Cost of fear and radiation protection actions: Washington County, Utah and Fukushima, Japan {Comparing case histories}.

Purpose: The purpose of this manuscript is to evaluate the role of regulatory limits and regulatory action on the total impact of nuclear contamination and accidents. While it is important to protect the public from excessive radiation exposures it is also critical to weigh the damage done by implementing regulations against the benefits produced. Two cases: Actions taken as a result of radioactive fallout in Washington County, Utah in 1953 from the atomic bomb testing in Nevada, and the actions implemented post release of radioactive materials into the environment from the damaged nuclear power reactor at Fukushima, Japan, are compared. Materials and methods: The Washington County radiation exposures and doses, resulting from the Nevada nuclear weapons tests, were taken from published reports, papers, and historical records. The protective actions taken were reviewed and reported. Recent publications were used to define the doses following Fukushima. The impact and/or results of sheltering only versus sheltering/evacuation of Washington County and Fukushima are compared. Results: The radiation dose from the fallout in Washington County from the fallout was almost 2–3 three times the dose in Japan, but the regulatory actions were vastly different. In Utah, the minimal action taken, e.g. sheltering in place, had no major impact on the public health or on the economy. The actions in Fukushima resulted in major negative impact precipitated through the fear generated. And the evacuation. The results had adverse human health and wellness consequences and a serious impact on the economy of the Fukushima region, and all of Japan. Conclusions: When evacuation is being considered, great care must be taken when any regulatory actions are initiated based on radiation limits. It is necessary to consider total impact and optimize the actions to limit radiation exposure while minimizing the social, economic, and health impacts. Optimization can help ensure that the protective measures result in more good than harm. It seems clear that organizations who recommend radiation protection guidelines need to revisit the past and current guides in light of the significant Fukushima experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]