Sep 20, 2012

Letter from Oguni Elementary School It's Okay: Hotspot Down from 179 μSv/h to 3.9 μSv/h



There is a letter sent home on September 18, 2012, from Oguni Elementary School in Date-city, Fukushima, in order to notify parents/guardians of the radiation contamination situation at school.  It can be found in the links below.

http://p.twipple.jp/jhQNo
http://p.twpl.jp/show/orig/jhQNo
http://goyonokatawa.blogspot.com/2012/09/blog-post.html?spref=tw

Date-city is located about 50 km northwest of Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant: it sits east of Fukushima-city and known to have high radiation levels.  Oguni Elementary School is indicated as “A” in the map below.

Information about Date-city can be found here: 




Complete translation of the letter is as below.

In regards to the radiation contamination situation surrounding the school

It has been nearly a month since the second trimester began.  Despite the persistent late summer heat, children are back into the regular daily routine, spending a calm school life.
I would like to report to you the latest radiation situation surrounding the school.

1. Regarding the ambient radiation level survey by the Date City Citizen Affairs Department Radiation Response Section

“Ambient radiation level monitoring survey of the area ‘A’ elementary and junior high schools” was conducted on Tuesday, August 21, 2012.  I have asked the person in charge to send the survey results to us through the Board of Education, but we have not received it yet.  When we checked with the person in charge today, I was told, “We will organize the data and deliver it to school.”  We will let you know as soon as we receive it.

http://www.city.date.fukushima.jp/groups/hosyasen/8keka-school.pdf

2. Regarding the confirmation of hot spots around the school and the response
(1) Survey and response by CRMS (Citizen’s Radioactivity Measuring Station)
  From 1:00 pm to 4:00 pm on Sunday, July 8, 2012, members of “Association for Recovering Clean Oguni from Radiation” as well as PTA conducted a radiation level survey around the school.
  The survey result confirmed the effectiveness of decontamination of the schoolyard.  However, multiple hot spots were identified:  from the school bus stop to the main gate; edges as well as south and east sides of the schoolyard; around the swimming pool; and behind the gymnasium.
  In regards to these hot spots, they stuck bamboo sticks with red vinyl tape wrapped around them there in order to secure safety of the areas.  we called the students' attention not to go near the area.

(2) Investigation and response by the Board of Education, Department of Education,  School Educational Facilities Section
  On Wednesday, September 12, 2012, the School Educational Facilities Section investigated a hot spot located at a drain a ditch outside the school property near the sundial on the east side of the school building.  (This area is covered by weeds and usually the students stay away from it).
  The next day, several workers came to school to remove soil from the drain and sand from the gutter and cover the area with sand stored in the corner of the schoolyard.  The ambient radiation level went from 179 μSv/h (prior to decontamination) down to 3.9 μSv/h (after decontamination).  The hot spot has a locally high radiation level due to the accumulation of mud and sand from the gutter.  Exposure to a high radiation level can be prevented if you stay far away from the hot spot location.
  In regards to the hot spot, we put up a “No Entry” sign there in order to secure safety of the area.  In addition, we called the students' attention not to go near the area.       
  In the future, we would like to keep checking the radiation levels around the school and take appropriate measures.  The school will continue to release the information, but if there is any other information available locally, please let us know.

(Contact person: Vice principal Yukinori Ishihata)


                          ***
Based on the map of Date City’s simultaneous radiation levels surveyed between July 26 through 28, 2012, Oguni Elementary School is located in the grid number J-17, which is circled in red.  The coloring of this grid indicates that the ambient radiation level is between 1.01 μSv/h and 1.25 μSv/h.




The ambient radiation levels at various elementary and junior high schools are listed below, with Oguni Elementary School on the very bottom.  The first table includes the radiation levels from September 18, 2012, taken at 100 cm from the ground for junior high schools and 50 cm for elementary schools.  The September 18th radiation levels for Oguni Elementary School were 0.38 μSv/h in the middle of the schoolyard, 0.08 μSv/h in the middle of a typical ground-floor classroom, and 0.27 μSv/h in the middle of the gymnasium.  Results for August 21, 2012, referred to in the above letter, are shown in a separate table.  Again, Oguni Elementary School is on the very bottom.  The August 21st radiation levels were similar to the September 18 levels, at 0.37 μSv/h, 0.12 μSv/h, and 0.27 μSv/h, respectively  

September 18, 2012 results: Oguni Elementary School, No. 小-17, is on the bottom.





