radiation. Appealing to them to reflect on their respective over-all situations as calmly as possible, I have pointed out that they had best decide to go home only after they become reasonably confident their hometowns will be safe and fit for habitation. To practice what I preach, I myself made it back to Hirono in early January to spend the new year in my home sweet home.”

　　　The Nishimotos’ home is located in Hirono, 22 kilometer (14 miles) from the Fukushima No. 1 Atomic Power Station operated by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO). Areas within a 20 to 30 kilometer (13 ~19 mile) radius of the nuclear complex had been designated as “Emergency Evacuation Preparatory Zones,” but the designation was lifted as of last September 30. Only less than 300 of Hirono’s approximately 5,500 residents, or no more than 0.06 percent of its total population, have since come back.

　　　At the Nishmoto residence, radiation levels stood at 1.8 micro sieverts in the garden and 3.8 microsieverts around the front entrance. Following a series of decontamination operations by TEPCO, however, the levels were reduced to 0.3 microsieverts and 1 microsievert, respectively.

　　　Another friend from Fukushima is Hidehiro Asada, a former resident of Namie, a town currently off-limits. Asada now lives as a nuclear refugee with his wife and a 13-year-old daughter, occupying an apartment in a housing complex for government employees in Koto Ward, Tokyo. Before March 11, Asada headed a 60-man operation carrying on a range of businesses centered around lumber manufacturing and sales, including wedding hall management, commercial building rentals, and costume rentals. Asada has this to say about his and his daughter’s future:

“I am aware that on April 1 the government will announce which specific areas of my hometown are fit for habitation in terms of radiation levels. If possible, I strongly desire to return immediately to re-launch my business. I am not sure how many of my former employees will follow me, although I know they must work for a living wherever they may be. Even if none of them follow me, I am definitely determined to go it alone.”

The Negative Effects of “Excessive Fear”

　　　Seriously concerned about his daughter’s health if he takes his daughter back with him to Namie, Asada is simultaneously worried she may be alienated from her hometown should he choose to return by himself. Either way, there is no such thing as peace and quiet for this troubled father.

　　　Hiroshi Sudo, a member of the city assembly of Shirakawa and chairman of the city’s “Special Committee on Radiation Countermeasures,” deals with residents day to day, trying to decide what actions need to be taken. Sudo deplores an excessive flood of contradicting information on the effects of radiation, admitting considerable difficulty in determining which information is credible as his committee attempts to implement proper countermeasures.

　　　Facing an audience with a variety of questions, Prof. Nakagawa came right to the point. He stated that, while the effects of radiation should never be underestimated, fearing them excessively would also be a mistake, stressing that the negative mental and emotional effects of living as nuclear refugees away from home while also being unemployed should not be neglected.

　　　Effective April 1, the Japanese government will enforce stricter limits on radioactive cesium found in food, reducing the annually allowable standard cesium level from 5 millisieverts to 1 millisievert. The new standard is based on the premise that most domestically produced foodstuff is contaminated, but Mrs. Nishimoto fears that the new measure would make the recovery of Fukushima, which once thrived on agriculture, even more difficult. Mrs. Nishimoto says:

　　　“Even if we cultivate rice, it is bound to be disposed of because of contamination, as has happened before. If that is going to be the case, nobody will dare want to grow rice any more in Fukushima. Even if the government pays subsidies, the farmers in Fukushima will be deprived of the incentive to work in the rice paddies.”

　　　Prof. Nakagawa powerfully warned against the negative effects of this type of “excessive fear” of radiation, explaining:

　　　“The Japanese are annually exposed to 1.5 millisieverts of radiation from natural sources. In addition, we are medically exposed to an annual average of 4 millisieverts. That is the average of radiation resulting from the high standard of medical treatment generally given in Japan, including chest and abdominal X-ray and the widely available CT scans. So, being overly obsessed and concerned with 1 millisievert is counterproductive, as it inevitably invites undue negative effects to the contrary.”

