Debunked: 14,000 Fukushima Deaths in U.S.

  • Context: Fukushima 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SpunkyMonkey
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the claims made in a study by Mangano & Sherman that suggests 14,000 deaths in the U.S. are linked to the Fukushima reactor disaster fallout. Participants analyze the statistical methods and data used in the study, questioning its validity and the credibility of the sources cited.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant highlights discrepancies between the infant-death data reported by M&S and the actual CDC data, suggesting that M&S's claims of a statistically significant increase in deaths are unfounded.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the credibility of the resources linked by the original poster, asserting that the study is too speculative.
  • Some participants argue that the journal in which M&S published their study lacks legitimacy and question the quality of its peer review process.
  • Concerns are raised about the exclusion of certain cities from the pre-Fukushima data set used by M&S, which may have biased the results towards a significant increase in deaths post-Fukushima.
  • Additional critiques of the study are shared, including links to external articles that describe the statistical flaws in M&S's analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the study by Mangano & Sherman. There are multiple competing views regarding the credibility of the study, the data used, and the interpretations of the findings.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in the data sets used by M&S, including potential biases due to the exclusion of certain cities and the reliance on possibly misrepresented data. The discussion reflects ongoing uncertainty regarding the implications of the Fukushima disaster on U.S. mortality rates.

  • #31
SpunkyMonkey said:
Mangano & Sherman only analyzed infant deaths, not infant mortality. And so the data I've posted are also only infant deaths. Not using infant-mortality data is just another entry in the long list of flaws in their argument. Reason being, any increase in infant deaths could simply reflect an increase in live births.

So the decline around 2008 could just as well be due to declining birth rates as declining infant mortality
 
Engineering news on Phys.org

Similar threads

  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
15K