August 21, 2012 results: Oguni Elementary School is on the bottom.


     


The table below shows ambient radiation levels from April 20-25, 2011, about 6 weeks after the nuclear accident, and the they range from 4.90 μSv/h to 5.34 μSv/h.  Oguni Elementary School, No. 小-17, is on the bottom.



                          ***

Oguni Elementary School officials seem content with the post-decontamination radiation level of 3.9 μSv/h.  It is certainly much, much lower than the unbelievable 179 μSv/h.  However, it is still too high for anybody, let alone children, to be around.

Sep 19, 2012

Nuclear cleanup workers sent in to Fukushima Dai-ichi with “fake resumes” -- Reality of corrupted subcontractor system


http://8bitnews.asia/wp/?p=3917#.UFlEpVGLuA8

https://twitter.com/8bit_HORIJUN/status/248171487998115840

A brief summary

The nuclear cleanup workers at Fukushima Dai-ichi are inexperienced day laborers gathered from all over Japan, including minors who are 18 to 19.  The subcontractor system below TEPCO is multi-layered, involving seven subcontractors in this case.  They are given “supposedly blank” resumes with work experience already filled out.  After a one-day seminar on radiation, some workers are obviously anxious.  They are told by one of the subcontractors that the exposure dose isn’t cumulative and even if they are exposed to 1 mSv of radiation a day, it will be halved daily, reaching zero in 8 days.

In February 2012, Tetsuya Hayashi applied for a job repairing the covering for the reactor 3 building.  He was asked to begin work in April 2012.  However, the work was postponed, and he was told in early June that he could begin work immediately doing the checkout and checkin of equipments as well as conducting a radiation survey.  He was asked to fill out a resume which was pre-filled with a falsified work experience.  He was told that his actual work was going to involve changing the agitator inside a decontaminating machine by Areva, a French company, in a high radiation area.  He was told that APD (alarm pocket dosimeter) was going to be set for 6 to 9 mSv and 5 alarms would mean 9 mSv.  He will switch with someone else after 3 alarms, which means the actual work time will be 5 to 10 minutes.  He asked them about the high radiation level, and he was told it was fine because 1 mSv exposure would be halved daily, becoming zero in 8 days. He was told that everyone was exposed to about that much radiation.

He and other workers complained, and they were given a different work.  On June 19, 2012, he removed glass pieces so that a new pipe can be put into the reactor building.  He complained to his immediate supervisor about the discrepancy in job description.  After work he was called to one of the subcontractors and reprimanded for complaining to a higher-level subcontractor without going through the appropriate channel.  He was unfairly dismissed.  There were 4 to 5 layers of subcontractors between him and the actual employer, and kickbacks were taken out of his wages.


Introductory statement by the former clean-up worker, Tetsuya Hayashi:

On August 24, I, together with “Haken Union,” sent a written proposal to TEPCO, which is undertaking the cleanup work at Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant (F1), and its seven subcontractors simultaneously.  I worked at F1 as a nuclear worker since this June, participating in part of the clean-up operation.  What I witnessed was the reality of various acts of dishonesty and kickbacks conducted in the multi-layer subcontracting system.  A group of lay people with no knowledge or experience of working with radiation, including minors ages 18 to 19, were sent in to the work site without adequate training and with a false statement of work experience and low wages.

The clean-up work at Fukushima Dai-chi will continue for many tens of years from now on.  Without workers on site, there will be no end to the accident.  Nevertheless, the disposable nature of the scheme involving the on-site clean-up workers is too absurd and careless.  Who is protecting the rights of the workers?  If we don’t change that now, children who will be born from now on will have to deal with the hotbed of this injustice. This is a videotaped record of the proof of injustice over a two-month period.  I will file a complaint with my real name, Tetsuya Hayashi, hoping for an end to the accident as early as possible.

Short Conversation with Chris Busby


Short Conversation with Chris Busby


It was brought to our attention that Dr. Chris Busby is referring to the radiation risk model of the ECRR (European Committee on Radiation Risk)  having been “recently incorporated into Japanese law” in one of his most recent statements.

As we have not heard such a drastic measure having been taken by the Japanese government, which has always employed the ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) standards, we decided to ask Busby which law it was.

