Let's measure Radiation: the radioactivity of everyday objects 放射線を測って見よう

This post is based on a stand the JEM-EUSO group  prepared for RIKEN open campus, in April 2012. 

The poster prepared fo RIKEN open campus 2012. Click to enlarge
Special thanks to I. Kaneko for the graphic layout and to H. Miyamoto
for the Japanese translation.

Polonium creeps into tobacco
Tobacco is the single largest source of radiation affecting to man, both in Europe and Asia and worldwide. In fact cigarettes contain polonium-210, which accumulates on the tobacco leaves due to the fertilizer used, apatite, which also includes radium and lead-210.Smoking, polonium is deposited at bifurcations of the bronchi with the lungs, one of the places where they originate many of the cancers of smokers.

Smoking a pack of cigarettes a day, we are exposed to 100 mSv each year (compared to a threshold of 15mSv and an average of 1mSv). Consequently the risk of getting cancer is 25 times greater than those subject only to environmental radon. Note that these figures are for deaths due to radiation and do not include those for cancer directly caused by carcinogenic substances in the smoke. Moreover, the tar in cigarette smoke also has the effect of fixing the particles of radon in the lungs by preventing the body to eject the radioactive material  and increasing the damage compared to a non-smoker who is exposed to the same quantity of radon. It is estimated that every year in Europe, a tenth of deaths from lung cancer, about 20,000 cases are due to exposure to radon and polonium. From these estimates we can conclude that fifty years of smoking have caused – only for the radiation component - a million deaths in Europe.

In detail, the probability of contracting lung cancer before 75 years at concentrations of 0, 100 and 400 Bq/m3 radon is equal to, respectively, 0.4%, 0.5% and 0.7% for non-smokers. For those who smoke a pack of cigarettes a day the risk rises to 10%, 12% and 16%. An estimated 20,000 deaths in Europe each year from lung cancer are due to exposure to radon (9% of all deaths from lung cancer, representing 2% of deaths from all cancers). 

肥料からポロニウムを吸収 

タバコは単体で人体に最大の影響を及ぼす放射線源で、その影響はヨーロッパやアジア、世界各国に及びます。

タバコを製造する際に使用するタバコの葉には放射性物質が含まれています。特にポロニウム210やラジウム、鉛210を含んでいて、そのほとんどが土壌と肥料から吸収したものです。

喫煙により、ポロニウムは肺につながる気管支の分岐に蓄積されます。喫煙者のがんの多くが発症する部位の一つです。

たばこを1日1箱吸うと、１年間に100ミリシーベルトの放射線を浴びることになります（法で定められた年間許容量は20ミリシーベルト、日本の平均自然放射線量は1ミリシーベルト）。結果として、自然界のラドンからの放射線のみを浴びている場合と比べてがんになるリスクが25倍になります。ただし、これらの図は放射線による死亡率を表したもので、タバコに含まれる発がん性物質によるがんは含まれていません。更にタバコの煙に含まれるタールは放射性物質を体外に排出する働きを妨げるため、肺の中のラドンの粒子を固定し、同量のラドンに曝された非喫煙者に比べて、よりダメージが大きくなります。ヨーロッパでは毎年肺がんによる死亡件数のうち１０％に当たる２万人がラドンやポロニウムの放射によるものであると見られています。これらの見積もりから50年間の喫煙による志望者数は（放射性物質によるものだけで）ヨーロッパにおいて 100 万人に上ることになります。

より詳しく述べると、75歳以下の肺がんの発症率は、非喫煙者の場合、1立方メートル当り0、100、400ベクレルのラドンに被ばくした場合、それぞれ全体の0.4％、 0.5％、 0.7％なのに対して、喫煙者の場合はリスクがそれぞれ10％、 12％、 16％に上がります。ヨーロッパにおける年間2万件の肺がんによる死亡推定件数はラドンの被ばくによるものです（肺がん死亡件数のうち9％がラドン被ばくによるもので、これは全てのがんによる死亡率の2％にあたります）

Food

All food contains small amounts of radioactive material: for instance  bananas contain about 125Bq/kg of potassium-40 (which means that a kilogram of bananas contains 125 Potassium nuclei that decay each second). Brazil nuts can contain up to 260 Bq/kg of radium. Currently all food limits are at 100 Bq/kg or below for cesium. It should be noted that there may be a difference in the total dose depending on the speed of the various radioactive substances are expelled from the body (for example, the potassium is removed rela

tively fast, while cesium may remain in the human body for a longer period).

