Uploaded on Sep 22, 2011
The BBC Program
CNN Report Quoted
The Yomiuri Daily Table
Atomic-Bombing Survivors Study
In light of that study, it's worth noting that the Japanese government calculated that the Cesium-137 alone emitted from Fukushima as of late August was 168 times more radioactive than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...
IAEA Report Quoted
NYAS Review (Yablokov et al.) Cited
NOTE: I'm now skeptical of the 985,000 death-toll figure in the NYAS review. The figure has been criticized for lacking a clear or standard methodology. And the authors have not rebutted their critics that I am aware. But their review is a 327-page tour de force of Chernobyl research important in that respect.
In contrast, the European Environmental Agency, using standard dosimetry (ICRP and BEIR) -- predicts between 17,000 to 68,000 Chernobyl-induced deaths over 50 years. A figure that also counters Al-Khalili's implication that estimated death tolls above a mere handful are wild rumors.
The European Environmental Agency's prediction of 17,000 to 68,000 deaths over 50 years is based on better-established radiobiology. See: Late lessons II Chapter 18 - Late lessons from Chernobyl early warnings from Fukushima @ http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications..., which lays out the EEA's straightforward methodology:
"Given that UNSCEAR (1993) and IAEA (1996)
estimate a total world-wide collective dose
of 600,000 person‑Sieverts over 50 years from
Chernobyl fallout, and the standard risk
estimate from the International Commission on
Radiological Protection (ICRP, 2005) is 0.057 fatal
cancers per Sievert, this suggests an estimate of
about 34,000 fatal cancers over that time period
(Ramana, 2009). Given the widely accepted linear
no-threshold radiation risk model may overstate
or understate risks by a factor of two (BIER VII,
2006) — then estimates for post-Chernobyl cancer
mortality extrapolation may range from 17,000 to
68,000 over 50 years."
Extra: detailed complaint submitted to BBC over the program critiqued in this video :
@ 1:53 I cite a false analogy Al Khalili commits, which takes this form:
1. Fukushima and the tsunami are similar in that both were disasters.
2. The tsunami's harm is measured by its death toll before 9/14/11.
3. Therefore, Fukushima's harm is measured by its death toll before 9/14/11.
That argument from analogy is assumed implicitly in his comparison aired on Sept 14, 2011. We cannot conclude as he wishes us to that the tsunami was far worse unless we accept that analogy as true. However, it's a false analogy on account of the fact that the harm of radiation exposure is also measured by the deaths it causes years and decades later.
Standard YouTube License