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

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.