Cancerphobia and Radiophobia Are Harming the Children of Fukushima

Radiophobia had the Fukushima region by the throat, so it was decided that all 360,000 or so children and teens would be offered screening for thyroid irregularities.

The thyroid gland is a little butterfly shaped thing inside that soft spot in your throat just above your chest bone. Doctors can feel it just by rubbing, which is how initial exams for possible thyroid cancer are usually done, sort of like digital prostate exams or self breast exams: feel around for bumps, and go from there.

But like breasts and prostates, thyroids can have bumps that are just bumps, nothing more: not cancer, and nothing that will harm you or kill you. Experts say that if you autopsy anybody’s thyroid, you can find cysts or nodules, or even cancerous cells themselves, that would never have caused harm or death. You and I probably have some of those bumps or cells in our thyroids right now.

But while those cells or cysts might not hurt us, the fear of radiation and the fear of cancer certainly could, as an unfolding tragedy for children living around in the prefecture of Fukushima in Japan illustrates.

Following the nuclear accident there, fear of radiation was off the charts, even after it was well established that the levels of radiation released by the accident weren’t. In most areas those levels were low, well below the levels that the Life Span Study of atomic bomb survivors has taught us are worth serious concern.

Nonetheless, radiophobia had the Fukushima region by the throat, so it was decided that all 360,000 or so children and teens would be offered screening for thyroid irregularities, since high enough doses of radiation, particularly the isotope Iodine 131, can increase the risk of thyroid cancer (the thyroid sucks up iodine like a sponge), and iodine 131 was released by the nuclear accident. And to be extra careful, the decision was made to screen the kids with ultrasound, not those normal clinical ‘feel for the bumps’ exams.

Unsurprisingly, given the prevalence of suspicious cysts or nodules in everyone’s thyroids, the screening turned up thousands of abnormalities. And unsurprisingly, the first assumption was that these were cancers caused by radiation from Fukushima, a fear aggressively promoted by anti-nuclear activists. Only, that’s not what the evidence says:

+ Testing in non-exposed kids in Japan found the same rate of abnormalities, and so did the testing of south Korean kids 15 years ago when the health care system switched from physical exam to ultrasound. Radiation couldn't have cause those abnormalities.

+ The risk from the tiny dose of radiation received by most area residents was tiny.

+ Genetic tests of suspicious cells taken in biopsies from several thousand kids found that the genes matched the kind of thyroid abnormalities common in Japanes people as a whole, but did not match the abnormal thyroid cells taken from those exposed to radiation from Chernobyl.

“The evidence suggests that the great majority and perhaps all of the cases so far discovered are not due to radiation,” says Dillwyn Williams, a thyroid cancer specialist at University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom.

Still, tens of thousands of Japanese kids had biopsies, medical exams that can lead to infection or other complications. One of the outcomes of biopsies for cancer can be really serious: removal of the entire thyroid if cancerous cells are found, even though such cells are common in many thyroids and are unlikely to ever cause harm or death. In the end, more than 100 Fukushima-area kids have had their thyroids removed, with significant health implications for the rest of their lives.

Is something causing an abnormal spike in thyroid cancers in all the kids in Japan? (Remember, ultrasound screening found elevated rates of abnormalities in non-exposed non-Fukushima kids.) Or is this a case of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of a disease that scares us into doing things that are not medically called for? That’s what experts are calling what happened to the Fukushima kids. As Dennis Normile reported recently in Science magazine

Even though the vast majority of thyroid abnormalities are safe to ignore, “finding small lesions causes patients anxiety,” says Seiji Yasumura, vice director of the Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey. Virtually all of those diagnosed with thyroid cancer have had the glands removed, even though accumulating evidence suggests in many cases it might have been better to wait, the University of Tokyo’s Shibuya adds. “Careful observation would be the best option.” 

And if you need evidence that excess screening to increase early detection of a scary disease doesn’t necessarily lead to any health benefit, consider what happened in South Korea, according to the article in Science. When the government made ultrasound testing available, 

[T]hyroid cancer diagnoses exploded. In 2011, the rate of thyroid cancer diagnosis was 15 times what it was in 1993, yet there was no change in thyroid cancer mortality (my emphasis).

There are good physical and emotional reasons to fear nuclear radiation. At high enough doses it can cause more than 20 different kids of cancer. Emotionally, human-made risks scare us more than natural ones (radiation from the sun doesn't scare us as much though it kills many more) and any risk we can’t detect with our senses leaves us feeling vulnerable and powerless and more afraid. There are certainly good physical and emotional reasons to fear cancer, a disease that often causes great suffering, and against which we feel have no control – many still think a cancer diagnosis is a death sentence – even though more and more forms of cancer are treatable, and even curable.

But when we let our emotions override an objective review of the evidence – which as this column notes we do all the time - it’s not radiation we should fear, or cancer. It’s our fears that we have to fear most. Those poor kids in Japan have offered us a profound lesson. We should listen.

(For a detailed summary of the thyroid issue around Fukushima, see this solid piece in The Hiroshima Syndrome, a blog that writes about the gap between the facts and our fears of nuclear radiation.)


image; GettyImages, Jeremy Sutton-Hibbert

Big Think
Sponsored by Lumina Foundation

Upvote/downvote each of the videos below!

As you vote, keep in mind that we are looking for a winner with the most engaging social venture pitch - an idea you would want to invest in.

Keep reading Show less

Essential financial life skills for 21st-century Americans

Having these financial life skills can help you navigate challenging economic environments.

