In August 1945, two atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan, causing 200,000 people to die instantaneously and razing the houses and buildings within three miles radius of the blast center.

However, the latest scientific evidence shows that the long-term effects of nuclear weapons on those survivors are not as large as one might think.

People used to fear that radiation from nuclear weapons explosions will increase the cancer rate of survivors and their children. However, 71 years after Japan’s atomic bombing, a scientist discovered that people think that radiation causes cancer rates and birth defects to be actually exaggerated by the public.

“Most people, including many scientists, believe that survivors face debilitating and high cancer rates and that their children have a high probability of having a genetic disease,” he said at the University of Aix-Marseille in France and national scientific research in France. Bertrand Jordan, the molecular biologist and author of the study, said.

“There is a huge gap between people’s perceptions and the realities that researchers have discovered.”

In order to emphasize people’s misperceptions, Dr. Jordan analyzed medical investigations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors and their children during the 60 years.

For example, research clearly shows that exposure to radiation increases the risk of cancer, but it also shows that the average life expectancy of survivors is reduced by only a few months compared with people who are not exposed to radiation.

Moreover, no health effects were found in the children of survivors.

Since half of the people survived after that explosion, a large amount of data is available for study.

The study tracked 100,000 survivors, 77,000 children of survivors, and 20,000 people who were not exposed to the explosion radiation. The study began in 1947 and is now conducted by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation, funded by the U.S. and Japanese government.

Their research shows that survivors have a higher cancer rate than those who were not in the city at that time.

Because of the distance, age, and gender of the survivors from the blast site, the risks are also different. Young people are at greater risk than older people, and women are much more affected than men.

However, most survivors do not have cancer.


The report said that between 1958 and 1998, the number of cancer patients suffering from solid tumors such as stomach cancer and breast cancer accounted for only 10% of survivors.

However, most survivors receive only relatively little radiation.

In contrast, those exposed to 1 Gy of radiation had a 44% chance of developing cancer. This amount of radiation is 1000 times higher than the current public safety limit level.

Taking into account all causes of death, the high radiation dose will reduce the average life expectancy by 1.3 years.

Although Jordan did not find any difference in the probability of health and mutation in the children of the survivors, he believes that this subtle influence will one day become more apparent through more detailed analysis of the genome sequence.

But it is now clear that even if the children of survivors have health risks, the risk is minimal.

Why do these studies differ from people’s perception of the long-term impact of the explosion? Jordan attributed this difference to a number of factors, including historical background.

"People's fear of new dangers is far higher than their familiar dangers," said Dr. Jordan.

"For example, people will tend to ignore the dangers of coal, whether it be coal miners or people exposed to atmospheric pollution."

"Because radiation is easier to detect than many chemical hazards. With the help of the Geiger counter, you can sensitively detect low-dose radiation that does not pose a health risk."

However, he also warned that the results of the research published in the Journal of Genetics cannot be used as a reason for policy makers to ignore the impact of nuclear events and the danger of nuclear war.

"I used to support nuclear power, but I didn't think about it after the Fukushima nuclear power plant leaked," he said.

“The incident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant shows that disasters can occur even in a country that has strict regulations such as Japan.”

"However, I think that the intellectual debate is very important. I would also like to let people look at scientific data instead of exaggerating the danger indiscriminately."

(Translation: Yan Yanhua)

Feed Pellet Plant

Shandong Longze Mechanical Equipment Co.,Ltd , https://www.pelletmachinefactory.com