　　　Prof. Nakagawa gave comparative accounts of Hiroshima and Chernobyl, amply demonstrating the negative effects of overreacting to radiation. Let me amplify on his views on this issue, borrowing from his talk as well as his just published book, A Radiologist’s Take: The Truth about Radiation Exposure and Cancer Occurrence (K.K. Best Sellers, Tokyo).

　　　First and foremost, Prof. Nakagawa reminds us that Hiroshima, sustaining horrendous damage from the atomic bomb on August 6, 1945, subsequently has gone on to become one of Japan’s healthiest prefectures. Immediately after the bomb was dropped, many people began pouring into Hiroshima and were exposed to radiation. They were primarily concerned about the wellbeing of their in-laws and friends. Prof. Nakagawa points out that the life span of those who entered the contaminated city is in fact longer than the national average, and that the average life span of 86.33 years for women in Hiroshima is said to be the longest among all of the major cities across Japan with nearly or more than one million population. On top of that, Hiroshima boasts the second highest birth rate and the lowest stillbirth rate in Japan.

　　　According to an analysis by Prof. Nakagawa, the primary factor contributing to the impressive health and longevity on the part of the women of Hiroshima is the so-called “hibakusha” (A-bomb victim) health card. Today, there are some 220,000 health card holders, compared to more than 370,000 in 1980, who are entitled to free treatment for every ailment, from such diseases as diabetes right down to the common cold. In addition to substantial medical treatment, Prof. Nakagawa points to a second factor -€ the simple fact that the victims of Hiroshima chose to continue living in their hometown, right where they were exposed to radiation after the bomb was dropped.

Needed: More Vigorous Efforts to Lessen the Burdens of Fukushima Evacuees

　　　At the time, few people outside the experts were aware that radiation was potentially deadly -€ a factor that prompted the victims to continue living in Hiroshima rather than deserting their hometown. This is a decisive difference from today, where thousands of citizens terrified of radiation have left their homes with only the clothes on their backs, each living a life of great uncertainty in remote and unfamiliar shelters.

　　　Hiroshima was also different from Chernobyl, Prof. Nakagawa points out. In the small Ukraine town near the Belarus border, which suffered an incomparably devastating accident with the explosion of a reactor pressure vessel, a mass migration of residents was carried out starting in 1988, nearly two years after the April 1986 accident. The criteria for migration applied to all of the areas with radiation levels higher than 5 millisieverts a year -€ a standard far stricter than Fukushima, which set it at 20 millisieverts. The important question here is if the evacuees have become any healthier. Unfortunately, the answer is “no.” To the contrary, their average life span shortened by seven years in the eight years between 1986, when the accident happened, and 1994.

　　　The reason, notes Prof. Nakagawa, is that the residents were compelled to live as evacuees away from their dear old homes. His contention is supported by an account of the Chernobyl disaster published last year by the Russian government 25 years after the accident -€ A Review and Outlook 1986-2011. The report concludes that miscalculations by the authorities in managing the accident included:
　　　-Carrying out a massive migration program for Chernobyl
　　　residents after 1988; and,
　　　-The effects of radiation on mental and physical hygiene
　　　have proved to be far less than other negative factors.
　　　Needless to say, the less exposure to radiation, the better. Radiation damage should never be underestimated; little children should naturally be paid special attention. At the same time, it is vital to grasp the real factors contributing to cancer occurrence as calmly as possible. Many of us in the Kanto area have benefited immeasurably from the precious electricity produced in Fukushima over the years. ﾂ黴€Now is the time for all of us to be grateful to Fukushima and make up our minds to give all possible assistance and support to Mrs. Nishimoto, Mr. Asada, and the tens of thousands of other nuclear victims to help mitigate their anxieties, encouraging them to face their future with confidence.
　　　For that purpose, I would consider it a sensible idea for communities across Kanto -€ and, other regions of the Japanese archipelago as well -€ to willingly contribute to lessening Fukushima’s heavy burdens, such as by agreeing to bear a share of the cost of processing earthquake and tsunami debris.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 500 in the March 8, 2012 issue of The Weekly Shincho.)