Symposium: The Medical and Ecological Consequences of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident: March 11-12 NY

[FBaggins]

10. Let me give you another example

They cite a decline in live births across Japan for 2011.

Do they tell you that the population of Japan has been in decline for some time? That fertility rates didn't just fall in 2011... but had fallen for many years prior to that? Of course they don't... because if they did you would catch them at their little game.

They cite a rise of infant mortality of 75. Seriously? In a population over 125 million people they think that means something?

It's the same game that Mangano tried to play with infant deaths in the US right after Fukushima. He cherry-picked the NW cities with the highest change in infant mortality and added them up - claiming that 14,000 additional babies died in the ten weeks after Fukushima compared to the weekly rate over the four previous weeks. Did he tell you that the rate was higher than that in the ten weeks prior to Fukushima? Did he tell you that it was lower in other cities? Did he tell you that ALL of the variability over those weeks was entirely within the normal statistical variation for these statistics?

Of course not. Then he couldn't sell you his snake oil.