     ***

Following is the link for the statement in question by Busby, “The Current Radiation Risk Model and its affects on Human Rights,” submitted as part of “Formal Report to the UNHRC, United Nations Human Rights Council.”
http://nuclearjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/UAJWritten-statements-Busby-UNHRC-13th-Sept.pdf

The statement may also be downloaded here.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B68f83tqq7QuYkp2SGVhR2UwV1E/edit

     ***

The phrase in question is seen in the paragraph which begins in the very last part of page 1 and continues into the beginning of page 2 of the statement, as excerpted here.  The questionable part is shown in bold red letters.

“The averaging process leading to ‘absorbed dose,’ whilst possibly accurate for external exposures, cannot be employed for internal exposures especially to nuclides with chemical affinity for chromosomal components. This has been accepted by the ICRP in its latest report ICRP 103 and regulators are advised to employ different methodology for these internal exposure situations. Such methodology has indeed been developed by the ECRR and the use of the radiation risk model of the ECRR (recently incorporated into Japanese law) leads to accurate prediction of the results of such exposures (ECRR2010).”

     ***

Following is a series of e-mails between FRCSR (Fukushima Radiation Contamination Symptoms Research) and Busby.
*********************
September 3, 2012

FRCSR
Dr. Busby, will you be kind enough to answer my question regarding the following statement you made in the attached submission?

"Such methodology has indeed been developed by the ECRR and the use of the radiation risk model of the ECRR (recently incorporated into Japanese Law) leads to accurate prediction of the results of such exposures."

You mention "recently incorporated into Japanese Law."  Would it be possible for you to direct me to which law it is?  I would like to have the information because I think it is important for all Japanese people to be aware of it.  (The government doesn't always volunteer useful information, as you might know.)

Thank you for your time and all the work you do.

Sincerely,
FRCSR
**********************
September 3, 2012

Busby
You need to contact Gen Morita who told me this. I forward this to him.
Chris
***************************
September 3, 2012

FRCSR
Am I correct to understand that you wrote ”recently incorporated into Japanese Law" without verifying which law it was?  Shall I contact Mr. Morita myself, or will he contact me?

Sincerely,
FRCSR
***************************

September 4, 2012

Busby
I registered which law it was at the time. I am too busy to chase this up as i have a deadline on a book chapter and get about 500 emails a day. I would be grateful, if you want to know that you check it. I recall from memory it was a new law, just passed, relating to the building of new nuclear power stations, or the development of nuclear energy.
***************************
End of e-mail exchanges.

We are unaware of any new law that passed which incorporated ECRR standards into it.  In Japan pretty much everything is based on ICRP standards.

By the way, FRCSR was never contacted by Mr. Gen Morita.

       ***

Addendum (as of October 8, 2012)

On October 4, 2012, FRCSR received an e-mail from Dr. Busby as below.

Here is the law:

Dear Dr Busby,

The Japanese government passed the "Law of Establishment of Nuclear Regulatory Committee" in June, with an additional resolution which includes Res. 14 stating:

"Regarding the international standard of radiation effects to health, recommendation by ICRP as well as ECRR to be fully validated and reflected in their policies. "

Regards,

Gen
*************

FRCSR has confirmed that the Law of Establishment of Nuclear Regulatory Committee became effective on September 19, 2012, and its Additional Resolution 14 indeed contained a clause referring to ECRR.

Additional Resolution 14: In regards to the international standards relating to health effects of radiation, ECRR (European Committee on Radiation Risk) standards, in addition to ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) standards, should be fully validated and reflected in the policies.  In addition, this knowledge should be utilized to consider such effort as risk communication participated by residents.”

Additional Resolution, however, does not seem to be legally binding: it merely asks the government to “honor” it.

FRCSR appreciates Dr. Busby for providing the information.

Sep 18, 2012

Excerpts from the Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial gathering held in Tokyo on September 14, 2012

http://twitcasting.tv/matudaira/movie/6403938

Around 3 minutes into the video:

Question about any medical issues in Koriyama-city:

A man’s comment

“I am here from Yokohama.  I was diagnosed with arrhythmia one year ago at a check-up.  This spring I was told my EKG was abnormal.  Also my red blood cell and white blood cell count was abnormal, but the doctor told me it was no big deal and I was working too much.  I actually don’t work.  Also my right little fingernail split in half recently.  Something like this has never happened to me before, and I don’t feel good about it at all.  One more thing is that my tooth cracked when eating something hard.  I realize I can’t blame everything on radiation, but I don’t feel comfortable with any of these (symptoms).  How is it in Koriyama?  Are there abnormalities such as arrhythmia?”

