Scientific consensus views are useful, but dangerous, without a code of ethics.

Using the Fukushima accident experience, this letter discusses recent efforts on measuring scientific consensus views-that is, quantifying the agreement among scientists. In the field of radiological protection, the efforts to measure scientific consensus views deserve attention, because hoaxes have been spreading even after the Fukushima nuclear accident. We discussed two points. First, the visualization of the diversity of scientific opinions shatters the diversity illusion caused by the mass media's irresponsible dissemination of pro and con arguments. Second, the use of scientific consensus views without an ethical code is dangerous. Measuring scientific consensus views should be accompanied with the development of ethical guidelines on using it.