Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

marketwatch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 24 posts

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#11

Post by marze »

po wrote: post #8

These numbers are still very very small. I'm sitting in Tokyo right now working away on my codebase. No need to get worked up over nothing and so far it is nothing. A lot of my friends (mostly foreigners in Tokyo) are getting on trains out to Kyoto or Osaka. I think that's fine; maybe it's better to be safe than sorry. Maybe it's the cynical New Yorker in me but I feel like I've seen too many of these scares before.…

Isn't Tokyo 150 km from the leaking reactors? The radiation levels for those living closer must be more concerning, if it is 23x background that far away.

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#12

Post by brazzy »

nickolai wrote: post #9
uvdiv wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article screwed up the units: it is likely "0.809 microSieverts per hour ". Your link's figures are over one year.

That's still way below the "no health issues" threshold of 0.01 Sv/hr (so we're 10 000 times below the threshold) (source : http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/docs/energy-good-bad.pdf )

The closest to a "no health issues" figure in your article is 0.02 MILLI-Sieverts per hour as the US regulation for maximum allowable exposure to the public in the vicinity of a power plant. So it's actually only about 250 times below that limit. i.e. nothing to worry about right now, but that can change quickly.

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#13

Post by orblivion »

po wrote: post #8

These numbers are still very very small. I'm sitting in Tokyo right now working away on my codebase. No need to get worked up over nothing and so far it is nothing. A lot of my friends (mostly foreigners in Tokyo) are getting on trains out to Kyoto or Osaka. I think that's fine; maybe it's better to be safe than sorry. Maybe it's the cynical New Yorker in me but I feel like I've seen too many of these scares before.…

It's not like swine flu where something out of people's control might happen, purely based on speculation. At the moment you're fine, but that's because there are people deliberately keeping things at OK levels. If they stopped, things would stop being OK.

Not to say you should necessarily worry more yet, but just know that its not something that will sort itself out, it will require a solution.

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#14

Post by varjag »

marze wrote: post #11
po wrote: post #8

These numbers are still very very small. I'm sitting in Tokyo right now working away on my codebase. No need to get worked up over nothing and so far it is nothing. A lot of my friends (mostly foreigners in Tokyo) are getting on trains out to Kyoto or Osaka. I think that's fine; maybe it's better to be safe than sorry. Maybe it's the cynical New Yorker in me but I feel like I've seen too many of these scares before.…

Isn't Tokyo 150 km from the leaking reactors? The radiation levels for those living closer must be more concerning, if it is 23x background that far away.

The wind is also not blowing on Tokyo. Could be much worse otherwise.

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#15

Post by donw »

po wrote: post #8

These numbers are still very very small. I'm sitting in Tokyo right now working away on my codebase. No need to get worked up over nothing and so far it is nothing. A lot of my friends (mostly foreigners in Tokyo) are getting on trains out to Kyoto or Osaka. I think that's fine; maybe it's better to be safe than sorry. Maybe it's the cynical New Yorker in me but I feel like I've seen too many of these scares before.…

Same here. I'm far more concerned about figuring out how to get IRB to play ball than I am about growing extra limbs or discovering that I'm now a nightlight.

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#16

Post by xiaoma »

russss wrote: post #10
xiaoma wrote: post #7

Actually at that level chronic radiation a positive. Long term research on a large group of people in Taiwan living in somewhat radioactive buildings showed significantly lower cancer rates than the populace a whole. http://toshuo.com/2009/chronic-low-level-radiation-good-for-...

Although this research is interesting, it isn't widely accepted yet. All major authorities still contend that there's not enough evidence to prove that low doses of radiation aren't harmful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model#Contr...

To the best of my knowledge no major authority believes the LNT, the threshold model or the radiation hormesis model to be proven.

That said the French Academy of Sciences & National Academy of Medicine did cite the exact same study of Taiwanese people as well as a large number of laboratory studies in its 2005 report that criticized the LNT model.

