Listed here is critical information about Chernobyl, a name
that, like Bhopal, has come to represent the epidome of
man's inappropriate behavior based only on the intellect's capacity to
ask, Is it possible? If we are to survive as a species, and be
the true conservators of this place as our response abilities endow us
with, we MUST temper the intellect's youthful inexperience
with the age-old instinctual and intuitive wisdom that always asks
Is it appropriate? when considering any activity. Chernobyl is
a clear message to humanity that nuclear power (to say nothing of
weapons) is not an appropriate exercise of human
intelligence. It is omnicidal.
|
1
Oct 1986 photo showing repairs being carried out on the
Chernobyl nuclear plant in the Ukraine. ZUFAROV / AFP / Getty Images
|
|
|
19 Mar 1996: Ivan
Kalenda turns away to wipe his tears as he visits
his 3-yr-old grandson Vitya, right, in the children's
cancer ward at a hospital in Gomel, 300 kms, 186 miles
southwest of Minsk, Belarus.
|
|
|
|
Mar 2009: Ferris wheel that was to be
inaugurated in children's amusement park a
week after the explosion stands eternally unused.
Photo credit: Timm
Suess via Flickr. See also: Timm Suess'
Chernobyl Journal.
|
|
|
10 Nov 2000: cemetery of
radioactive vehicles near Chernobyl. Some
1,350 Soviet military helicopters, buses, bulldozers, tankers,
transporters, fire engines and ambulances were used
fighting the nuclear accident. (AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky)
|
|
|
- Chernobyl: Consequences of the catastrophe 25 years later,
by Janette D. Sherman, M.D., and Alexey V. Yablokov, Ph.D,
San Francisco Bay View, 27 April 2011
The
most serious effect of the Chernobyl radiation is to the
brain and is a major medical, social and economic problem for the
affected individual, the persons' family and society at large. . . .
Inexplicably,
WHO had a special project on brain damage in the
Chernobyl territories, which was abruptly stopped after the first
definitive results. It is becoming clear that low-dose and
low-dose rates of radiation have a profound effect upon fine
structures of the nervous system, upon higher nervous system
function and upon neuropsychiatry function. . . .
It
takes 10 decades for an isotope to completely decay, thus the
approximately 30-year half-lives for Sr-90 and Cs-137 mean it
will take nearly three centuries before they have decayed, a mere
blink of the eye when compared to Plutonium-239 (Pu-239) with a
half-life of 24,100 years.
The
human and economic costs are enormous: In the first 25 years,
the direct economic damage to Belarus, Ukraine and Russia has
exceeded $500 billion. To mitigate some of the consequences,
Belarus spends about 20 percent of its national annual budget,
Ukraine up to 6 percent and Russia up to 1 percent. Funding from
other countries and from the U.N. is essential to continue
scientific studies and to provide help to those who continue to
live with significant radioactive contamination. . . .
When
a radiation release occurs, we do not know in advance the
part of the biosphere it will contaminate, the animals, plants
and people that will be affected, nor the amount or duration of
harm. In many cases, damage is random, depending upon the health,
age and status of development and the amount, kind and variety of
radioactive contamination that reaches humans, animals and
plants. For this reason, international support of research on the
consequences of Chernobyl must continue in order to mitigate the
ongoing and increasing damage. Access to information must be
transparent and open to all, across all borders. The WHO must
assume independent responsibility in support of international
health.
Given
the continuing and known problems caused by the Chernobyl
catastrophe, we must ask ourselves: Before we commit ourselves to
economic and technological support of nuclear energy, who, what
and where are we willing to sacrifice and for how long?
- Health Effects of Chernobyl, 25 years after the reactor catastrophe,
by Dr. rer. nat. Sebastian Pflugbeil, Society for Radiation Protection
Henrik Paulitz, International Physicians
for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)
Dr. med. Angelika Claussen, IPPNW
Prof. Dr. Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake, Society for Radiation Protection
With the support of Strahlentelex information service
8 April 2011
from the Executive Summary:
According
to UNSCEAR between 12,000 and 83,000 children were born with
congenital deformations in the region of Chernobyl, and around 30,000 to 207,000
genetically damaged children worldwide. Only 10% of the overall expected damage
can be seen in the first generation....
A
paper by Kristina Voigt, Hagen Scherb also showed that after 1986, in the aftermath
of Chernobyl, around 800,000 fewer children were born in Europe than one might
have expected. Scherb estimated that, as the paper did not cover all countries, the
overall number of “missing” children after Chernobyl could be about one
million. Similar effects were also observed following above-ground nuclear weapons
tests....
Up
until today, there has unfortunately been no conclusive overview of the changes in the
health condition of the whole of the affected population in the region of Chernobyl,
not to mention the lack of an overview of the catastrophe for the people in the
Northern hemisphere. The numbers referred to here may seem on the one hand to be
terribly high, on the other hand rather low. But it has to be taken into account
that nearly all of the collated studies dealt with relatively small sections of the
population. Even supposedly slight changes in rates of sickness can signify serious
health damage and a large extent of human suffering when they are extrapolated onto
a larger population group....
from 4. Genetic and teratogenic damage (malformations),
4.1 The Chernobyl region:
Scientists from the
Universities of Moscow and Leicester examined blood samples from 79 families, the
parents of which had been living within a 300-kilometre radius of the reactor.