私たちが普段口にする食べ物は全て微量の放射性物質を含んでいます。例えばバナナは1kg当り125Bqのカリウム40を含んでいます（バナナに含まれるカリウムは、毎秒1kg当り125個ずつ崩壊しながら放射線を出します）。同様にブラジルのナッツには１kg当たり260Bq以下のラジウムが含まれています。現在全ての食物において、セシウムの含有量は  １kg当り100Bq以下に制限されています。ここで注意しなければならないのは、取り込まれた放射性物質が私たちの体から排出されるまでの時間によって、私たちの体が浴びる総放射線量が変わるということです（例えば、セシウムが長く体内に留まるのに対して、カリウムは比較的早く体外に排出されます）。

Survivalism and the real radiation contamination in Japan

Japan is catching up with the tradition of bad newspaper articles, depicting an apocalyptic,  post-nuclear vision of the life in the  island. If the term "post-nuclear" might apply to a country that has all but one nuclear reactors off the power production grid, many of the personal views expressed in one recent article were especially puzzling. This is an excerpt of the letter I sent to the editors of the daily newspaper. I hope it might be a useful recap of the situation in Japan. The letter did not contain the links (that unfortunately are in italian, but google translate does a decent job).

Dear Sirs,

in reading your article [...] I cannot help but be puzzled by the content and implications.  

[...] in the article there is no mention of real measurements of environmental or food contamination,  only hearsay and very general and unhelpful comments that would probably better find its place in a personal blog rather than on a daily newspaper that is widely read by the foreign community in Japan and by foreigners that are interested on Japan.

The risk in reading the personal comments and life-style expressed in the article is that all foreigners are mindlessly scared about radiation and/or  that the situation of the radiation in Japan after the Fukushima accident is out of control.

As you might be aware, the foreign press in general, and in particular the Italian one, has been extremely inaccurate and unprofessional in dealing with the accident, its effects and the risks of radiation in Japan and abroad.   This kind of old-maid’s tale articles can be misinterpreted or voluntarily misused by foreign press to depict an incorrect situation in Japan and on the people -  foreigners or not -  living in this country.

Some points that are worth remembering,  at least  to ease the worries of the author:

1.       Radiation in Tokyo area is roughly one third than in Rome (0.1 microSv/h vs 0.3microSv/h and 0.4 at the University of Rome Tor Vergata, near volcanic rocks – personally measured)

2.       Radiation on airplanes is 20 times higher than on the ground. Even though we spend less time on an airplane this is relevant for airline crews.

3.       Radiation in space is 1000 times higher than on ground. No ill effect have been found on astronauts who lived  for months on the International Space Station.

4.       Bananas have 125 Bq/kg of radioactive potassium 40 (higher than the Cesium safety levels of 100 Bq/kg).  It is possible that the process of eliminating cesium and potassium is different, though. (edit May 2012, here  the time of permanence of Cesium in human body).

5.       The amount of food consumed comes into play in calculating the radiation exposure.  Five grams of “radioactive” tea, even assuming  the old limit of 500Bq/kg amount to 0.5 Bq.

6.       A number of independent measurements point to no risk in the food, my colleagues in Italy have tested personally the amount of cesium in rice of Miyagi-ken and found 0.1 Bq/kg, less than 1per mil of what found in bananas.

7.        Chernobyl and Fukushima are two completely different accidents: in the former case the reactor core was exposed and radioactivity was dispersed in the air. This did not happen in Fukushima plant, where most of the radiation went in the water.

8.       Cigarettes contain polonium 210 (the same isotope used to kill the Russian dissident Litvinienko), present in the tobacco due to fertilizers. A two pack per day smoker is exposed to 250 mSv/year in the bronchial region, compared to about 1-3mSv/year of non-exposed persons.  In Europe, every year 5000 people die because of radiation induced cancers in the lungs (this is about 15% of all cancers in lungs).

9.       The highest risk of radiation in Europe is due to radon gas seeping through the underground cracks. This radioactive , but chemically inert gas, can accumulate in places where air is not changed often. 

At this point it should be mentioned that I have been living with two small children and a Japanese wife since before the fateful earthquake and accident at the power plant, and that, even though we took precautions and monitor closely the situation, we do not live in the state of fear that might be mistaken to be typical of foreigners in Japan. The same can be said of my colleagues, Japanese and foreigners  at RIKEN  and the many foreigners living in Japan, equally puzzled by the tone of the article and the discrepancy with their daily lives and behavior.  

This is not to attempt to deny the tragic events of the accident and its devastating implications, but to put them in the correct context and to analyze the situation individually and independently with real measurements.  This is the effort that has to be painstakingly pursued by everyone.  

My main research field is space physics with satellites and radiation environment studies on astronauts, but I am also struggling – for what is possible – to inform on the real situation and correct the excesses and apocalyptic visions that have been evoked in my country since the Fukushima accident.  [...]  

I sincerely hope that – in line with your excellent editorial policy and quality of the articles  that have kept us informed of the situation in Fukushima - of you might publish in the future a “review” article with more circumstantiated numbers, values and  reading, but also on the life in daily Japan,  so that the general public can be made aware of the current situation. If possible, please print the main points of this letter on your newspaper.

yours sincerelly....

-------------
It might be worth adding that very cheap and relatively precise geiger counters are available from many shops. Radiation is one of the most easily measurable quantities, also by non-specialists. If you have doubts, it is very easy to make your own measurements.