3 ms·
> I understand that he received an estimated 74 mSv of radiation "The ministry said he had been exposed to about 195 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation. The Inte
by miles 4y ago
> I understand that he received an estimated 74 mSv of radiation
"The ministry said he had been exposed to about 195 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation. The International Commission on Radiological Protection recommends avoiding more than 1-20 mSv per year, and according to Reuters, exposure to 100 mSv a year is 'the lowest level at which any increase in cancer risk is clearly evident.'" https://time.com/5388178/japan-first-fukushima-radiation-death/ https://time.com/5388178/japan-first-fukushima-radiation-dea...
- acidburnNSA 4y agoThat's 100 mSv acute. Did he get it acutely (i.e. in a day or two) or over years? If acute then yes, the measurable increment over a background 40% lifetime risk could be due to Fukushima. So then the question is what's the increment? Let's estimate that it's 1% (based on the noisy data at these still quite low doses). In that case, there is a 1 in 40 chance that his cancer death in 2016 was due to Fukushima in 2011. It it wasn't acute and accumulated over >1 year, then there's a ~0% chance it was from Fukushima radiation.