The scientists were surprised by the fact that in those children born between
February and September 1994 cases of mutations had doubled. The genetic scientists
reasoned, that as the examined children were only two years old this was due to
genetic changes in the parental germ cells. Professor David Hillis from the
University of Texas in Austin drew attention to the correlation with measurement
results from field mice that had lived off highly contaminated food in the area
around the Chernobyl sarcophagus: “The rate of mutation amongst the
field mice is one hundred thousand times higher than
normal”.[92]....
from 6. All cancers and leukaemia:
The
estimated whole-body doses for the affected population in the area around Chernobyl
ranged from 0-1.5 Gy. At the same time, it must be noted that an increasing number of
Chernobyl studies from the three countries affected have come to the conclusion that
the risk of cancer due to chronic low-level radiation is higher in comparison with
the results from studies on atomic bomb survivors. The multi-centre study that was
carried out on nuclear industry workers in 15 countries shows that the risk for all
cancers, except leukaemia and lung cancer, is approximately 3-times higher than for
the atomic bomb survivors. It must therefore be ascertained that the results of
studies carried out on atomic bomb survivors cannot be applied to the Chernobyl
population, as they systematically underestimate the
risk.[168]....
from the Executive Summary:
By 2050 thousands
more cases of illnesses will be diagnosed that will have been caused by the Chernobyl
nuclear catastrophe. The delay between cause and noticeable physical reaction
is insidious. Chernobyl is far from over.
Particularly tragic is
the fate of the thousands of children who were born dead or died in infancy, who
were born with malformations and hereditary diseases, or who are forced to live
with diseases they would not have developed under normal circumstances.
The genetic defects
caused by Chernobyl will continue to trouble the world for a long time to come
– most of the effects will not become apparent until the second or third
generation.
Even if the extent
of the health effects is not yet clear, it can still be predicted that the suffering
brought about by the nuclear disaster in Fukushima
is, and will be, of a similar magnitude.
- Chernobyl Catastrophe: 25th Anniversary of World's Worst Nuclear Accident
Interview with Dr. Janette Sherman and Dr. Jeff Patterson,
DemocracyNow.org,
26 April 2011
DR. JEFF PATTERSON: [N]uclear power, nuclear
energy, has three poisonous Ps, and those are pollution—and
we're certainly seeing the example of that now at the 25th
anniversary of Chernobyl. That pollution occurs all along the
fuel cycle, from the time we dig it out of the ground, the
tailings that are left and expose people to radon, to the
proliferation of nuclear weapons, to the production of fuel, and
then we don't know where to bury the waste or what to do with it.
And now we're seeing the catastrophic release of radiation once
again, which happened at Kyshtym in Russia, happened in
Chernobyl, and now is happening in Fukushima—and will
happen again. And so, pollution is the first thing that is the
poisonous P.
Second
is price. And as Medvedev said—he claims that this
is the cheapest form of energy. It's by far and away the most
expensive form of energy. When we figure in the results of these
disasters and the cost to people's health, the economic loss, the
agricultural loss, the Ukraine, in the initial days of this,
spent a sixth of their national budget on Chernobyl. And Belarus
and the Ukraine are still spending five to seven percent of their
national budgets every year to deal with the Chernobyl accident.
If we figured all of that in to the cost of nuclear power,
nuclear power becomes extremely expensive. As Dr. Sherman
mentioned, the next sarcophagus that they're proposing to build
over the nuclear power plant, they're estimating will cost $1.1
billion, and they've only raised $800 million for this now. It's
already three years behind time in terms of being built. And so,
the question is, will this ever get done, because the cost of
this is so much. The cost of building a new nuclear power plant
is so expensive that, chances are, none will be built, because
nobody wants to fund them.
And
the third poisonous P is proliferation. Nuclear power and
nuclear weapons go hand in hand. Medvedev talked about the
peaceful atom that was designed by Eisenhower. Well, it's out of
the peaceful atom program that has come nuclear weapons for many
countries. And we're seeing the example of that in Iran today.
So, these are deadly parts of the nuclear experiment that we are
conducting today that, in my opinion, is a highly unethical
experiment. . . .
DR. JANETTE SHERMAN: . . . . When a nuclear reactor explodes,
the radiation goes around the entire hemisphere. It is not confined
to where the people live—or where the accident occurred.
The effects are ubiquitous across all species: that's wild and
domestic animals, birds, fish, bacteria, viruses, plants and
humans. So the effects are extremely serious, and they last for
generations. We're terribly concerned about Belarus, where only
20 percent of the children are now considered healthy. So, what
do you do with a society if 80 percent of your population is
sick? Who are going to be the artists and the musicians and the
scientists and the teachers, if your population is not well? . . .
It's
very, very, very important to keep adequate records on
exposures and the effect of the workers and make them publicly
available, certainly not by the name of the individual person,
but certainly the data needs to be available and transparent so
scientists can follow what is happening to these people. The
problem within Chernobyl was that they released almost no data
for three years, and it was very, very difficult to reconstruct
what was happening. And as Dr. Patterson pointed out, many of
these records have disappeared. And indeed, many records of
nuclear workers in the United States have disappeared, and it
has—workers have a very hard time finding what their
exposures were, even when they knew what their job description
was.
Just One Part in a Thousand ?
It
may sound like a trifle to put only one part per thousand of a poison
into the environment, but we will show what one part per thousand means with
respect to radioactive cesium.
The
cesium-137 produced each year by a 1000-megawatt (electrical) nuclear
power plant amounts to nearly 4 million curies. Since its radioactive
half-life is 30.2 years, very little of it decays during a year.
The
Chernobyl reactor contained a two-year cesium-inventory of about 8
million curies. Recent estimates are that the Chernobyl reactor released
about 2.5 million curies of cesium-137, which is equivalent to (2.5 / 4.0)
or 62.5 % of a ONE-year inventory.
Now
let us consider 100 large nuclear power plants each operating in the
USA for a lifespan of about 25 years each. Call "A" the yearly cesium-137
production by one plant. Then 100A = the yearly production by 100 plants.
Lifetime production = 25 yrs x 100A/year = 2,500A. 99.9 % containment =
release of 1 part per 1,000. With 99.9 % perfect containment, loss = 2.5A.