Koriyama-city woman’s response

“Thank you for being here, everyone.  I would like to talk about what has been happening around me.  Last May, an aunt of my daughter’s friend, a woman in her early 40’s, was found dead of heart failure while waiting in a car for about 15 minutes when her husband went into a store to pick up something for their restaurant business located in front of the station:  They had gone to the neighboring Ibaraki Prefecture for an errand.

Last May or June, a woman in her early 40’s, an evacuee from Tomioka-machi living in a temporary housing in Koriyama-city, dropped dead when she touched a door.  She was taken to Southern General Tohoku Hospital in Koriyama-city, but she died.

Also you might have heard that two to three Fukushima high school students have died.  The one that died in July is a friend of a son of my acquaintance.  They went to the same elementary school, but they are in different high schools.  When the mother went to wake up the child, the child was already dead.

There is a place called Shinobuyama (in Fukushima-city) where an ambient radiation level is very high. (Note: 1.484 μSv/h on September 18, 2012)  Fukushima high school students go there to do sports without wearing masks and also commute to schools on bicycles without wearing masks.

Also it might be from aging process, but my acquaintance’s huband died last May, which I didn’t know until the end of the year.  I went to the altar shop near my house to buy incense sticks and candles.  The old man at the shop came out and said, “I just went to a funeral and I am totally astonished.  A 48-year-old son of the greengrocers across the street suddenly died of heart failure.”  Also it might be the aging process or the stress, but since the earthquake up to the end of last year, seven people died on this particular shopping street.  This May my acquaintance’s husband died at age 74.  That’s all that happened around me.”

*****
Question regarding temporary convalescence outside Fukushima:

A man’s comment

“I am active in hosting Fukushima children for at least during a summer break for convalescence in clean air.  We only had several children come.  As a whole how many Koriyama children actually took part in such convalescence, and what were people’s feelings about it?  Some families wanted to spend the summer break convalescing as families.  It was difficult to find appropriate accommodation for small children.  I am curious how many people actually participated in temporary evacuation and how they might have managed it.  For instance, junior high school students might have sports and club activities so they may not be able to leave Koriyama.  Some families might have work commitment so they may not be able to leave Koriyama.  In addition, I believe that local municipalities and schools in Fukushima should be more active in making this happen.  Our group talked to the city and the prefecture to accommodate these children in our city during the summer break.  Perhaps that sort of thing should also be done in Koriyama-city.”

Koriyama-city woman’s response

“When it comes to evacuation, a Koriyama city councilor, Yukiko Komazaki, is the mediator for the Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial.  We have heard there are municipalities outside Fukushima which have offered to accept evacuation of children by schools, and Koriyama-city has had some offers.  Yet Koriyama-city itself does not seem interested.  Koriyama schools also have had such offers.   As far as I know, those who have temporarily evacuated have done so through programs by citizens groups and other prefectures which they found on their own.  I heard about someone’s grandchild who did a temporary evacuation to Hokkaido for four weeks during last summer but the child didn’t want to go to live with strangers again despite being fearful of radiation.  I think the best thing is for the entire school to go so that all the kids are together, accompanied by teachers and some parents who can help out. This will be more comforting to them.  Some children are afraid of being bullied.

Last summer Fukushima Prefecture put in their budget 2.8 billion yen ($36 million) towards convalescence expenses.  I heard about this from travel agents.  However, this money can only be used for convalescence within Fukushima Prefecture, such as Aizu area (where the radiation level is relatively low).  So those who want to send their children outside Fukushima Prefecture cannot take advantage of it.”

*****
Question about bashing of people who are trying to do the right thing:

A man’s question

I am tired of how people criticize and bash those who are trying to do the right thing, by simply exerting their rights.  What did people around you say about your involvement in this trial?

