(Reuters Health) - Months after the meltdown at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, workers there and at a nearby plant that remained intact were still suffering high rates of stress and depression, according to a new study that points to multiple sources of trauma.from High distress seen in Japanese nuclear plant workers
One of the study researchers said those effects could be due to explosions at the plant and other workplace stressors during the emergency, which lasted weeks, as well as to the workers' fears of losing family, friends and their homes.
"No case of acute health problems has been reported so far; however, assessments of the long-term effect of radiation requires ongoing monitoring of exposure and the health conditions of the affected communities," they concluded.
Another possible source of stress is the realization that a couple of bureaucrats in their government had been warned about the danger years in advance, and had just ignored and buried the warning, and are now not even being identified. Instead, the entire Japanese engine of progress, which is responsible for the post-WWII Japanese economic miracle, has been blamed. If those bureaucrats had taken the warning seriously, the much maligned engine of progress would have prepared as much as humanly possible for the tsunami, and the consequences would have been far less severe. But instead, the very impetus for progress was blamed for their decision to ignore and bury the warning! Perhaps something else, such as the British empire's desire to use Fukushima Daiichi as an example of the "inherent risks" of nuclear energy, was behind their decision. The disaster was certainly used in that manner.
But note that buried at the end of the article, after the calls for "mental health treatment" ("happy pills," although no calls for sanity from the US government, which is threatening civilization), is the admission that nobody became sick due to radiation as a result of Fukushima Daiichi being destroyed by the tsunami. So, where is the justification for banning nuclear power globally?