Masao Yoshida, Nuclear Engineer and Chief at Fukushima Plant, Dies at 58

Here&#x27;s the NYTimes on the same story:<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/world/asia/masao-yoshida-nuclear-engineer-and-chief-at-fukushima-plant-dies-at-58.html?_r=0" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;07&#x2F;10&#x2F;world&#x2F;asia&#x2F;masao-yoshida-n...</a><p>Key graf: &quot;Mr. Yoshida took a leave from Tokyo Electric in late 2011 after receiving a diagnosis of esophageal cancer. Experts have said his illness was not a result of radiation exposure from the accident, given how quickly it came on.&quot;

Fukushima disaster has not raised cancer risks [1]<p>We need more nuclear power and less nuclear scaremongering.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/2013/06/un-report-fukushima-disaster-no-cancer-risk" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.rsc.org&#x2F;chemistryworld&#x2F;2013&#x2F;06&#x2F;un-report-fukushim...</a>

This headline is scaremongering at its worst.<p>&gt;The ex-head of Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant Masao Yoshida, 58, died at a Tokyo hospital of esophageal cancer on July 9, 2013. Doctors have maintained repeatedly that Yoshida’s illness has had nothing to do with exposure to high doses of radiation.<p>&gt; [...]<p>&gt; On November 28, 2011, Yoshida was admitted to hospital, where cancer was diagnosed.<p>It&#x27;s fortunate that the article points out that the exposure does not correlate to the incident in the first place, but I get the feeling that the headline given here is link-bait at its worst.<p>As far as I can tell you, you cannot get cancer six months after being exposed to a high degree of radiation. You either die shortly after a large dose or something appears years if not decades later.<p>Cancer is a seemingly random, yet likely event.

&quot;Had he obeyed the order, the whole of north eastern Japan would possibly have been uninhabitable for decades, if not centuries.&quot;<p>I&#x27;m a bit confused by this. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were hit with nuclear weapons, but people still live in these cities today. How does the radiation from a nuclear meltdown (like Chernobyl) differ from the fallout of a nuclear weapon like with Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

The headline of this article reminds me of this one article I saw a good while back that basically said &quot;SOME DUDE WHO WORKED ON FUKUSHIMA HAS BEEN DIAGNOSED WITH CANCER!&quot;<p>Then at the end of the (short) article it was mentioned that &quot;oh, by the way, doctors are saying that it has nothing to do with Fukushima and he has been a chain smoker for decades. Never mind the blatant link baiting and scaremongering that was the entire rest of the article, it&#x27;s just what sells!&quot;<p>I&#x27;m having a hard time locating that article now, but maybe that&#x27;s for the better. It&#x27;s pretty sad how common stuff like this is when it comes to reporting on nuclear energy.

The courage of Japanese managers in the line of duty in situations like this is commendable. Similar examples were found during the Sarin gas bombings.

Mr Yoshida is a true hero, and I send my condolences to his family &amp; friends.

&gt; Doctors have maintained repeatedly that Yoshida’s illness has had nothing to do with exposure to high doses of radiation.<p>Is there any validity to this claim?

This makes for a observation for us all, that life is precious indeed, but at times we must trade that for the many other precious lives.<p>From a Administrative point of view, I would love to get a record of what methods, were used by him, to keep his men in line. Though I do have a Idea, what it would be, but actual facts would be more revealing.<p>From a Human point of view, I would call him a hero, and all his co-workers as well. And take an oath that if time would come for me to take a similar decision, i.e, to &quot;STAY SO OTHERS CAN LIVE&quot; I would in all probability take that.<p>From a Citizen point of view, I feel that, yes nuclear plants are very dangerous, it is to remember that the call of the hour is that I&#x27;m a entrepreneur, and the only way I can help make this all better is to do, what we do best: Innovate. And Search for more safer, better, alternate ways of mass electricity production.

He sounds like a hero for his actions after the failure at the plant (and I commend him and his team for this), but what about his leadership before which allowed the plant to get into such a situation?<p>I&#x27;m not saying it was his fault, I&#x27;m merely curious as to how such an important enterprise could be so ill equipped on so many levels.

I read this story this morning. Would make for a good movie.