Koriyama-city woman’s response

“I began my participation in this trial as a supporter from part of the way, so I don’t know what sort of reactions the organizers might have encountered.  What I can say is that Koriyama-city itself is divided on the issue.  Even families are split.  A husband might think it’s safe while the wife might be worried about it, or it could be the other way around.  Or in some cases grandparents and mothers-in-law might may object to evacuation.  I think some people think Koriyama-city is safe.  This is kind of a small thing, but I heard of some people receiving sarcastic remarks such as, “It must be nice to be wealthy enough to buy bottled water.” while carrying their bottled water, which is rather big and obvious, up to their floor in the apartment building elevator.  I also evacuated in the beginning, after the accident, and when I returned home and went to greet my nextdoor neighbor, I got sneered at.  They said, “It’s all a matter of how you think about it.”  Now, with the passage of time,  it’s like we can’t openly talk about it with anyone.  You have to pick whom you talk to about your honest feelings about radiation.  Parents are sending their children out of Fukushima on the pretext of reasons other than radiation.”

*****

A man from the defense counsel for the Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial explains:

“All the plaintiffs are anonymous.  If they identify themselves, they will obviously be bashed.  To put it simply, the Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial is a stumbling block to those who want to revive Fukushima.  They think the Trial is the biggest reason hindering their effort for revival.  We are simply asking for our rights.  We are not saying we want to abandon Koriyama:  We simply want to let our children escape the danger (of radiation) and we will return once the city becomes safe for children.  But they say that thinking alone is the hindrance to revival of the city.  Those of us who should be helping with the revival lack confidence in accomplishing it while protecting our health and lives.  They think the city will die if people leave.  People who are leading the revival of the city are unmotivated, uninterested and apathetic:  They don’t seem interested in protecting residents’ health and lives.  Also in some cases threatened job security pulled some plaintiffs out of the Trial.  One single mother was told to withdraw from the Trial or she would be fired.  She had to quit the Trial so that she can go on making living.

Locally in Koriyama this Trial encounters various obstacles.  Despite all that pressure, we continue on in order to protect our children.  Because of the difficulty encountered in Koriyama, I think it is important for outside people from places like Tokyo to support them.”

*****
64,478 Koriyama-city children are scheduled to undergo their first thyroid ultrasound examination beginning in early October 2012 through the end of March 2013.

Sep 17, 2012

Fukushima Thyroid Examination Part 2


The Eighth Report of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey was released on September 11, 2012.

The thyroid examination section of the survey is shown in this link.
http://www.pref.fukushima.jp/imu/kenkoukanri/240911siryou2.pdf

It contains new thyroid examination results from the first five months of Fiscal Year Heisei 24 (FYH24), from April 1 through August 24, 2012.  The results revealed that 18,358 (43.12%) of 42,060 children, mostly from Fukushima-city, Fukushima, had thyroid ultrasound abnormalities.  Together with 38,114 children (13,645 or 35.8% had thyroid ultrasound abnormalities) tested in the last half of Fiscal Year Heisei 23 (FYH23)  from October 2011 through March 2012, a total of 32,003 (40.0%) of 80,174 Fukushima children have been found to have ultrasound abnormalities.  

44,959 of 53,619 eligible Fukushima-city children actually underwent the examination, together with 216 from municipalities which were covered in the FYH23 examination.  The report includes the examination results up to August 24, for 42,060 children whose results were complete.

On the day of the release, it was announced that one child from the FYH23 (FY2011) examination had been diagnosed with thyroid cancer after the secondary examination.  (This child is apparently one of the 14 children, who actually underwent biopsy, of the 60 children who qualified for secondary examination).

The new report also includes a size category of nodules and cysts between 3.1 and 5.0 mm for both the new FYH24 (FY2012) results as well as the old FYH23 (FY2011) results.

FYH24 (FY2012) implementation schedule includes the following municipalities:

September to early October 2012: 18,061 children from Nihonmatsu, Motomiya and Otama.
Early to mid October 2012:  4,757 children from Koori, Ten-ei, and Kunimi.
Mid October to late November 2012:  14,655 children from Shirakawa, Nishigo and Izumizaki.Early October 2012 to late March 201364,478 children from Koriyama.
Mid January 2013 to late March 2012:  3,139 children from Miharu-machi, the only municipality whose residents were administered stable iodine prophylaxis.

*****
Note:
H23 refers to Heisei Year 23, which is the same as 2011.
FYH23 refers to Fiscal Year Heisei 23 which runs from April 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012.
H24 refers to Heisei Year 24, which is the same as 2012.
FYH24 refers to Fiscal Year Heisei 24 which runs from April 1, 2012 through March 31, 2012.

