Below is the text of the Open Letter sent by a group from SARI (Scientists for Accurate Radiation Information) via e-mail on Oct 31, 2014 to advisory bodies (ICRP, NCRP, UNSCEAR, IAEA, WHO, NAS) regarding the disastrous consequences from the use of the LNT model at Fukushima Daiichi:
The nuclear reactor accident at Fukushima Daiichi that followed the earthquake and tsunami in 2011 prompted well-intended measures that have had disastrous consequences. These were not caused by the radiation itself but by the social stress, the forced evacuation, and the ongoing displacement of tens of thousands of people. Both the stress and the population relocations are based on the fear of low-dose radiation that originated from the use of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model for radiation-induced cancers and its associated “no safe dose” mantra.
The mistakes made at Chernobyl concerning prolonged evacuation were repeated in Fukushima in spite of the acknowledged adverse health consequences from the prolonged evacuations with little projected benefit, since the radiation doses avoided were too low to have resulted in any detectable harm.
To address and overcome the root cause of these social and economic consequences for Fukushima residents and for Japan as a whole, the Society for Radiation Information (SRI), a group of concerned Japanese citizens, in collaboration with the Legislators’ Committee for the Study of the Effects of Radiation, has organized a conference on Dec 3, 2014 in Tokyo called “1st Scientific Advisory Meeting for Radiation and Accurate Information”. This conference is being co-sponsored by the international group Scientists for Accurate Radiation Information (SARI). All signatories of this letter are members or associate members of SARI.
If the evacuated Fukushima residents had returned to their homes and resumed normal activities in 2012, the maximum additional radiation dose they would have faced has been estimated to be ~8 mSv/y (Harada et al., PNAS, 2014). That modest dose-rate would decrease every year. Considering the wide variation in annual natural background radiation doses around the world, and the lack of observed increases in cancer rates in areas having higher annual doses than noted above, repopulation would not have posed an increase in cancer risk, notwithstanding the current use of the LNT model.
If your organization makes a firm, unconditional statement to the Fukushima residents that returning to their homes would not increase their risk of cancer, it would help eliminate fear, and enable them to resume normal life. Since your organization has a great influence on the public, we are making this request, so that we can convey your response to the conference.
Considering the potentially large impact of assurance from you to the Fukushima population and the country of Japan, we hope you will oblige with a reply via e-mail, if possible on or before November 28, 2014. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
(Signed by 40 members and associate members of SARI)