Chernobyl lost 0.625A. The ratio of 2.5A and 0.625A is 4.0.
This
ratio, 4, has an enormous meaning. It means that achieving 99.9 %
PERFECT containment of the cesium-137 produced by 100 plants during 25 years
of operation, through all steps of the cesium's handling up through final
burial, would STILL result in cesium-137 contamination equivalent in curies
to 4 Chernobyl accidents.
Worldwide,
there are about 400 plants underway, so the same scenario
(99.9 % perfection in containing cesium) would mean cesium-loss equivalent
to 16 Chernobyl accidents per 25 years of operation. And this assault on
human health could occur without blowing the roof off any single plant.
|
|
|
- Chernobyl's Accident: Path and Extension of the Radioactive Cloud
This is a graphic reconstruction of the path of the first 14 days of the 1986
Chernobyl radioactive plume. It was created by the French Government's official
agency on radiation and nuclear matters, the INSTITUT DE RADIOPROTECTION ET
SÛRETÉ NUCLÉAIRE (IRSN). (Only
the entry point -
Path
and extension of the radioactive cloud - is in English. At present (14 Mar
2011), the text content and details are available only in French.
IRSN is currently working on a new international website.)
Also included is a graphic from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory showing
dispersions of Chernobyl radioactive cloud on 27 April and 6 May 1986. Graphic
reproduced from page two of
"The
Chernobyl Catastrophe, Consequences on Human Health,"
Greenpeace, 18 April 2006.
- What Next for the WHO and IAEA? Chernobyl, 25 Years Later
By Dr. Janette D. Sherman, MD,
Counterpunch, 4 March 2011
Immediately after the catastrophe, release of information was
limited, and there was a delay in collecting data. WHO, supported
by governments worldwide could have been pro-active and led the
way to provide readily accessible information, but did not. These
omissions resulted in several effects: limited monitoring of
fallout levels, delays in getting stable potassium iodide to
people, lack of care for many, and delay in prevention
of contamination of the food supply. . . .
The
number of victims is one of the most contentious issue between
scientists who collected data first-hand and WHO/IAEA that
estimated only 9,000 deaths.
The
most detailed estimate of additional deaths was done in
Russia by comparing rates in six highly contaminated territories
with overall Russian averages and with those of six
lesser-contaminated areas, maintaining similar geographical and
socioeconomic parameters. There were over 7 million people in
each area, providing for robust analysis. Thus data from multiple
scientists estimate the overall mortality from the Chernobyl
catastrophe, for the period from April 1986 to the end of 2004,
to be 985,000, a hundred times more than the WHO/IAEA estimate.
Given
that thyroid diseases caused such a toll, Chernobyl has
shown that nuclear societies – notable Japan, France,
India, China, the United States, and Germany – must distribute
stable potassium iodide (KI) before an accident, because
it must be used within the first 24 hours.
Key
to understanding effects from nuclear fallout is the
difference between external and internal radiation. While
external radiation, as from x-rays, neutron, gamma and cosmic
rays can harm and kill, internal radiation (alpha and beta
particles) when absorbed by ingestion and inhalation become
embedded in tissues and releases damaging energy in direct
contact with tissues and cells, often for the lifetime of the
person, animal or plant. . . .
When
a radiation release occurs we do not know in advance the
part of the biosphere it will contaminate, the animals, plants,
and people that will be affected, nor the amount or duration of
harm. In many cases, damage is random, depending upon the health,
age, and status of development and the amount, kind, and variety
of radioactive contamination that reaches humans, animals and
plants. For this reason, international support of research on the
consequences of Chernobyl must continue in order to mitigate the
ongoing and increasing damage. Access to information must be
transparent and open to all, across all borders. The WHO must
assume independent responsibility in support of international
health.
|
Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment
Written by Alexey V. Yablokov (Center for Russian Environmental Policy, Moscow, Russia),
Vassily B. Nesterenko (head of Ukrainian Nuclear establishment at time of accident (deceased)),
and Alexey V. Nesterenko (Institute of Radiation Safety, Minsk, Belarus).
Consulting Editor Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger (Environmental Institute,
Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan).
Annals
of the New York Academy of Sciences,
Volume 1181, December 2009, 335 Pages
local PDF copy of 2009 book [327 pages, 3.79 MB]
|
Fukushima & Chernobyl: Joined At The Hip
Russian Biologist Reveals the Truth About Low-Dose Radiation Risks
May 2011 – reprint of
Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for
People and the Environment,
now available; 347 pages—with index.
This book is the only publication to document non-cancer incidence
and mortality in countries outside the Russian Federation, Ukraine,
and Belarus and serves as a frame of reference and counterweight for
officials who are obscuring the full scope of the Fukushima Dai-ichi
disaster. First published by the prestigious New York
Academy of Sciences (Nov. 2009 in its ANNALS), it
is now out of print, causing lead author, eminent Russian biologist Doctor
Alexey Yablokov, to request the right to reprint (recently granted). This
reprint edition includes a separate index that was not part of the original
book. Dr. Yablokov contacted his Consulting Editor,
Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger, MD,
and Timothy
Mousseau, Associate Vice President for Research & Graduate
Education, University of South Carolina, and asked them to be his agents in
the U.S. The book is now for sale directly from the printer
(see below).
In her brief assessment Dr. Sherman ties Chernobyl to the current
low-dose releases in Japan. “As we watch the
events unfold at Fukushima Nuclear Plant
in Japan, radioactive nuclides are spreading around the entire northern
hemisphere. Professor Yablokov and his colleagues cite some 2,000
studies of wild and domestic animals, birds, fish, plants, trees,
mushrooms, bacteria, viruses, and yes–humans–that
were altered, some permanently as a result of the Chernobyl
radioactive releases. Animals and humans developed similar
abnormalities and diseases, including birth defects and cancers.
