Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Earth
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant suffered three meltdowns last year. Paired with hydrogen explosions, these meltdowns allowed radioactive material to escape. So what's the effect on the environment and human health?
The first clues come from what’s called the pale grass blue butterfly. This delicate insect's wings change color and pattern in response to environmental changes.
The offspring of female butterflies caught in the Fukushima region six months after the meltdowns sported such color-pattern changes, as well as deformed legs, antennae, wings and even eyes. The deformities persisted and got worse in the second generation of offspring as well.
The same deformities were found in butterflies collected from the wild. And the researchers induced similar effects by exposing normal butterflies to radiation from cesium particles like those that escaped Fukushima Daiichi. The research is in the journal Nature Scientific Reports.
As for people, more than 3,000 individuals from a town 23 kilometers north of the stricken nuclear plant also bore detectable levels of radioactive cesium in their bodies. Their total dose of less than one milliSievert is considered safe, and no radiation sickness was observed. But, says a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the men, women and children exposed need to be watched for the long-term effects of the radiation—for the rest of their lives.
—David Biello
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
[Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.]
See what we're tweeting about
15 Comments
Add Comment<the men, women and children exposed need to be watched for the long-term effects of the radiation—for the rest of their lives>
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat IS already a negative consequence of radiation, influencing their quality of life, restricting the duration of travel abroad etc.
(Not to mention the disturbing consequence of intellectual meltdown at SciAm in the shape of the idiotic and most disruptive floating facetwit bar which is messing up my screen space and irritating me enormously - not that SciAm seems to care: beware, digital idiots at work)
Recent <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2012/08/17/radon-lung-cancer-risk.html">article</a> relates how 16% of all lung cancers are probably caused by naturally occurring radon. By international standards radon rad. level is allowed to be 10mSv/yr, so a person receives a typical TOTAL Fukushima dose in about a month, and receives it month in, month out. So, yes, the Fukushima people are monitored, but it is 100 times more important for everyone with a basement home to monitor their own homes for naturally-occurring radon.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBTW, SciAm, love your floating share bar; I hope you don't mind if I steal the scripts for my own web pages.
your nick says it all
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiskrab: still I checked your link:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisa) you imply explicitly that nuclear radiation as a cause for cancer is vastly exaggerated; in YOUR quote it says that radon is the second cause for lung cancer; not to be the first cause then makes it healthier in your opinion?
b) it seeks into those houses that are built on soil containing naturally decaying radium:
b1) contrary to what some pro-nukers here pretend then, radium does cause cancer even in very low doses;
b2) check the soil on which you build or you may get cancer;
c) it is not a one-time low dose of radiation which causes the worst consequences, it is the long-term exposure to low-level radiation:
c1) people around Fukushima will have long-time exposure and their cancer rate will increase exponentially;
c2) low level radiation has caused havoc around Three-Mile Island and Tchernobyl; these stats exist, are fully documented and freely available from a simple netsearch;
d) as the butterfly studies show, the consequences of even low-level radiation become worse over time and with each generation;
Would you live near an accidented reactor? Would you even live near an operating reactor these days?
---
you don't like the floating toolbar, you just say so to spite me because if you had a site where you would use SciAm's facetwit toolbar, you would promote that thing endlessly in every comment; or post the link so that we can see what your facetwit-loving site looks like. And if you have a site, do you have a comments' section?
Don't know why but you are reminding me of Tchernobyl birds.
And have I said it? I do love your nick. It's so expressive, so - you.
Just another in a long line of Big Oil infomercials dutifully copied down by its favorite stenographer Biello designed to keep the Big Oil agenda in the news. After all Big Oil paid out a lot in bribes to make the nuke accident happen so why not milk it as long as they can.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUtter nonsense completely debunked - one butterfly was found deformed most likely from deadly forever toxins released by all of Big Oils chemical spills.
http://nucleardiner.com/archive/item/radioactive-mutant-butterflies-really
<After all Big Oil paid out a lot in bribes to make the nuke accident happen>
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLOL - if you can provide a single shred of evidence for that I eat this issue of SciAm and post the video of it on youtube.
Whereas this is solid proof that you don't have a brain.
Or you are a cretinous and malicious troll. But that would require two neurons.
So the proof stands.
Come ON, crabbee, do your homework. You can't just post garbage and then leave it at that. I was hoping you'd for once look up a subject you're commenting on and hit back with "rodents Chernobyl healthy" so we could have discussed why there is such a discrepancy between the health of everything that flies and that of everything that lives in the ground. Or why Chernobyl re-established a certain ecological balance. But no, you comment once and then give up? How do you expect to learn anything? Scientific progress is in mind discussing things through, popular progress is in minds fighting it out. This is not about winning or losing, this is about you pushing me pushing you. At least then look up those things above for your own sake. Cos it's rather interesting. You see, the bleedin rats do perfectly well around Chernobyl... but am I your advocate?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMore Big Oil sponsored Disinformation, got to earn that huge Oil & Gas advertising revenue. An entirely SCHLOCK study, that is RIPPED TO SHREDS here:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisnucleardiner.com/archive/item/radioactive-mutant-butterflies-really
"..In reviewing the data I found a number of issues:
1. Natural background .. report fails to provide a baseline for any of the locations.
2. Sample size..surprising how high is the abnormality rate for adult butterflies..report states that at Fukushima 20% of the wings from female butterflies have abnormalities. That sounds significant – yet what they neglect to say is that the sample size is only 5 female butterflies! In other words – a statistically insignificant sample! The radiation levels at Fukushima were 1/3 to 1/2 of those from two other sites in the study where the abnormalities in male and female wings were zero.."
