Sacrificing the Fukushima 50 again?

Background: In the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear plant accident, many workers helped restore the contaminated site, exposing themselves to a highly radioactive environment. They were referred to as the 'Fukushima 50' and applauded as heroes who saved Japan. A cohort study targeting those emergency workers is, currently, underway. We object to the study on ethical grounds.

Methods: Ethical and content analyses.

Results: First, the low participation rate raises ethical questions about why potential participants declined. Content analyses of nuclear power plant workers' narratives from a television broadcast extracted eight recurrent themes: disposable, treated like a sacrificial pawn, taboo, fear of contamination, readiness to risk one's life, distrust and dissatisfaction with the nation's response, regret over participating and uncertainty about the future. Second, the unscientific nature of the cohort design undermines the ethical basis for conducting it. Third, public resources were allocated in a way that compromises justice.

Conclusions: We urge re-considering the current Fukushima 50 research study. We also urge applying the public funds now invested in this research project to activities that would directly benefit the Fukushima 50, such as offering free lifetime healthcare and direct financial compensation.