Radioactive releases from Chernobyl continue today–25 years
later. This book documents the never-ending perils from nuclear
power.“
In a March
25 press conference in Washington,
Professor
Yablokov observed that the long-term health and
environmental consequences of the Fukushima accident
could surpass those from Chernobyl. He stated,
”Because the area is far more densely populated
than around Chernobyl, the human toll could eventually be
far worse in Japan. It's especially dangerous if plutonium
is released (reports say it has) as inhalation results in a
high probability of cancer. A release of plutonium will
contaminate that area forever and is impossible to clean
up.“
|
ORDER NOW:
Book prices include shipping and handling, anywhere in the U.S.
|
|
Individuals, NGOs, &
Public Interest Organizations
|
Total
Cost
|
|
|
|
One
|
|
$13.50
|
|
|
|
Two
|
@ $13.25
|
$26.50
|
|
|
|
Three
|
@ $13.00
|
$39.00
|
|
|
|
4-19
|
$12.50
|
each
|
|
|
|
20 & up
|
$12.00
|
each
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bookstores, Universities, and
Colleges
|
|
|
|
|
1-19
|
$16.50
|
each
|
|
|
|
20 & up
|
$14.50
|
each
|
|
|
|
Please send checks directly to:
GREKO PRINTING
260 W. Ann Arbor Rd.,
Plymouth, MI 48170 USA
phone: 734-453-0341
For credit cards orders, please mail
< tony at grekoprinting dot com >.
Include credit card number and expiration date, or call the print
shop with credit card info, Plymouth, MI (9-5, M-F, EDT).
Please include mailing address.
For further information please contact:
Lynn Howard Ehrle, M.Ed,
Chair, International Science Oversight Board
(Doctors Yablokov and Sherman-Nevinger are board members).
Electronic address: < ehrlebird32 at att dot net >
|
|
|
- Complete Text Transcript: Chernobyl: A Million Casualties
Karl Grossman on EnviroVideo interviews
Dr. Janette Sherman, recorded 5 March 2011
A million people have died so far as a result of the 1986 Chernobyl
nuclear plant accident, explains Janette Sherman, M.D., toxicologist
and contributing editor of the book Chernobyl: Consequences of the
Catastrophe for People and the Environment. Published by the New
York Academy of Sciences, the book, authored by Dr. Alexey Yablokov,
Dr. Vassily Nesterenko and Dr. Alexey Nesterenko, examined medical
records now available – which expose as a lie the claim of the
International Atomic Energy Commission that perhaps 4,000 people may
die as a result of Chernobyl. Enviro Close-Up # 610 (29 mintes)
- New Book Concludes: Chernobyl death toll: 985,000, mostly from cancer,
by Karl Grossman, Global Research, 3 September 2010
In his foreword, Dr. Dimitro Grodzinsky, chairman of the Ukranian
National Commission on Radiation Protection, writes about how
"apologists of nuclear power" sought to hide the real impacts of
the Chernobyl disaster from the time when the accident occurred.
The book "provides the largest and most complete collection of
data concerning the negative consequences of Chernobyl on the
health of people and the environment. . . . The main conclusion of the
book is that it is impossible and wrong `to forget Chernobyl.'" . . .
The
book details the spread of
radioactive poisons following the explosion of Unit 4 of
the Chernobyl nuclear plant on April 26, 1986. These major
releases only ended when the fire at the reactor was brought
under control in mid-May. Emitted were "hundreds of millions
of curies, a quantity hundreds of times larger than the
fallout from the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki." . . .
There
is an examination of genetic impacts with records
reflecting an increase in "chromosomal aberrations" wherever
there was fallout. This will continue through the "children of
irradiated parents for as many as seven generations." So "the
genetic consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe will impact
hundreds of millions of people." . . .
Further,
"the concentrations" of some of the poisons, because they have
radioactive half-lives ranging from 20,000 to 200,000 years,
"will remain practically the same virtually forever."
[Near
the end of the book,] "The Chernobyl catastrophe demonstrates that
the nuclear industry's willingness to risk the health of humanity and
our environment with nuclear power plants will result, not only
theoretically, but practically, in the same level of hazard as
nuclear weapons."
|
15.8. It Is Impossible to Forget Chernobyl
1. The
growing data about of the negative
consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe for
public health and nature does not bode well
for optimism. Without special large-scale
national and international programs, morbidity
and mortality in the contaminated territories
will increase. Morally it is inexplicable that the
experts associated with the nuclear industry
claim: “It is time to forget Chernobyl.”
2. Sound
and effective international and
national policy for mitigation and minimization
of Chernobyl’s consequences must be based
on the principle: “It is necessary to learn
and minimize the consequences of this
terrible catastrophe.”
|
|
|
- Another Book About the Hazards of
Nuclear Radiaton. Read It. Weep. Take Action.,
by Janettte D. Sherman, M. D., 31 May 2010
The link between U. S. atomic veterans and Chernobyl victims is
even closer. The Army's Infantry School Quarterly asserted: "A
soldier is not a casualty until he requires treatment. Even
though he has been exposed to a lethal dose of radiation, he can
perform his combat mission until symptoms appear." The 1987
Central Military Commission of the USSR Ministry of Defense
declared: "The presence of acute somatic illness and activation
of chronic disease in persons who were involved in liquidation
(the clean up workers) who do not have acute radiation sickness,
the effect of ionizing radiation should not be included in the
causal relationship." Denial is a strong tool -- it supports
dangerous industries and denies relief to those who are harmed.
But these actions are more than denial -- these are lies. . . .
