Journal of radiological protection : official journal of the Society for Radiological Protection
-
At its 58th session in May 2011, the United Nations Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) decided to carry out, once sufficient information was available, a full assessment of the levels of exposure and radiation risks attributable to the Fukushima accident. It envisages a preliminary document for consideration at its 59th session in May of 2012 and a more complete report for the 60th session of the Committee in 2013. This paper summarises the aims and objectives of the project, the scope, the working arrangements as well as the relation of the work to other activities.
-
The psychosocial consequences of disasters have been studied for more than 100 years. The most common mental health consequences are depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, medically unexplained somatic symptoms, and stigma. The excess morbidity rate of psychiatric disorders in the first year after a disaster is in the order of 20%. ⋯ Thus, based on the studies of adults, the Chernobyl Forum concluded that mental health was the largest public health problem unleashed by the accident. Since mental health is a leading cause of disability, physical morbidity, and mortality, health monitoring after radiation accidents like Fukushima should include standard measures of well-being. Moreover, given the comorbidity of mental and physical health, the findings support the value of training non-psychiatrist physicians in recognizing and treating common mental health problems like depression in Fukushima patients.
-
The accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant released a large quantity of radioactive iodine and caesium into the environment. In terms of radiological protection, the evacuation and food restrictions that were adopted in a timely manner by the authorities effectively reduced the dose received by people living in the affected area. Since late March, the transition from an emergency to an existing exposure situation has been in progress. ⋯ It would not be possible to resolve this problem unless the ICRP addressed an alternative risk assessment to convey the meaning and associated uncertainty of the risk to an exposed population. A situation-based approach in addition to a risk-informed approach needs to be disseminated properly in order to select the level of protection that would be the best possible under the prevailing circumstances. A dialogue between radiation and other risk experts such as those dealing with chemical exposures is now needed.
-
Editorial Comment
International expert symposium in Fukushima, September 2011.
-
Editorial Comment
International expert symposium in Fukushima: radiation and health risks.