Photo by Jp Valery on Unsplash
Personal Growth
  • Americans are swimming in increasingly higher amounts of debt, even the upper middle class.
  • For many, this burden can be alleviated by becoming familiar with some straightforward financial concepts.
  • Here's some essential financial life skills needed to ensure your economic wellbeing.
Keep reading Show less

Scientists create a "lifelike" material that has metabolism and can self-reproduce

An innovation may lead to lifelike evolving machines.

Shogo Hamada/Cornell University
Surprising Science
  • Scientists at Cornell University devise a material with 3 key traits of life.
  • The goal for the researchers is not to create life but lifelike machines.
  • The researchers were able to program metabolism into the material's DNA.
Keep reading Show less

New fossils suggest human ancestors evolved in Europe, not Africa

Experts argue the jaws of an ancient European ape reveal a key human ancestor.

Surprising Science
  • The jaw bones of an 8-million-year-old ape were discovered at Nikiti, Greece, in the '90s.
  • Researchers speculate it could be a previously unknown species and one of humanity's earliest evolutionary ancestors.
  • These fossils may change how we view the evolution of our species.

Homo sapiens have been on earth for 200,000 years — give or take a few ten-thousand-year stretches. Much of that time is shrouded in the fog of prehistory. What we do know has been pieced together by deciphering the fossil record through the principles of evolutionary theory. Yet new discoveries contain the potential to refashion that knowledge and lead scientists to new, previously unconsidered conclusions.

A set of 8-million-year-old teeth may have done just that. Researchers recently inspected the upper and lower jaw of an ancient European ape. Their conclusions suggest that humanity's forebearers may have arisen in Europe before migrating to Africa, potentially upending a scientific consensus that has stood since Darwin's day.

Rethinking humanity's origin story

The frontispiece of Thomas Huxley's Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature (1863) sketched by natural history artist Benjamin Waterhouse Hawkins. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

As reported in New Scientist, the 8- to 9-million-year-old hominin jaw bones were found at Nikiti, northern Greece, in the '90s. Scientists originally pegged the chompers as belonging to a member of Ouranopithecus, an genus of extinct Eurasian ape.

David Begun, an anthropologist at the University of Toronto, and his team recently reexamined the jaw bones. They argue that the original identification was incorrect. Based on the fossil's hominin-like canines and premolar roots, they identify that the ape belongs to a previously unknown proto-hominin.

The researchers hypothesize that these proto-hominins were the evolutionary ancestors of another European great ape Graecopithecus, which the same team tentatively identified as an early hominin in 2017. Graecopithecus lived in south-east Europe 7.2 million years ago. If the premise is correct, these hominins would have migrated to Africa 7 million years ago, after undergoing much of their evolutionary development in Europe.

Begun points out that south-east Europe was once occupied by the ancestors of animals like the giraffe and rhino, too. "It's widely agreed that this was the found fauna of most of what we see in Africa today," he told New Scientists. "If the antelopes and giraffes could get into Africa 7 million years ago, why not the apes?"

He recently outlined this idea at a conference of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.

It's worth noting that Begun has made similar hypotheses before. Writing for the Journal of Human Evolution in 2002, Begun and Elmar Heizmann of the Natural history Museum of Stuttgart discussed a great ape fossil found in Germany that they argued could be the ancestor (broadly speaking) of all living great apes and humans.

"Found in Germany 20 years ago, this specimen is about 16.5 million years old, some 1.5 million years older than similar species from East Africa," Begun said in a statement then. "It suggests that the great ape and human lineage first appeared in Eurasia and not Africa."

Migrating out of Africa

In the Descent of Man, Charles Darwin proposed that hominins descended out of Africa. Considering the relatively few fossils available at the time, it is a testament to Darwin's astuteness that his hypothesis remains the leading theory.

Since Darwin's time, we have unearthed many more fossils and discovered new evidence in genetics. As such, our African-origin story has undergone many updates and revisions since 1871. Today, it has splintered into two theories: the "out of Africa" theory and the "multi-regional" theory.

The out of Africa theory suggests that the cradle of all humanity was Africa. Homo sapiens evolved exclusively and recently on that continent. At some point in prehistory, our ancestors migrated from Africa to Eurasia and replaced other subspecies of the genus Homo, such as Neanderthals. This is the dominant theory among scientists, and current evidence seems to support it best — though, say that in some circles and be prepared for a late-night debate that goes well past last call.

The multi-regional theory suggests that humans evolved in parallel across various regions. According to this model, the hominins Homo erectus left Africa to settle across Eurasia and (maybe) Australia. These disparate populations eventually evolved into modern humans thanks to a helping dollop of gene flow.

Of course, there are the broad strokes of very nuanced models, and we're leaving a lot of discussion out. There is, for example, a debate as to whether African Homo erectus fossils should be considered alongside Asian ones or should be labeled as a different subspecies, Homo ergaster.

Proponents of the out-of-Africa model aren't sure whether non-African humans descended from a single migration out of Africa or at least two major waves of migration followed by a lot of interbreeding.

Did we head east or south of Eden?

Not all anthropologists agree with Begun and his team's conclusions. As noted by New Scientist, it is possible that the Nikiti ape is not related to hominins at all. It may have evolved similar features independently, developing teeth to eat similar foods or chew in a similar manner as early hominins.

Ultimately, Nikiti ape alone doesn't offer enough evidence to upend the out of Africa model, which is supported by a more robust fossil record and DNA evidence. But additional evidence may be uncovered to lend further credence to Begun's hypothesis or lead us to yet unconsidered ideas about humanity's evolution.