*****
For a complete English translation of the thyroid examination section of the Sixth and Seventh Reports of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey, please refer to these links.
http://fukushimavoice-eng.blogspot.com/2012/07/thyroid-examination-by-fukushima.html
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B68f83tqq7QuZUdCZXhTLVl2dEE/edit?pli=1


The Eighth Report of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey (excerpt)
September 11, 2012

Page 15
Summary of Thyroid Examination Results ①


Summary of Thyroid Examination Results ①
[Explanation of assessment classifications]
・A1 and A2 will be observed until the next round of examination (after FYH26 or FY2014).
・B and C will undergo the secondary examination.  (Notice of the date and place of the secondary examination will be sent to them).
※A2 will be treated as B if the thyroid gland condition warrants the need for secondary examination.
※Examination results for FYH24 (FY2012) includes completed results up to August 24, 2012.
※Some cases have both nodules and cysts.

*********
Page 16
Summary of Thyroid Examination Results ②

1. Distribution by age and gender for each assessment classification category.
(For each category the left column shows the number of boys, the middle column shows the number of girls, and the right column shows the total, based on age groups in five-year intervals.)
The upper table is for FYH23 (FY2011).  The lower table is for FYH24 (FY2012), which shows the completed results up to August 24, 2012.


2. Proportion of each assessment classification category by age.  
In the tables of horizontal bar graphs, the left table is for boys and the right for girls.  For each age group, in five-year intervals, the top bar shows FYH23 (FY2011) and the bottom bar FYH24 (FY2012).   



*********
Page 17
Details of Thyroid Examination Results (FYH23 Exam: Nodules)


① Size breakdown of nodules found at thyroid examination conducted in FYH23 (FY2011)
※Assessment classification based on the size of the nodules alone.
In addition, category C has been omitted from the table since no cases have been classified as category C so far.


② Size distribution of nodules

Total Results

・Of 38,114 who were examined in FYH23 (FY2011), 385 or 1.0% had nodules.

・Of 385 who had nodules, 184, or 0.5% of total, required secondary examination based on the size of the nodules.
 In addition, of these 184, 126 had nodules between 5.0 mm and 10.0 mm, comprising 68.5% of 184 requiring secondary examination.

・58 had nodules larger than 10.0 mm, and the proportion was even lower at 0.15%.

・Difference by gender was barely seen up to 5.0 mm, but the incidence in girls tended to be higher in sizes larger than 5.1 mm.



*********
Page 18
Details of thyroid examination results (FYH23 Exam: Cysts①)



① Size breakdown of cysts found at thyroid examination conducted in FYH23 (FY2011)
※1 Assessment classification based on the size of the cysts alone.
In addition, category C has been omitted from the table since no cases have been classified as category C so far.
※2 The reason the size group “~3.0 mm” is put together with “No cysts present” in the proportion is because in ordinary medical examination cysts smaller than 3.0 mm are treated as no cysts.

② Size distribution of cysts

Total results

Of 38,114 who were examined in FYH23 (FY2011), 24,731 or 64.9% had no cysts.  
 In addition, cysts equal to or smaller than 3.0 mm are considered not to be cysts in ordinary medical examinations, and 7,036 had cysts equal to or smaller than 3.0 mm.
 These two groups comprised 31,767 or 83.3% of the total examined.

Difference by gender was barely seen up to 3.0 mm, but the incidence in girls tended to be higher in sizes larger than 3.1 mm.



*********
Page 19
Details of thyroid examination results (FYH23 Exam: Cysts②)

③ Size distribution of cysts by age groups and gender (proportion against 13,383 with cysts).  (Note: for each age group, left column shows boys and right column shows girls).


④ Gender distribution by size groups (proportion against 13,383 with cysts).
(Note: Boys are shown in blue and girls in red).


Total results

・According to the bar graph showing the size distribution of cysts by age groups and gender, cysts up to 3.0 mm are seen most frequently in the age 6-10 group, with incidence gradually decreasing with increasing age.
 Cysts which are 3.1 mm to 5.0 mm in size increase with age, most prominent in the age 11-15  group and decreasing in the age 16-18 group.  A similar trend is seen in cysts which are 5.1 to 10.0 mm and larger than 10.1 mm.

・Difference by gender was barely seen up to 3.0 mm, but the incidence in girls tended to be higher in other sizes.


*********
Page 20
Details of Thyroid Examination Results (FYH24 Exam: Nodules)



① Size breakdown of nodules found at thyroid examination conducted in FYH24 (FY2012)
※Assessment classification based on the size of the nodules alone.
In addition, category C has been omitted from the table since no cases have been classified as category C so far.