While
the book documents the health and environmental
devastation, the economic and political costs from the Chernobyl
catastrophe have been enormous. With so many children physically
and mentally stunted, many not even born at the time of the
disaster, it will be very difficult for families to earn a living
and maintain needed familial bonds, and with so much of the
budget diverted to care for sick and disabled people, it will be
difficult for citizens to develop an independent society that can
make needed political, social and economic decisions. Who will
challenge the status quo if most of a society is un-well, poorly
educated, and impoverished? There was a collapse of the life
expectancy in Russia, plunging to 57-59 for men during the 1990s,
now 61 years as of 2009, largely blamed on the "collapse of the
Soviet Union'" but what contributed to that collapse?
It
is impossible to understand that the U. S., one of the
wealthiest countries in the world, could not pass into law
provisions to extend medical care to all citizens, rich, poor,
young and old, while at the same time some $54 billion has been
proposed in loan guarantees to build seven new nuclear power
plants, this on top of $18.5 billion in guarantees provided in
2005. With documented deterioration of health, lack of preventive
and restorative medical care coupled with loss of economic
stability for many citizens, it is a matter of a few years before
the U. S. reaches a social calamity.
- Chernobyl Radiation Killed Nearly One Million People: New Book,
by Environmental News Service, 26 April 2010
Drawing upon extensive data, the authors estimate the number of deaths
worldwide due to Chernobyl fallout from 1986 through 2004 was 985,000,
a number that has since increased. . . .
Yablokov
and his co-authors find that radioactive emissions
from the stricken reactor, once believed to be 50 million curies, may
have been as great as 10 billion curies, or 200 times greater
than the initial estimate, and hundreds of times larger than the
fallout from the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. . . .
About 550
million Europeans, and 150 to 230 million others in the Northern Hemisphere
received notable contamination. Fallout reached the United States and Canada
nine days after the disaster. . . .
The
authors of the study say not enough attention has been paid to
Eastern European research studies on the effects of Chernobyl at a
time when corporations in several nations, including the United States,
are attempting to build more nuclear reactors and to extend the years
of operation of aging reactors.
The
authors said in a statement, "Official discussions from the
International Atomic Energy Agency and associated United Nations'
agencies (e.g. the Chernobyl Forum reports) have largely downplayed
or ignored many of the findings reported in the Eastern European
scientific literature and consequently have erred by not including
these assessments."
- Book Review: Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment,
by Dr. Rosalie Bertell, Global Research, 12 February 2010
The authors systematically explain the secrecy conditions imposed by
the government, the failure of technocrats to collect data on the
number and distribution of all of the radionuclides of major concern, and the restrictions placed on physicians against calling any medical
findings radiation related unless the patient had been a certified “acute radiation sickness” patient during the disaster, thus assuring that
only 1% of injuries would be so reported.
|
15.5. Chernobyl Releases and Environmental Consequences
5. In
1986 the levels of irradiation in
plants and animals in Western Europe, North
America, the Arctic, and eastern Asia were
sometimes hundreds and even thousands of
times above acceptable norms. The initial
pulse of high-level irradiation followed by
exposure to chronic low-level radionuclides has
resulted in morphological, physiological, and
genetic disorders in all the living organisms in
contaminated areas that have been
studied—plants, mammals, birds, amphibians,
fish, invertebrates, bacteria, and viruses. . . .
11. Wildlife
in the heavily contaminated
Chernobyl zone sometimes appears to flourish,
but the appearance is deceptive. According to
morphogenetic, cytogenetic, and immunological
tests, all of the populations of plants, fishes,
amphibians, and mammals that were studied
there are in poor condition. This zone is
analogous to a “black hole”—some species may only
persist there via immigration from uncontaminated
areas. The Chernobyl zone is the microevolutionary
“boiler,” where gene pools of living creatures are
actively transforming, with unpredictable consequences. . . .
13. For
better understanding of the
processes of transformation of the wildlife in the
Chernobyl-contaminated areas, radiobiological
and other scientific studies should not
be stopped, as has happened everywhere in
Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia, but must be
extended and intensified to understand and
help to mitigate expected and unexpected
consequences.
|
|
|
|
|
- Chernobyl: An Unbelievable Failure to Help,
by Rosalie Bertell, International Journal of Health Services, March 2008
. . . IAEA subsequently took its radiation protection recommendations
directly from ICRP (rather than WHO), therefore persons from the
Commission who also sit on UNSCEAR both make the rules and judge
their adequacy. Dr. Fred Mettler, Jr. is not the only person to
sit on the Commission and also sit on UNSCEAR. This dual role is
commonplace and clearly a conflict of interest. . . .
The
nuclear industry has a monopoly on
radiation and human health scientific information, and its
dissemination through the Universities into nuclear reactor
facilities, hospital radiology laboratories and UN organizations.
This poses a further serious problem. Normally, one believes the
evidence at hand, rather than the theory! If one has been taught
theory as fact, the situation becomes more complicated. ICRP has
created an artificial "consensus" on the health effects of
radiation. . . .
The
next logical question is: why would the serious health
effects of radiation, such as **non-fatal cancers, (including
thyroid, breast and skin), non-cancer somatic effects and
teratogenic effects of radiation be discounted and ignored? It is
my opinion that this administrative decision made by the
physicists of the Manhattan Project was meant as a safeguard
against possible objections to the northern hemispheric nuclear
fallout. . . .
Thus
the radiation protection standards proposed by the Manhattan
Project physicists and later by ICRP and IAEA have been, from the
start, a trade-off between the "benefits" sought by the
professional users of ionizing radiation, not least of which were
the bomb makers, and the "risk" to life and health of workers and
the public. . . .
Since
the ICRP methodology and radiation risks depend heavily on
the Atomic Bomb Research, which looked at the effects of high
radiation doses delivered at a fast rate
from an external (to the body) source, it fails to address
chronic low dose internal radioactive contamination. . . .
