Response to Toshihide Tsuda, Yumiko Miyano and Eiji Yamamoto [1].

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Using a toolkit approach, Tsuda et al. critiqued work carried out by or in collaboration with the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC/WHO), including the IARC technical publication No. 46 on "Thyroid health monitoring after nuclear accidents" (TM-NUC), the project on nuclear emergency situations and improvement on medical and health surveillance (SHAMISEN), and the IARC-led work on global thyroid cancer incidence patterns as per IARC core mandate. MAIN BODY We respond on the criticism of the recommendations of the IARC technical publication No. 46, and of global thyroid cancer incidence evaluation. CONCLUSION: After nuclear accidents, overdiagnosis can still happen and must be included in informed decision making when providing a system of optimal help for cases of radiation-induced thyroid cancer, to minimize harm to people by helping them avoid diagnostics and treatment they may not need.