| Literature DB >> 30050004 |
Michio Murakami1, Takao Nirasawa2, Takao Yoshikane3, Keisuke Sueki4, Kimikazu Sasa5, Kei Yoshimura6.
Abstract
Evaluation of radiation exposure from diet is necessary under the assumption of a virtual accident as a part of emergency preparedness. Here, we developed a model with complete consideration of the regional food trade using deposition data simulated by a transport model, and estimated the dietary intake of radionuclides and the effectiveness of regulation (e.g., restrictions on the distribution of foods) after the Fukushima accident and in virtual accident scenarios. We also evaluated the dilution factors (i.e., ratios of contaminated foods to consumed foods) and cost-effectiveness of regulation as basic information for setting regulatory values. The doses estimated under actual emission conditions were generally consistent with those observed in food-duplicate and market-basket surveys within a factor of three. Regulation of restricted food distribution resulted in reductions in the doses of 54⁻65% in the nearest large city to the nuclear power plant. The dilution factors under actual emission conditions were 4.4% for radioiodine and 2.7% for radiocesium, which are ~20 times lower than those used in the Japanese provisional regulation values after the Fukushima accident. Strict regulation worsened the cost-effectiveness for both radionuclides. This study highlights the significance and utility of the developed model for a risk analysis of emergency preparedness and regulation.Entities:
Keywords: Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident; cost-effectiveness analysis; food; internal dose; radiation risk assessment; regulation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30050004 PMCID: PMC6121232 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15081589
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Estimated and observed effective doses for men (≥19 y) [μSv month−1]: (a) Fukushima City (or Fukushima Pref.), (b) Tokyo (or Kanto), and (c) Osaka. Observed values are taken from food-duplicate and market-basket surveys [18,40,41]. Case 1, the distribution of foods was restricted if the estimated median concentrations of radionuclides exceed regulation values. Case 2, median > 1/2 × regulation values. Case 3, median > 1/5 × regulation values.
| Jul. 2011 | Sep.–Nov. 2011 | Dec. 2011 | Feb.–Mar. 2012 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fukushima City Case 1 (this study) | 3.38 | 1.54 | 1.26 | 1.12 |
| Fukushima City Case 2 (this study) | 2.40 | 1.40 | 1.13 | 1.02 |
| Fukushima City Case 3 (this study) | 1.36 | 1.07 | 0.84 | 0.73 |
| Fukushima Pref. (ref [ | 0.53 ± 1.04 e | - | - | - |
| Fukushima Pref. (ref [ | - | 1.58 | - | - |
| Fukushima Pref. (ref [ | - | - | 2.17 ± 1.67 e | - |
| Nakadori, Fukushima Pref. (ref [ | - | - | - | 0.55 |
| Tokyo Case 1 (this study) | - | 0.70 | 0.63 | 0.59 |
| Tokyo Case 2 (this study) | - | 0.69 | 0.62 | 0.57 |
| Tokyo Case 3 (this study) | - | 0.60 | 0.54 | 0.50 |
| Tokyo (ref [ | - | 0.18 | - | - |
| Kanto (ref [ | - | - | 0.92 ± 1.42 e | - |
| Kanto (ref [ | - | - | - | 0.43 |
| Osaka Case 1 (this study) | - | - | - | 0.34 |
| Osaka Case 2 (this study) | - | - | - | 0.33 |
| Osaka Case 3 (this study) | - | - | - | 0.29 |
| Osaka (ref [ | - | - | - | 0.13 |
a food-duplicate survey. b market basket survey. c including Tochigi, Gunma, Ibaraki, Saitama, Chiba, Tokyo, Kanagawa, and Nagano prefectures. d including Tochigi, Ibaraki, Saitama, and Kanagawa prefectures. e arithmetic mean ± standard deviation. f minimum–maximum.
Figure 1Effective doses for men (≥19 year) in the first year and the effectiveness of measures under different climate conditions without and with measures (Case 1): (a) Fukushima City, (b) Tokyo, and (c) Osaka. Percentages represent reduction ratios. Measures include restrictions on food distribution and evacuation.
Figure 2Dilution factors of radioiodine and radiocesium (men, ≥19 year).
Figure 3Cost and effectiveness of restricted food distribution for each regulatory value: (a) reduction in effective doses, (b) per-capita cost, and (c) cost effectiveness. Men, ≥19 year, actual emission conditions, Case 1.
Figure 4Net values of restricted food distribution for each regulatory value for radiocesium: (a) 1–20,000 Bq kg−1 and (b) 100–20,000 Bq kg−1.