The IAEA Report of 2005 and UNSCEAR 2000 analysis ignored these
considerations. When the international scientific critics of
ICRP methodology develop an internationally acceptable
alternative, and when the UNSCEAR data gaps are filled, we may be
able to adjust this estimate of Chernobyl deaths and severe
injuries accordingly. However, the inadequate record-keeping in
this high-technology age will always be seen as an attempt to
cover-up the true effects of the Chernobyl disaster. Clearly, the
true damage to health attributable to the Chernobyl disaster has
been hidden from the general public through poor and incomplete
scientific investigation, obfuscation and poor recording of data
and outright lying.
Many
people are mystified that three UN Agencies (IAEA, WHO and
UNEP) appear to be agreeing on the minimal damage done to the
people directly affected by Chernobyl and other low dose
radiation exposures. I think this is a failure to understand the
profound influence wielded by ICRP which dictates not only what
should be of concern to UN Agencies, but also provides the
methodology which must be used in order to determine both the
dose of ionizing radiation received by the victims and the risk
posed by that dose. All of the U.N. Agencies use these same
protocols, methodologies and risk estimates -- hence there are no
independent assessments. Reform of the UN must assure
independence of its agencies. . . .
The
time has come to replace closed science with open science,
self-perpetuating committees with professional societies
accountable to their peers, and monopolized areas of research
with properly funded transparent scientific research. While
physics is needed to identify and quantify the strength and
nature of a radiation source, physicians with
expertise in epidemiology, toxicology, oncology, pediatrics and
community health should describe the injury caused by it, and the
ramifications of the exposure for the public health. The need is
urgent for UN reform in this important area on which the survival
of the human species and the environment may well depend.
|
Links
- The Chernobyl Congress
Chernobyl: 25 Years After, Stop the Nuclear Timebomb—Abandon Nuclear Power Now!
International IPPNW Public Congress
Timebomb Nuclear Power
25 Years after Chernobyl
Urania, Berlin
April 8-10, 2011
German affiliate of the
International Physicians for the Prevention
of Nuclear War,
Physicians for Social Responsibility
in cooperation with the
Society for Radiation Protection,
the Physicians of Chernobyl,
the Scientists Initiative for Peace and Sustainability
and the Nuclear Free Future Award.
Chernobyl: The Meltdown
April 26, 1986: 23 minutes, 40 seconds after 1 am, Block 4 of the
Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded. For the first time ever,
the world witnessed a “maximum credible accident” in a nuclear
installation. This disaster changed the world. The Chernobyl catastrophe
made millions of people into victims. 180,000 kilograms of highly
radioactive material were inside the reactor. The radioactive cloud
did not stop at borders, it circled the world. Even now, the effects of
the accident are still being suppressed, hushed up and made light of.
25 Years After Chernobyl
Against the will of the German people, the operational lifespan of nuclear
power plants is being increased. New nuclear power plants are being
planned and built in Europe. Politics are slave to the nuclear industry.
The fairy tale of “clean” nuclear energy as saviour of the
climate and a “stopgap technology” is doing the rounds. In
place of responsible policies we find only disinformation. The success
story that was renewable energy has been stalled.
The Congress
- provides information on the effects of Chernobyl
- analyses the risk potential of the nuclear chain
- offers solutions for a world free from the nuclear threat
- introduces possibilities for action
- Socio-Ecological
Union
This is the only international ecological organization born in the USSR. In
the middle of 2000 the Socio-Ecological Union brings together more than
25 thousand persons from 19 countries of Europe, Asia and North America. See
especially, Programs of SEU.
- The Institute of Radiation Safety "BELRAD"
The institute of radiating safety "BELRAD" (Institute "BELRAD") was
created in 1990 and acts as independent not state organization. The
goal of activity of the Institute "BELRAD" is radiation monitoring of
the inhabitants of Chernobyl zone and their foodstuffs, development
of measures on maintenance of radiation safety and protection of
the population on territories, contaminated by radionuclides by
realization of necessary scientific researches, development and
organization of implementation of their results in practice.
- The Physicians
of Chernobyl, Association
This is a humanitarian organisation, which was
registered in 1990 in the Ukraine, the epicentre of the Chernobyl disaster.
It does not receive any financial support from the government nor from
international and lobby organisations. Thus the independence in the
assessment of the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster and in the
association's objective is sustained. Citizens of the Ukraine as well as
foreigners, who take part in this field of activity, can become members
of this association: physicians, scientists, journalists and other people,
who realise humanitarian goals of the association.
-
Charities and Organisations across the UK
dedicated to improving
the lives of those affected by the Chernobyl disaster
-
Chernobyl Children's Project - Supporting the Children of Belarus
- Chernobyl Children's Life Line
brings several thousand children to the UK each year from Belarus and
Ukraine to stay with families in over 100 links around the country; it has
a family support project providing financial help to many poor families
in Belarus.
- Friends of Chernobyl Children
an ecumenical group working with host families throughout the UK to
help socially underpriviledged children affected by the Chernobyl disaster.
- Chernobyl Continuity
Started in 1998 Chernobyl Continuity organises respite holidays in the
UK for Belarusian teenagers aged 16 to 18 with a programme designed
to expand their horizons by taking part in activities most of us take for granted.
- Friends of the Belarusian Childrens Hospice
funds the building and staff of the Children's Hospice in Minsk which cares for
114 terminally ill or severely disabled children. Has provided training and funding
for two professional fundraisers who are working towards making the hospice
independent of foreign support in the future.
- Leaves Of Hope
The charity's primary objective is to promote the social, medical and physical
well being of the Children of Belarus by seeking to alleviate the
consequences of poverty, sickness and distress, by developing programmes
of education and training that promote the rights of children, particularly
focusing on early intervention, foster care and support for children with disabilities.
