关于疏散时适当辐射水平的评论。
Commentary on the appropriate radiation level for evacuations.
机构信息
Cuttler & Associates Inc.
出版信息
Dose Response. 2012 Dec;10(4):473-9. doi: 10.2203/dose-response.12-013.Cuttler. Epub 2012 Mar 19.
Abstract
This commentary reviews the international radiation protection policy that resulted in the evacuation of more than 90,000 residents from areas near the Fukushima Daiichi NPS and the enormous expenditures to protect them against a hypothetical risk of cancer. The basis for the precautionary measures is shown to be invalid; the radiation level chosen for evacuation is not conservative. The actions caused unnecessary fear and suffering. An appropriate level for evacuation is recommended. Radical changes to the ICRP recommendations are long overdue.
摘要
本评论回顾了导致超过 9 万名居民从福岛第一核电站附近地区撤离的国际辐射防护政策，以及为保护他们免受假设的癌症风险而进行的巨额支出。事实证明，预防措施的依据是无效的；选择进行撤离的辐射水平并不保守。这些行动造成了不必要的恐惧和痛苦。建议确定一个适当的撤离水平。国际辐射防护委员会的建议早就应该进行彻底改革。
相似文献
1
Commentary on the appropriate radiation level for evacuations.关于疏散时适当辐射水平的评论。
Dose Response. 2012 Dec;10(4):473-9. doi: 10.2203/dose-response.12-013.Cuttler. Epub 2012 Mar 19.
2
Evacuation after a nuclear accident: Critical reviews of past nuclear accidents and proposal for future planning.核事故后人员撤离：对过去核事故的批判性回顾与未来规划建议。
Environ Int. 2021 Mar;148:106379. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106379. Epub 2021 Jan 13.
3
Radiation protection issues on preparedness and response for a severe nuclear accident: experiences of the Fukushima accident.严重核事故应急准备与响应中的辐射防护问题：福岛事故的经验
Ann ICRP. 2015 Jun;44(1 Suppl):347-56. doi: 10.1177/0146645314543750. Epub 2014 Nov 3.
4
Radiological protection issues arising during and after the Fukushima nuclear reactor accident.福岛核反应堆事故期间及之后出现的放射防护问题。
J Radiol Prot. 2013 Sep;33(3):497-571. doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/33/3/497. Epub 2013 Jun 27.
5
Cost of fear and radiation protection actions: Washington County, Utah and Fukushima, Japan {Comparing case histories}.恐惧和辐射防护措施的代价：犹他州华盛顿县和日本福岛{比较案例历史}。
Int J Radiat Biol. 2020 Apr;96(4):520-531. doi: 10.1080/09553002.2020.1721595. Epub 2020 Feb 7.
6
Severe Psychological Distress of Evacuees in Evacuation Zone Caused by the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident: The Fukushima Health Management Survey.福岛第一核电站事故导致的C区撤离人员严重心理困扰：福岛健康管理调查
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 8;11(7):e0158821. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158821. eCollection 2016.
7
[The relationship between information sources, media, and "anxiety about the effects of radiation on future generations" in Hamadori and Fukushima Prefecture's evacuation areas after the nuclear accident].[核事故后滨通地区和福岛县疏散区信息来源、媒体与“对辐射对子孙后代影响的担忧”之间的关系]
Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi. 2021 Dec 4;68(11):753-764. doi: 10.11236/jph.20-140. Epub 2021 Aug 25.
8
Effect of evacuation on liver function after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident: The Fukushima Health Management Survey.福岛第一核电站事故后撤离对肝功能的影响：福岛健康管理调查
J Epidemiol. 2017 Apr;27(4):180-185. doi: 10.1016/j.je.2016.05.006. Epub 2017 Jan 27.
9
Mortality risk amongst nursing home residents evacuated after the Fukushima nuclear accident: a retrospective cohort study.福岛核事故后撤离的养老院居民的死亡风险：一项回顾性队列研究。
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e60192. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060192. Epub 2013 Mar 26.
10
Importance of continuing health care before emergency hospital evacuation: a fatal case of a hospitalized patient in a hospital within 5 km radius of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant: a case report.在紧急医院撤离前继续医疗保健的重要性：福岛第一核电站半径 5 公里范围内的一家医院内住院患者的致命病例：病例报告。
J Med Case Rep. 2023 Feb 7;17(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s13256-022-03744-6.
引用本文的文献
1
Commentary on fukushima and beneficial effects of low radiation.福岛评论与低辐射的有益影响。
Dose Response. 2013 May 24;11(4):432-43. doi: 10.2203/dose-response.13-008.Cuttler. eCollection 2013.
2
Special issue introduction.特刊介绍。
Dose Response. 2012 Dec;10(4):462-6. doi: 10.2203/dose-response.12-047.Scott. Epub 2012 Dec 7.
本文引用的文献
1
Muller's Nobel Prize Lecture: when ideology prevailed over science.穆勒的诺贝尔奖演讲：当意识形态凌驾于科学之上。
Toxicol Sci. 2012 Mar;126(1):1-4. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfr338. Epub 2011 Dec 13.
2
Improving the scientific foundations for estimating health risks from the Fukushima incident.加强估算福岛事件健康风险的科学基础。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Dec 6;108(49):19447-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1117296108. Epub 2011 Nov 22.
3
Key studies used to support cancer risk assessment questioned.用于支持癌症风险评估的关键研究受到质疑。
Environ Mol Mutagen. 2011 Oct;52(8):595-606. doi: 10.1002/em.20662. Epub 2011 Jul 22.
4
Muller's Nobel lecture on dose-response for ionizing radiation: ideology or science?穆勒的诺贝尔演讲：电离辐射的剂量反应——是意识形态还是科学？
Arch Toxicol. 2011 Dec;85(12):1495-8. doi: 10.1007/s00204-011-0728-8. Epub 2011 Jun 30.
5
Nuclear energy and health: and the benefits of low-dose radiation hormesis.核能与健康：以及低剂量辐射兴奋效应的益处。
Dose Response. 2009;7(1):52-89. doi: 10.2203/dose-response.08-024.Cuttler. Epub 2008 Nov 10.
6
The road to linearity: why linearity at low doses became the basis for carcinogen risk assessment.线性之路：为何低剂量下的线性关系成为致癌物风险评估的基础。
Arch Toxicol. 2009 Mar;83(3):203-25. doi: 10.1007/s00204-009-0412-4. Epub 2009 Feb 27.
7
Radiation-induced versus endogenous DNA damage: possible effect of inducible protective responses in mitigating endogenous damage.辐射诱导的DNA损伤与内源性DNA损伤：诱导性保护反应在减轻内源性损伤中的可能作用。
Hum Exp Toxicol. 2003 Jun;22(6):290-306; discussion 307, 315-7, 319-23. doi: 10.1191/0960327103ht365oa.
8
Mortality from cancer and all causes among British radiologists.英国放射科医生的癌症及所有病因死亡率。
Br J Radiol. 1981 Mar;54(639):187-94. doi: 10.1259/0007-1285-54-639-187.
9
Spontaneous DNA damage and its significance for the "negligible dose" controversy in radiation protection.自发性DNA损伤及其在辐射防护“可忽略剂量”争议中的意义。
Radiat Res. 1990 Nov;124(2):242-5.
10
1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.国际放射防护委员会1990年建议
Ann ICRP. 1991;21(1-3):1-201.
Zotero 插件