Health and Medical Issues in the Area Affected by Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident

Futaba County was the area most affected by the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident. To understand issues around the re-development of the medical system, we investigated the post-accident changes in medical needs and the system’s transition. We analyzed reports from Fukushima Prefecture and local municipalities, ambulance transport data from the Futaba Fire Department, and patient data from Futaba Medical Center (FMC). After the accident, all medical institutions were closed, and the number of ambulance use dropped sharply. With the lifting of evacuation orders beginning in 2014, the amount of ambulance use increased at an annual rate of about 10%. Early on, the proportion of trauma caused by occupational and traffic accidents increased rapidly to more than 30%. As residents returned, the proportion related to endogenous diseases (most commonly respiratory) increased. Soon after the FMC opened in 2018, the majority of the patients were in their 60s, and by 2019 the proportion of patients in their 80s markedly increased. The return of the residents as well as ongoing decontamination and reconstruction projects were related to changes in the demographics of patients and the types of injuries and illnesses observed.

Review of engagement activities to promote awareness of radiation and its associated risk amongst the Japanese public before and after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident

Following the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident in 2011, many radiation experts directly experienced a vast gap between ideal and real public understanding (PU) of radiation in risk communication. Therefore, this study collated and reviewed information about PU activities for radiation and its risk that six Japanese academic societies—which seem to be socially neutral expert communities—related to radiation and radiation risk conducted before and after the accident. Activities these radiation-related societies provided to the general public were discussed from the following perspectives: (a) difficulties in two-way communication due to resources, motivation and public interest and concerns; (b) balance between academic research and PU activities; (c) academic societies’ building trust with the public while ensuring member experts’ neutrality and independence; and (d) discussions among academic societies to prepare for public engagement. We hope that this paper encourages experts and academic societies in radiation protection to hold more national and international discussions about their roles in public communication and outreach.