"local exposure to the workers' legs was estimated to be between 2 and 6 sieverts."

It seems that the news media missed this (from the IAEA):

"Fukushima Nuclear Accident Update (27 March 2011, 03:00 UTC)

As previously reported, three workers at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant were exposed on 24 March to elevated levels of radiation. The IAEA has received additional information on the incident from the Japanese authorities.

For two of the three workers, significant skin contamination over their legs was confirmed. The Japanese authorities have stated that during medical examinations carried out at the National Institute of Radiological Sciences in the Chiba Prefecture, the level of local exposure to the workers' legs was estimated to be between 2 and 6 sieverts."

Yes its only localized exposure, but that would suggest that levels in that water may at least be even higher than 1 sievert, which itself is enough to cause serious radiation damage (2 sieverts if more of the body receives it can cause severe radiation poisoning.)

extent of injury. I can't tell if they're saying 2 to 6sv is total absorbed dose or if it's supposed to be 2-6sv x ?time (although either is not good). And 'local exposure' isn't a trivial point- it's not an 'only' if you end up a double amputee.

The numbers they release are maddening - they muddle more than they clarify!

It's supposed to include factors for what part of the body is exposed, what type of radiation the exposure contains, the amount (mass) of the body exposed, etc.

The problem is that it hasn't been reported properly over the last couple weeks. We constantly see a "Sv/hr" measurement of radioactivity, when there is no way to measure such a value. When do you get that dose? If you drink it? If you bathe in it? If you dip your finger into it? If you're in the room five feet away wearing protective clothing?

And in the case of this incident, they reported Sv when I'm sure they were really talking about Gy (Gray).