3. Motomiya, located 58.8 km from Fukushima, had roughly 3 times the radiation dose rate as compared to the Fukushima samples (3.09 and 2.73 μSv/hr vs 1.13 and 1.25 μSv/hr), but had no abnormalities out of the 11 butterflies collected in May – 2 female and 9 males.."
4. Mixing apples and oranges- The charts look good, but only the ones that correlate to apparently predetermined conclusions are shown..The data for the September collection is similar. There appears to be no correlation between increased dose rate and higher abnormalities in the F1 samples.The data appears to be random.."
"..In summary-the increase in abnormalities for the butterflies that were captured in May 2011 do not correlate to increased radiation..there is no relationship between increased abnormalities between F1 off-spring and increased radiation levels.."
Warning: Big Oil demands that the public is not informed about this:
How about showing some studies on the effects of all the Oil & Gas carcinogens released. PAH'S, PCB'S, Dioxins, PCDD's, PCDF's, POP's, Heavy Metals, Mercury, Asbestos, Benzene and many others. Many of these terrible toxins bioaccumulate with half-lives of over 10 yrs - that's deadly carcinogens which remain in the body for decades, with Furans some of the most deadly carcinogens known to man. 1/2 gm a fatal dose to an adult male. Where is the studies showing the effects of these on wildlife, humans and the LONG TERM cancer risk? Oh, Big Oil doesn't want that, so it don't happen.
One Japanese official remarked that citizens were committing suicide wandering, WITHOUT RESTRICTION, into debris fields, containing toxic levels of asbestos, fibers which lodge into the lung tissue until death.
The state is preparing criminal charges against the principles and Yakuza ties are alleged. There will never be any proof of Big Oil involvement - these folks aren't stupid. In these situations "follow the money" is an excellent rule of thumb.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour commentary makes you to be a troll if you look up the definition of the word - not that you are capable. Just sayin'.
So a pro-nuker is "ripping to shreds" a "big-oil sponsored report"? I've got news for you, there's a blog out there proving the world is a dish and if you get to close to the edge you fall off:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Forest
Other than that, yes, the oil companies are also dangerous polluters. But oil pollution would be far easier to control if there were less idiot politicians elected by idiot voters. But then, you live in a country which considers Fox a news channel and Bush an egg-head.
<The state is preparing criminal charges against the principles>
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisProvide one single proof / one single link to an intelligent site. ONE SINGLE OF ANYTHING to back up that idiotic statement.
<and Yakuza ties are alleged>
Who alleges that? PROOF!
<There will never be any proof of Big Oil involvement - these folks aren't stupid.>
Since there is no proof this proves that this is true? The fact that I can't prove that you are a talking dog is proof that you are. I dare you to bark back.
<In these situations "follow the money" is an excellent rule of thumb.>
Some would say you're just another conspiracy bunny. But I've just had a decent cup of coffee and I am in the mood to believe momentarily that you are funny. Not intentionally I know, but you are.
I tend to reply to stuff like yours when I am in digestive mood. For fun. Otherwise I wouldn't waste a second on it. Whereas your posts seem the result of yours.
Better watch your reply, I have ties too.
Are you taking the place of Sault as Sciam's troll in chief?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI know the G O O G L E is a strange and wierd concept for a halfwit. There I looked a few up you. Ask your teacher for help?
"criminal investigation tepco"
www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/08/prosecutors-have-opened-criminal-investigation-fukushima-disaster/55296/
"yakuza tepco"
www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/05/first-arrest-made-linking-yakuza-fukushima-nuclear-clean-crews/52649/
"Follow the money"
The last led to the resignation of the president.
Lotsa references that you can get your remedial English teacher to explain to you.
As for "proof" - well the world's most notorious war criminal George W Bush is still enjoying life on his ranch.
The investigation is about criminal negligence regarding nuclear safety and the combined efforts of top government officials colluding with Tepco to cover that up. Nothing to do with the kind of crime you imply, that the meltdown was paid for by some competing industry.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd the yakuza ties to Tepco are the same as the mafia's to certain Italian corporate giants. Investment of criminally gained capital, money laundering, that kind of stuff.
To conclude from those investigations that "Big Oil" paid to have a reactor meltdown is stupid beyond belief.
Because something adds up in your brain means nothing. If your brain was money, even the yakuza couldn't launder it. How do you wash a vacuum?
Still, I got curious and looked up the atlantic wire links.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou are technically and practically illiterate. Or nicely put, you suffer from selective reading. Here is what that means:
The woman says: "Listen here, this is one hell of a mess! You and I, we are going to clean this up. Your whole stuff is on the floor and if we don't wash it soon, you will pretty soon have no clothes to wear. You are going to help me and I mean now."
He understands:
blablablabla listen here
blablablabla you and I
blablablabla on the floor
blablablabla no clothes
blablablabla now.
And that's how you read the atlantic wire articles:
blablabla criminal
blablabla investigation
blablabla government
blablabla tepco
blablabla yakuza
your lightning fast brain concentrates on the keywords, your incomparable logic does the rest.
You are an intellectual giant.
If seen through a very, very powerful electron microscope.
in reply to comment nr 1 re the floating facetwit toolbar:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSciAm have improved the thing. Whereas before it was always trampoleening up and down when you scrolled the page, which was the most irritating thing, it now stays steady to the left. That I can live with. SciAm went through the effort. Much appreciated.