② Size distribution of nodules

Total Results

Of 42,060 who were examined in FYH24 (FY 2012), 385 or 0.9% had nodules.

・Of 385 who had nodules, 232, or 0.5% of the total examined, had nodules large enough to require secondary examination.
 In addition, 158 of the 232 mentioned above had nodules which were 5.1 mm to 10.0 mm in size, comprising 68.1% of the 232 requiring secondary examination.

・74 had nodules which were larger than 10.0 mm, and its proportion was even lower at 0.18% of the total examined.

・Difference by gender showed a tendency for more girls in both nodules up to 5.0 mm and larger than 5.1 mm.



*********
Page 21
Details of thyroid examination results (FYH24 Exam: Cysts①)



① Size breakdown of cysts found at thyroid examination conducted in FYH24 (FY2012)
※1 Assessment classification based on the size of the cysts alone.
In addition, category C has been omitted from the table since no cases have been classified as category C so far.
※2 The reason the size group “~3.0 mm” is put together with “No cysts present” in the proportion is because in ordinary medical examination cysts smaller than 3.0 mm are treated as no cysts.

② Size distribution of cysts

Total Results

Of 42,060 who were examined in FYH24 (FY2012), 23,921 or 56.9% had no cysts.  
 In addition, cysts equal to or smaller than 3.0 mm are considered not to be cysts in ordinary medical examinations, and 10,424 had cysts equal to or smaller than 3.0 mm.
 These two groups comprised 34,345 or 81.7% of the total examined.

Difference by gender was barely seen up to 3.0 mm, but the incidence in girls tended to be higher in sizes larger than 3.1 mm.



Page 22
Details of thyroid examination results (FYH24 Exam: Cysts②)

③ Size distribution of cysts by age groups and gender (proportion against 18,139 with cysts).  (Note: for each age group, left column shows boys and right column shows girls).


④ Gender distribution by size groups (proportion against 18,139 with cysts).
(Note: Boys are shown in blue and girls in red).


Total results

・According to the bar graph showing the size distribution of cysts by age groups and gender, cysts up to 3.0 mm are seen most frequently in the age 6-10 group, with incidence gradually decreasing with increasing age.
 Cysts which are 3.1 mm to 5.0 mm in size increase with age, most prominent in the age 11-15  group and decreasing in the age 16-18 group.  A similar trend is seen in cysts which are 5.1 to 10.0 mm and larger than 10.1 mm.

・Difference by gender was barely seen up to 3.0 mm, but the incidence in girls tended to be higher in other sizes.



*******
Page 23
Implementation Status of FYH24 (FY2012) Secondary Thyroid Examination


Summary of Secondary Thyroid Examination (All-prefecture Preliminary Examination)

1. Contents of examination implemented
 ● If lumps (nodular lesions) are found during the primary thyroid examination, secondary      examination (detailed ultrasound examination, blood test, urine test, biopsy if needed) will be conducted at Fukushima Medical University Hospital.
 ● A2 will be treated as B and secondary examination implemented if the thyroid gland condition warrants the need for secondary examination.
 ● Those qualifying for secondary examination will be notified of the time and place of the  secondary examination at a later date by the Fukushima Medical University Radiation Medicine Prefecture Health Management Survey Center.

2. Examination items
 ● Detailed ultrasound examination: An examination using ultrasound equipment.
 ● Blood test: TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone), FT-3 (free triiodothyronine), FT-4 (free thyroxine), Tg (thyroglobulin), Tg-Ab (anti-thyroglobulin antibody), and TPO-Ab (anti-thyroid peroxidase antibody).
 ● Urine test: urinary iodine.
 ● Fine-needle aspiration biopsy:  Cells will be aspirated from lumps in order to determine if they are benign or malignant, after detailed ultrasound examination.

3. Examination results
 ● As for the notification of the secondary examination results, those examined will have direct (in-person) explanation of detailed results of the secondary examination.


■ Implementation status of secondary thyroid examination (All-prefecture preliminary examination).  (As of August 23, 2012)
Note: Items in the table were translated exactly how they appear in the original table.
※1 Those who will be re-checked at the standard examination after April 2014 due to the absence of abnormalities.
※2 Those who have moved onto regular medical care schedule, to be re-checked mostly 6 months to one year later.