Skip to main content

Shunichi Yamashita's Graph Alteration

At the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements (NCRP) held in Bethesda, Maryland, on March 11, 2013, Shunichi Yamashita, the Radiation Risk Management Advisor for Fukushima Prefecture and then vice president of Fukushima Medical University, gave a keynote address.

NCRP http://www.ncrponline.org/.
Yamashita's keynote address video http://echo.colostate.edu:8080/ess/echo/presentation/d6ddb666-85bd-48a3-8d83-a691910906be
Yamashita's keynote address PowerPoint presentation PDF http://www.ncrponline.org/Annual_Mtgs/2013_Ann_Mtg/Yamashita.pdf

His PowerPoint presentation included a version of a graph from the 2005 study by Cardis et al., Risk of Thyroid Cancer After Exposure to 131I in Childhood, linked here http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/97/10/724.long. Yamashita was one of the co-authors of the study, and the graph he referred to is "Fig. 2 Comparison of odds ratios (ORs) predicted by the best-fitting risk models with categorical odds ratios estimated in 11 dose categories," on page 729.

On page 727 of the Cardis study, it is stated:
"Figure 2 shows the variation in odds ratios as a function of dose level. A strong dose-response relationship was observed (P<.001); the odds ratio appeared to increase linearly with dose up to 1.5-2 Gy and then to plateau at higher doses. Statistically significant increases in risk were associated with all radiation dose categories greater than 0.2 Gy.
The statistical models that best describe these data are the linear excess relative risk model up to 1 Gy, the linear excess relative risk model up to 2 Gy, and the linear-quadratic excess relative risk model over the entire dose range. As shown in Fig. 2, however, the latter model tended to underestimate risks up to 2 Gy. "

Here's Yamashita's version, which is slide 12 of his PowerPoint presentation titled "Risk of Childhood Thyroid Cancer around Chernobyl."
 

       

Here's the original Cardis version:

     
 

It appears that he omitted the curve 1, the ERR model - linear-quadratic dose-response model over the entire dose range, which was considered one of the best-fit models. Is it because it "tended to underestimate risks up to 2 Gy"?

The videotape of Yamashita's keynote address revealed the following statement (sic) associated with this slide:
"According to other joint project on the case control studies, it's also clearly shown the increase of thyroid cancer by in dose-responsibly by radioactive iodine.   These data also reconfirmed by United States and Belarus and United States-Ukranian cohort project recently. This is really important to understand the dose-responsiveness of how much they received thyroid dosing."

Apparently he used the slide to show the dose-response of thyroid cancer risk.

Alfred Korblein, a physicist from Germany who has analyzed post-Chernobyl and post-Fukushima birth and mortality data, plotted the data points from Yamashita's graph as well as the original Cardis version, as shown below.


   


A question remains unanswered as to the reason behind Yamashita's decision to leave out the curve 1. In addition, a question arises as to if it's appropriate for him to cite the original study, as he did in the slide, when the graph has been "altered" by him.

Is this ethical as a researcher?

A consensus by a group of international researchers was that it probably wasn't. Cardis was contacted with the above information multiple times, but she never responded.

When asked what he thought of Yamashita's action of making his own graph yet citing the Cardis study as a source, Korblein said, "I would call it deception or fraud."

 



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Strict" Management of the Fukushima Health Management Survey Data by Fukushima Medical University

The Interim Report released in March 2016 by the Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey called for the need to establish the rules of management and provision of the data so it can be widely utilized by domestic and international experts. Accordingly, the Subcommittee to Review Provision of Data for the Purpose of Academic Research met in Fukushima City, Fukushima, for the first time on May 31, 2016. Subcommittee members were selected by the Fukushima prefectural government in order to address the role of the subcommittee in establishing technical rules in provision of data and include specialists in epidemiology, information technology, law, and legal sociology. Also included are members of the Oversight Committee for Fukushima Health Management Survey, Shoichiro Tsugane and Hokuto Hoshi, and the Health Survey Support Department Head and the Department of Epidemiology Chair at Fukushima Medical University, Tetsuya Ohira, representing the Fukushima Health Managemen…

A Letter Hand-delivered to the UN and UNSCEAR, Requesting Revision of UNSCEAR Report And a New UN Mandate for UNSCEAR

On October 24, 2014, at the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly being held in New York City, representatives from Physicians for Social Responsibility (USA) and Human Rights Now (Tokyo, Japan) hand-delivered a letter to the chairperson of the 4th Committee and the Secretary of UNSCEAR.  The letter, co-signed by 43 civil society groups from 9 countries, including 21 Japanese groups, requested revision of the 2014 UNSCEAR report on Fukushima accident as well as a new UN mandate for UNSCEAR.


Date: 24 October 2014
To: Members of the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly 69th Session, Members of UNSCEAR, andMembers of the UN General Assembly:

Re:Civil Society groups request revision of the recent United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) Report: “Levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East-Japan Earthquake and tsunami.”

The 2011 Fukushima disaster made UN oversight of the adverse effects of …

Thyroid Cancer in Fukushima Children: When the Language and Information Gaps Mislead

With the year 2016 marking the passage of five years since the Fukushima nuclear accident, many writings—articles, editorials, academic papers—have been released reflecting on the first five years after the accident. Some of the writings address a psychosocial aspect of the accident such as “problems” caused by the stress of evacuation and the “unwarranted” fear of radiation, dismissing the potential health effects of radiation exposure, even ignoring the science. Others focus on the alleged withholding of medical data by authorities, speculating on the health effects of the Fukushima accident reaching even the United States. 

Official data and information available in English are often limited and biased. Transparency and impartiality of such information, released by the government and international agencies, can be influenced by ulterior motives other than public health protection. However, without a fluency in Japanese and an ability to navigate through and comprehend the mass of of…