Majia here: This series of articles illustrates how the Japanese people have been cast as disposable by elements of the Japanese government and elements within the UN.
A. Grover is an exception and as special rapporteur he has traveled to Japan on more than one occasion to advocate on the behalf of exposed Japanese citizens.
Unfortunately, the broken, corrupt UN in general has sabotaged his work with their own useless report.
The first article describes Grover's work. The second article, an analysis by the Asahi Shimbun, illustrates how the outrageous protective action guideline of 20 millisieverts was established as the exposure limit. The third article simply makes me mad as it is another effort to dismiss the severity of this disaster and to dispossess still farther the people exposed to its fallout.
Majia here: Meanwhile, the Asahi Shimbun investigates the decision by Japan to set the exposure level at 20 millisieverts, when the USSR had employed a 5 millisievert exposure level:AP (26 May 2013) ‘U.N. expert urges help for Japan's nuclear victims’, The Asahi Shimbun, http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201305260047
[Excerpted] A United Nations expert [A. Grover] who investigated the aftermath of Japan's 2011 nuclear power plant disaster says the government and the operator of the facility should do more to help those affected by the catastrophe.
....The report points to problems with the handling of the crisis, including a difficult process for seeking compensation for radiation exposure, a lack of openness about health risks from radiation and inadequate protection for nuclear plant workers... [end]
Sekine, S. (2013) ‘Strict radiation reference levels shunned to stem Fukushima exodus’ The Asahi Shimbun, http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201305250053
The government avoided setting stringent radiation reference levels for the return of Fukushima evacuees for fear of triggering a population drain and being hit by ballooning costs for compensation, an Asahi Shimbun investigation shows...Majia here: I think its important to keep in mind that this 20 millisievert exposure limit is based on external exposure to radiation and does not include dose from contaminated food and water.
...In December 2011, the government led by the Democratic Party of Japan decided to lift the evacuation order for areas with residual doses of up to 20 millisieverts per year....
...“The prefectural government could not function with population drain under the 5-millisievert scenario,” said a state minister who attended the meeting. “In addition, there were concerns that more compensation money will be needed, with an increase in the number of evacuees.”
Moreover, Fukushima Diary, among others, has documented time and time again how government radiation monitor results are manipulated as their locations are carefully decontaminated and their readings were distorted by the presence of lead batteries, which interfered with the monitors' readings.
The most outrageous news today is found in this article below. Notice how those LIARS hedge their outright fabrications. I am so angry reading this article because it is in fact a deliberate set of lies, whose character is disclosed by the careful caveat:
Y. Oiwa (27 May 2013)U.N.: Post-Fukushima collective thyroid dose about 3.3% the dose from Chernobyl’, The Asahi Shimbun, http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201305270089
The health effects from the Fukushima nuclear accident are substantially smaller than those from the Chernobyl disaster, and the increase in cancer incidence in Japan will be negligible, according to a U.N. panel’s estimates.
The collective thyroid dose of Japanese people from radioactive materials released from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant will be about one-30th of that of the exposed populations from the 1986 Chernobyl accident, according to a draft report by the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation obtained by The Asahi Shimbun.
The draft also said the cancer incidence in Japan will rise only marginally and will be difficult to detect. However, the report cautioned that data on released radioactive materials or actual measurements of radioactive iodine are insufficient, and that many uncertain factors remain about dose statistics.