In any case I wouldn't be worried in the least if I were in Tokyo right now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#17

Post by fxj »

xiaoma wrote: post #7

Actually at that level chronic radiation a positive. Long term research on a large group of people in Taiwan living in somewhat radioactive buildings showed significantly lower cancer rates than the populace a whole. http://toshuo.com/2009/chronic-low-level-radiation-good-for-...

why is this upmodded? it seems to me that here at HN many people have a very cargo cult knowledge of physics and radioactivity in special. hey guys, here is the message: radioactivity damages cells and finally kill you. stop the wishful thinking! (btw i have a PhD in plasma physics)

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#18

Post by cdavid »

marze wrote: post #11
po wrote: post #8

These numbers are still very very small. I'm sitting in Tokyo right now working away on my codebase. No need to get worked up over nothing and so far it is nothing. A lot of my friends (mostly foreigners in Tokyo) are getting on trains out to Kyoto or Osaka. I think that's fine; maybe it's better to be safe than sorry. Maybe it's the cynical New Yorker in me but I feel like I've seen too many of these scares before.…

Isn't Tokyo 150 km from the leaking reactors? The radiation levels for those living closer must be more concerning, if it is 23x background that far away.

There is an evacuation zone of 20 km around the plant, and people between 20 and 30 km advised to not go out. The radiations around the plant are now definitely dangerous, but those are far far above the ones seen in Tokyo.

Right now, from what I can read from Japanese news, and assuming the numbers given by the authority are accurate, there is no danger in Tokyo - 20 x normal is still below what's considered dangerous. What worrying about those numbers are not the number themselves, but what it means if the situation in the plants worsen - and I think people don't really know.

The Japanese gvt announced a couple of hours ago that every region in Japan will regularly update measure of radioactivity, which suggest that they don't try to hide too much, although I would not read too much into it either.

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#19

Post by nickolai »

brazzy wrote: post #12
nickolai wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's still way below the "no health issues" threshold of 0.01 Sv/hr (so we're 10 000 times below the threshold) (source : http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/docs/energy-good-bad.pdf )

The closest to a "no health issues" figure in your article is 0.02 MILLI-Sieverts per hour as the US regulation for maximum allowable exposure to the public in the vicinity of a power plant. So it's actually only about 250 times below that limit. i.e. nothing to worry about right now, but that can change quickly.

quote from table in the article

>Table 2: Symptoms associated with acute radiation exposure

>(dose for one day)

> Dose : 0-0.25Sv. Symptom : none . Outcome : - .

I was not referrign to any regulation, which is understandably way below the danger zone, but about the actual risks. hence the 10000 number.

These figures refer to "acute exposure", and may be different from prolonged exposure. Not sure about that, or about how prolonged the japanese exposure turns out to be.

Re: Tokyo radiation levels 23 times normal: officials

#20

Post by brazzy »

nickolai wrote: post #19
brazzy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The closest to a "no health issues" figure in your article is 0.02 MILLI-Sieverts per hour as the US regulation for maximum allowable exposure to the public in the vicinity of a power plant. So it's actually only about 250 times below that limit. i.e. nothing to worry about right now, but that can change quickly.

quote from table in the article >Table 2: Symptoms associated with acute radiation exposure >(dose for one day) > Dose : 0-0.25Sv. Symptom : none . Outcome : - . I was not referrign to any regulation, which is understandably way below the danger zone, but about the actual risks. hence the 10000 number. These figures refer to "acute exposure", and may be different from prolonged exposure. Not sure about that, or about…

Oh damn... These figures refer to acute radioation poisoning, i.e. what happens when radiation is so intense that it directly kills so many of your cells that your body can't cope.

Even if at 0.25 Sv none of that happens, you still have a very actual, massively increased risk of cancer and genetic defects in future children. To declare "no health issues", you most definitely want to stay several orders of magnitude below that (there is always and increased risk of cancer and birth defects, but at some point it gets lost in the noise).

I really don't want to sound condescending, but you should not issue statements here if you don't know such fundamental aspects.

Post reply on HN