evacuation criteria after a nuclear accident: a personal perspective

Clicks: 190
ID: 161882
2012
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Star

Ranked #9 of 9 articles by views in journal of exercise rehabilitation

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
In any decision involving radiation a risk-risk or risk-benefit comparison should be done. This can be either explicit or implicit. When the adverse effect of an alternate action is less than the planned action, such as medical use of X rays or nuclear power in ordinary operation, the comparison is simple. But in this paper I argue that with the situation faced by the Japanese in Fukushima, the assumption that the risk of an alternate action is small is false. The risks of unnecessary evacuation exceeded the risk of radiation cancers hypothetically produced by staying in place. This was not realized by those that had to make a decision within hours. This realization suggests important changes, worldwide, in the guidelines for radiation protection in accident situations.
Reference Key
wilson2012dose-responseevacuation Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Richardh Wilson
Journal journal of exercise rehabilitation
Year 2012
DOI
10.2203/dose-response.11-058.Wilson
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.