It’s always informative to look back to authoritative representations made in the early days of a crisis like Fukushima and see how well they align with reality a couple of years down the line.
Maybe you remember that infamous MIT study that seemed deliberately engineered to mislead about the dangers of radiation.
Therapeutically injected into the PR fallout from the world’s worst nuclear accident (which was not, as yet, identified as such), the MIT study took the rather astonishing position that it might not have been necessary to evacuate people from the region around the crippled reactors! It was very popular and widely quoted at the time; and probably gave some poor folks in northern Japan a short-lived sense of security.
If you were paying attention after then, we came rather quickly to understand that MIT was so dependent on support from the nuclear industry that its research in the area could no longer be trusted.
I haven’t heard much reference to those literally incredible findings in the intervening years, but they are no doubt deeply embedded in every proposal for a new nuclear facility that comes into play.
Much like the truncated and censored records drawn from survivors of the WWII nuclear attacks in Japan that form the basis of conventional wisdom even to this day; the myth of harmlessness generated by this latest attempt to skew the science in favor of the nuclear industry will have a half-life as long as plutonium.
But, hang on!
Here comes news that, even using the questionable benchmarks established by the post-WW II records and the equally questionable records from Chernobyl (where Soviet officials are believed to have deliberately expunged much of the data), it can be estimated that the incidence of thyroid cancer in Fukushima survivors will be one-in-fifty, or seven times the normal rate.
Now…can I interest you in some Japanese farmland that’s going very cheap these days?