When the realisation sunk in that the 2011 evacuation of 100.000 people from Fukushima for fear of radioactive fallout had taken 1600 or more lives (here). the question arose whether it might have been better to not evacuate at all. Radiation had claimed no lives but radiation scientists knew that the released radiation could never have caused so many casualties, the panicky evacuation itself was the culprit. Just how many lives would have been lost should the people have been asked to stay home and just sit through the fallout? There now is an answer to that question. Spoiler: none.
A recent study (attached) compares the event in Fukushima with those in St George in the American state of Utah where in the 1950ies a lot of fall out came down from nuclear tests in neighboring Nevada. In general, the fallout (from the 100 tests) was rather limited, but 'Harry', a bomb of 32 kilotons (about twice Hiroshima) that was detonated on May 19, 1953, stood out and was therefore called 'Dirty Harry'. St George was not evacuated, though the population was asked to stay inside. [Lees verder]
The number of casualties caused by the radiation that was released in the Fukushima accident is zero and will probably stay zero. We have stated that on this website multiple times and there is no reason whatsoever to change that position.