Read on Twitter
I wrote this longread for WIRED UK on the social and personal aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear accident: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/fukushima-evacuation-mental-health
A manmade disaster is different from a natural disaster. Tsunami survivors have been able to get closure, and in most cases, move back. But those evacuated due to radiation have been left living in limbo. (2/n)
I went to try and figure out what it's like to live in a contaminated environment (many parallels with coronavirus!), but found out that the main issue for those in Fukushima is not radiation, but the prolonged evacuation and wrenching social shifts that came with it. (3/n)
Many ‘experts’ will tell you that fear of radiation is worse for people’s health than radiation itself. That stress and paranoia will get you faster than any radiation-induced illness will. This is also the consensus view at many international orgs... (4/n)
It’s a seductive idea: maybe radiation is a bogeyman, and we’re irrationally fearful of it?
But no. It's a faulty argument. (5/n)
But no. It's a faulty argument. (5/n)
One, it’s political: it’s favoured by the pro-nuclear lobby, because they like to portray anti-nuclear folks as nutters. “It’s all in your head!”
Any doubts are dismissed as "radiophobia"; in Japanese, 放射脳, or 'radiobrain'. (6/n)
Any doubts are dismissed as "radiophobia"; in Japanese, 放射脳, or 'radiobrain'. (6/n)
It’s possible that some people are disproportionately concerned about radiation, vis-a-vis other hazards. But our knowledge of the health effects of radiation is incomplete, and heavily warped by vested interests in nuclear energy. (7/n)
There is also sufficient good science showing that low doses of radiation can induce cancer and illnesses. You can’t call people crazy if there is reasonable doubt! To be honest: we just don’t know what the long-term effects of a nuclear plant disaster is... (8/n)
... because the data from Chernobyl is incomplete and contested, and it’s too early to tell in Fukushima. Observational studies only ran for a few years in Chernobyl before funding was pulled + orgs switched to statistical modelling. They're not even being done in Fukushima(9/n)
Most of what we know about the health effects of radiation are based on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which involved very different radionuclides and people were exposed to a high dose in a very short period of time, which is different from low-level exposure over years. (10/n)
What’s more… most of the mental health problems amongst people Fukushima are not caused by radiation. They’re caused by the evacuation, by loss of work, community, family issues, money problems, and stigmatization. (11/n)
It’s also wrong to portray the problems as “psychological”, because it makes the problem *individual* even though its causes are social: “You’re an anxious person, so you're suffering from anxiety”. Doctors say it would be far more effective to fix the social problems (12/n)
... Or, you know, if the accident had never happened at all. Whether the issues are psychological or physical in origin, whether they derive from radiation or the change in lifestyle due to the evacuation... they all stem from the accident, which was manmade. (13/n)
The evacuation HAS caused more misery and upheaval in the area than radiation has. But when ‘experts’ assert that maybe people shouldn’t have been evacuated at all… well, to not evacuate would have been illegal. (14/n)
So evacuation was necessary, but it caused most of the problems. Doctors are worried the lessons haven’t been learned. 160,000 people were evacuated in Fukushima; there are nuclear plants in China with some 3 million people living within the same radius. (15/n)
The parallels with coronavirus were fascinating, too:
— perception that you, or others, are contaminated
— fury at (perceived) incompetence of govt
— health concerns pitched against economic imperative
— conflicts over differing attitudes towards risk
— stigmatization
(16/n)
— perception that you, or others, are contaminated
— fury at (perceived) incompetence of govt
— health concerns pitched against economic imperative
— conflicts over differing attitudes towards risk
— stigmatization
(16/n)
— the lie of "we're all in this together" while the rich have resources to survive it and the poor bear the brunt
— parallel crises complicating recovery (tsunami damage and energy shortage in Fukushima; global recession and climate change for coronavirus)
(17/n)
— parallel crises complicating recovery (tsunami damage and energy shortage in Fukushima; global recession and climate change for coronavirus)
(17/n)
Anyway! I am indebted to
@AzbyB, @ShaunBurnie, @masaharutsubo and dozens of others not-on-Twitter for their time, expertise, and input. And to @vturk for being an incredible editor, and @cpalmieri for providing a great place to write in Tokyo. (18/18)
@AzbyB, @ShaunBurnie, @masaharutsubo and dozens of others not-on-Twitter for their time, expertise, and input. And to @vturk for being an incredible editor, and @cpalmieri for providing a great place to write in Tokyo. (18/18)