- Chernobyl Children Rye
hosts children - from toddlers to 18 year olds, and usually in remission from
cancer - in the Rye, Hastings and Battle area. The charity also funds hospice
nurses supporting children in their homes in the city of Pinsk.
- Heart Hope Help
has been delivering aid to Belarus for many years, supporting schools,
orphanages and Hospices. They are very
involved with the Children's Hospice in Slonim.
- To The Memory of Chernobyl April 26, 1986 - 2011, Maria Gilardin,
TUC Radio
Instead of honoring its victims at this time, Chernobyl is referenced to minimize the impact of Fukuchima.
- Documentary:
The Battle of Chernobyl, Play Film, 2006
On April 26, 1986, a reactor at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power
Plant in the Ukrainian city of Pripyat exploded and began
spewing radioactive smoke and gas. Firemen discovered
that no amount of water could extinguish the blaze. More
than 40,000 residents in the immediate area were exposed
to fallout 100 times greater than that from the two atomic
bombs dropped on Japan. But the most serious nuclear
accident in history up to that time had only begun.
Based
on top-secret government documents that came to
light only in the Nineteen Nineties during the collapse of the Soviet
Union, The Battle Of Chernobyl reveals a systematic
cover-up of the true scope of the disaster, including the
possibility of a secondary explosion of the still-smoldering
magma, whose radioactive clouds would have rendered
Europe uninhabitable. The government effort to prevent
such a catastrophe lasted for more than seven months
and sacrificed the lives of thousands of soldiers, miners
and other workers.
The
Battle Of Chernobyl dramatically chronicles
the series of harrowing efforts to stop the nuclear chain
reaction and prevent a second explosion, to "liquidate" the
radioactivity, and to seal off the ruined reactor under a
mammoth "sarcophagus." These nerve-racking events are
recounted through newly available films, videos and photos
taken in and around the plant, computer animation, and
interviews with participants and eyewitnesses, many of
whom were exposed to radiation, including government
and military leaders, scientists, workers, journalists,
doctors, and Pripyat refugees.
The
consequences of this catastrophe continue today, with
tens of thousands of disabled survivors suffering from the
"Chernobyl syndrome" of radiation-related illnesses, and
the urgent need to replace the hastily-constructed and now
crumbling sarcophagus over the still-contaminated reactor. As
this remarkable film makes clear, The Battle Of
Chernobyl is far from over.
- Chernobyl
Heart, a 2003 documentary film by Maryann DeLeo
The film won the Best Documentary Short Subject Award at the 2004 Academy Awards.
- The Long Shadow of Chernobyl, A Long Term Project by Gerd Ludwig
Due to the unfolding nuclear crisis in Japan, this project has
become as timely and important as ever. While Gerd documents
the aftermath of the Chernobyl disaster nearly 25 years later,
he reminds us that the cost and consequences of nuclear energy
will continue to develop for decades to come.
-- Brandon Nightingale, Studio Manager for Gerd Ludwig, 23 Mar 2011
- Chernobyl Legacy by Paul Fusco
Photographer Paul Fusco faces the dark legacy of Chernobyl, focusing
on the horrifying human consequences of the event that is now 20 years
in the past. Fusco's work forces us to remember an important nightmare
that we would forget at the peril of our mortality and our future.
- Chernobyl
Exclusion Zone 2008-2009 by Graham Gilmore
[N]uclear power has always aroused my interest, from atomic weapons
and eerie-looking gas masks to the invisible dangers of nuclear
airborne particles. For me it is the most frightening human creation
and something that requires the utmost respect from all of mankind,
both as an efficient energy source and as a weapon of mass destruction.
-
Chernobyl nuclear disaster–in pictures, Igor Kostin, guardian.co.uk, 26 Apr 2011
In the immediate aftermath of the explosion on 26 April, 1986, few were prepared to
endure the massive radiation levels and document the disaster, but Russian photographer
Igor Kostin did. In the years that followed, he continued to monitor the political
and personal stories of those impacted by the disaster, publishing a book of photos
called
Chernobyl:
Confessions of a Reporter. His images of a deformed boy even led to adoption
of the 'Chernobyl Child' in UK. Here is a selection of his finest photographs.
|
|
|
- Belarus brought to its knees by `invisible enemy', April 26, 2001
Fifteen years after Chernobyl, the world has moved on. But for
Belarus the problems are only beginning. Thyroid cancer rates
have risen by 2,400 per cent since the explosion . . .
It is the country of Belarus which has suffered, and continues
to suffer, most from the disaster: 70 per cent of the radiation
has fallen on its land and people. . . .
Medical research has shown that radioactive elements (primarily
caesium 137 and iodine 131) cross the placental barrier from
mother to foetus, contaminating each new generation. Faced with
soaring levels of infertility and genetic changes, the gene pool
of the Belarussian people is now under threat.
- Chernobyl & Thyroid Cancer
-
14 years after and beyond . . .
- Chernobyl Kills And Cripples 14 Years After Blast, 4/21/00
- Deadly toll of Chernobyl, 4/22/00
- Ukraine Chernobyl Survivors Mark 14th Anniversary, 4/23/00
- Worst Effects of Chernobyl To Come, 4/25/00
- 50,000 extra Chernobyl cancers predicted, 4/26/00
- Chernobyl: For 14 years, the industry has downplayed the damage to humans and the planet, 5/7/00
- Chernobyl's risk to sheep may persist for 15 years, 5/11/00
- Ukraine: Chornobyl Contamination Lingers Longer Than Thought, 5/15/00
- Chernobyl Radiation Will Affect UK 100 Times Longer than Forecast, 6/7/00
- Chernobyl Newborns at Risk From 1986 Reactor Blast, 9/19/00
- Benevolent Doctor Uses Skills to Help Chernobyl Victims, 3/27/00
- Chernobyl at Ten: Half-lives and Half Truth by John M. LaForge
So Sorry If We're Wrong . . .
