「辞任というのは、最悪の行動じゃないでしょうか」
先週末、同僚から届いたメールの一文だ。内閣官房参与だった小佐古敏荘・東京大教授の話題だ。小佐古さんは、放射線の健康影響の専門家。その人が「政府の対応は甘すぎる」と訴え、泣きながら会見した。原発事故の地元では、ただでさえ放射性物質への不安が高まっている。小佐古さんの辞任劇は「あまりに感情的で唐突な行動のため、混乱に拍車をかける」というのだ。
放射性物質の健康影響には、２種類ある。強い放射線で体の組織が傷つく確定的影響と、被ばくによって染色体が傷つき、将来がんになるリスクが高まる確率的影響だ。原発から数十キロ離れれば、確定的影響が起きる線量より大幅に低く、「ただちに影響はない」との説明になる。一方、将来のがんリスクは、被ばく量が少なくても、わずかに高まるとされる。中でも、子どもは放射性物質の影響を受けやすい。福島県の親たちが心配するのは、その点だ。
ただし、将来、福島県の子どもががんになったとしても、生活習慣など他の要因との見分けはつかず、今回の放射性物質が原因かどうかは医学的に分からない。チェルノブイリ事故の長期的な健康影響についても、専門家の間で意見が分かれる。実は、はっきりしないことが多いのだ。
わずかにでも上がるリスクと、どう向き合うか。明確な根拠がない中で私たちは考えねばならないが、今は判断材料が少なすぎる。小佐古さんの行動はただ「安全」を連呼する政府に一石を投じたが、単に「危ない」と言われても困る。政府も小佐古さんのような専門家も、「不確実性がある」と認めたうえで、きちんと判断材料を示してほしい。本当に泣きたいのは、福島の人たちなのだ。
英訳毎日新聞 2011年5月4日 0時08分
Gov't, experts must release criteria for radiation safety around nuke plant
"Resigning was the worst choice, wasn't it?" says an e-mail I received from one of my colleagues late last week. It referred to the resignation of University of Tokyo professor and radiation expert Toshiso Kosako as an adviser to the Cabinet Secretariat.
Kosako tearfully criticized the government for what he calls its "lax" response to the crisis at the tsunami-hit Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant when he announced his departure at a news conference. My colleague fears that Kosako's abrupt and emotional announcement could fuel local residents' concern about radiation leaks from the crippled power station.
There are two kinds of health hazards that radioactive material can cause -- immediate tissue damage from high levels of radiation, and chromosomal damage that increases the risk of cancer in the future even if the amount of radioactive material is small.
Radiation in areas dozens of kilometers away from the plant is far below the level that could immediately damage tissues. Therefore, the government asserts that the radiation "will not pose an immediate threat to human health."
On the other hand, if people are exposed to even a small amount of radiation, experts say it will slightly increase the risk of cancer in the future. Children in particular are vulnerable to radioactive substances. This is what residents of Fukushima Prefecture are worried about.
However, if children living in Fukushima Prefecture suffer from cancer in the future, it will be impossible to prove a causal relationship between their exposure to radiation and the disease. Even experts are divided over whether and how far the Chernobyl nuclear crisis will affect the health of nearby populations from a long-term perspective. In short, health hazards that radiation can cause have not been clarified.
We need to consider how to deal with such a slight rise in health hazards caused by radiation, but there is too little information available to make that judgment.
Professor Kosako voiced objections to the government's repeated assertions that the situation is safe. However, his warning that the situation is dangerous without showing clear evidence also fuels the public's anxiety.
Both the government and experts like Kosako are required to show the public clear criteria for judging whether the situation is safe or dangerous. It is Fukushima Prefecture residents, rather than Kosako, who really want to cry over the ongoing nuclear crisis. (By Etsuko Nagayama, Tokyo Science and Environment News Department)
Click here for the original Japanese story
(Mainichi Japan) May 4, 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment