ArticleGenetics2016
The Hiroshima/Nagasaki Survivor Studies: Discrepancies Between Results and General Perception.
Article in Genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Irradiation with a mixed heavy ion beam induces ovarian follicle loss and dose-dependent mixed ovarian tumor development.Biology of reproduction · 2026Article
- The importance of data from the atomic bomb survivors for international radiological protection.Carcinogenesis · 2025Article
- Carcinogenesis Associated with Toxin Nephropathy: Proposed Mediation by Phosphate Toxicity.Cells · 2025Review
- Article
- High Resolution and Automatable Cytogenetic Biodosimetry Using In Situ Telomere and Centromere Hybridization for the Accurate Detection of DNA Damage: An Overview.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Solid cancer mortality risk among a cohort of Hiroshima early entrants after the atomic bombing, 1970-2010: implications regarding health effects of residual radiation.Journal of radiation research · 2022Article
- No evidence of increased mutations in the germline of a group of British nuclear test veterans.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- DNA damage response of haematopoietic stem and progenitor cells to high-LET neutron irradiation.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- How Safe Are Radiation Doses in Diagnostic Radiology? A Historical Perspective and Review of Current Evidence.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2021Review
- Role of Commensal Microbes in the γ-Ray Irradiation-Induced Physiological Changes inMicroorganisms · 2020Article
- Radiation Response of Human Cardiac Endothelial Cells Reveals a Central Role of the cGAS-STING Pathway in the Development of Inflammation.Proteomes · 2020Article
- Radiation mitigation of the intestinal acute radiation injury in mice by 1-[(4-nitrophenyl)sulfonyl]-4-phenylpiperazine.Stem cells translational medicine · 2020Article
- Nuclear radiation and prevalence of structural birth defects among infants born to women from the Marshall Islands.Birth defects research · 2019Article
- Mitochondrial Degeneration and Autophagy Associated With Delayed Effects of Radiation in the Mouse Brain.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2019Article
- Impact of early life exposure to ionizing radiation on influenza vaccine response in an elderly Japanese cohort.Vaccine · 2018Article
- Response to Busby.Genetics · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The explosion of atom bombs over the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 resulted in very high casualties, both immediate and delayed but also left a large number of survivors who had been exposed to radiation, at levels that could be fairly precisely ascertained. Extensive follow-up of a large cohort of survivors (120,000) and of their offspring (77,000) was initiated in 1947 and continues to this day. In essence, survivors having received 1 Gy irradiation (∼1000 mSV) have a significantly elevated rate of cancer (42% increase) but a limited decrease of longevity (∼1 year), while their offspring show no increased frequency of abnormalities and, so far, no detectable elevation of the mutation rate. Current acceptable exposure levels for the general population and for workers in the nuclear industry have largely been derived from these studies, which have been reported in more than 100 publications. Yet the general public, and indeed most scientists, are unaware of these data: it is widely believed that irradiated survivors suffered a very high cancer burden and dramatically shortened life span, and that their progeny were affected by elevated mutation rates and frequent abnormalities. In this article, I summarize the results and discuss possible reasons for this very striking discrepancy between the facts and general beliefs about this situation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.