Some
segments of the radiation community appear to believe passionately
that no one should impede the nuclear enterprise on the basis of what they
label as speculation and conjecture about injury from low doses and
dose-rates. Instead, they ask the world to accept THEIR speculation and
conjecture that low doses and dose-rates are safe -- a notion which would
surely result in increased exposures.
But
if the threshold speculation is wrong (as shown in this book), and nonetheless we contaminate the planet irreversibly with radioactive poisons,
the results might be hundreds of millions of unnecessary cancers over
time—as well as a presently unquantifiable price in heritable
genetic damage.
|
|
|
-
Chernobyl and the Collapse of Soviet
Society
written by Dr. Jay M. Gould, this is the original complete essay
before being edited and then published in
The Nation,
March 15, 1993.
Dr. Gould presents the evidence concerning the devastating health
effects suffered by the majority of the Russian people from their
exposure to the radioactivity released at Chernobyl as being
the single most important factor hastening the collapse
of the Soviet Empire.
-
excerpts from Chernobyl, Insight From
the Inside, Springer-Verlag, 1991
by Dr. Vladimir M. Chernousenko, Scientific Director of the attempted
"clean up".
The book's
Forward, written From
the Publisher, describes Chernousenko (born in 1941) as having,
started his scientific career at the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Physics in Kiev. Since 1971, he has worked at the
Institute for Theoretical Physics of the Ukrainian Academy of
Sciences in Kiev, where he earned his Ph.D. in theoretical physics
in 1973. Since then, up to 1991, he has been the head of the
Laboratory for Nonlinear Physics and Ecology. His scientific
acumen is exceptionally diverse, as can be seen from his numerous
publications (120 scientific papers and four monographs).
When the Chernobyl Reactor went critical and exploded on April 26,
1986, Dr. Chernousenko was invited by the Academy to act as "Scientific
Director of the Task Force for the Rectification of the Consequences
of the Chernobyl Accident" (i.e. to help direct the cleanup of this
catastrophe). In this capacity, he served for five years as one of
three key participants in the attempts to "clean up" the disaster. In
the Preface,
"The Myths of Chernobyl, and why I Wrote This Book," Chernousenko
articulates an "(incomplete)
catalogue of [21] myths" about this tragedy.
- Chernobyl: A Crossroad in the
Radiation Health Sciences
Chapter 24, from Radiation-Induced Cancer from
Low-Dose Exposure: AN INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS,
by Dr. John Gofman, 1990.
Introduction
This
chapter will compare our independent analysis
of Chernobyl's cancer consequences, with three
estimates from influential segments of the radiation
community. We will account for the huge disparity in
such estimates. In addition, we shall provide some new
estimates which use the Cancer-Yields developed in
this book, as well as the Cancer-Yields published in
1987 and 1988 by RERF analysts.
In
the process, we will suggest how the response
by segments of the radiation community to the
Chernobyl accident could have serious implications
-- extending to nuclear issues far beyond this single
accident, and beyond ionizing radiation to other
health issues and to the practice of science itself.
This chapter documents the following:
- Chernobyl's Cancer
Consequences -- Integrity of the Data
- The Two Keys to
Estimating Cancer-Consequences from This Accident
- Bottom Line from
Our 1986 Estimate of Chernobyl's Cancer Consequences
- Bottom Line from
the 1987 Estimate Issued by NRC
- Bottom Line from
the 1987 Estimate Issued by DOE
- Bottom Line from
the 1988 Up-Date of DOE's 1987 Estimate
- Reason for the
Great Disparity
- Some Important
Comments from the NRC and DOE Reports
- The Threshold and
Dose-Exclusion: Ultra-Low Cancer Estimates
- Beyond
Chernobyl: A Much Bigger Agenda in Parts of the Radiation Community
Then tables.
"De Minimis"—Beyond Radiation:
Many
people have observed that human nature incorporates some contradictory
tendencies. It seems contradictory to me that, on the one hand, there is a
readiness to inflict cancer-death on undetectable victims who will not be
noticed, while there is a competing tendency which causes some people in
Oakland, California, to risk their own lives on an unstable structure and
work themselves to exhaustion following the October 1989 earthquake, just on
the very slim chance that they might SAVE one life from under the collapsed
freeway.
People of goodwill
need to look closely at the aggregate consequences of
individually small risks. If pollution sources of all types are regulated
individually, and each is allowed under the "de minimis" concept to kill one
person in 100,000 (a low individual risk), then only 10,000 sources could
kill up to one tenth of the population. And no one would ever be able to
prove it.
|
|
|
- Chernobyl's 10th: Cancer and
Nuclear-Age Peace -- Don't Be Deceived,
March 9, 1996,
by Dr. John Gofman
The monolithic nuclear/radiation "community" cannot afford to
provide a meaningful analysis of the radiation consequences. Life,
for this monolith, requires the lowest possible death consequences
of Chernobyl. . . . Those enterprises (military or civilian) which
deliver ionizing radiation to people, anywhere in the world, share
the common goal of underestimating the health-hazard of ionizing
radiation. Thus, the military enterprises, the nuclear power
enterprises, and the medical radiation enterprises (x-rays and
"nuclear medicine") share a common endeavor.
- Radio-Iodine:
From Hanford To Chernobyl . . . And Beyond?,
Spring 1993,
by Dr. John Gofman
In 1989, a group of radiation experts who were sent to the
Chernobyl area by the World Health Organization (WHO) denied
that any of the health problems were related to radiation. In May
1991, a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) produced the same denial. Neither report denied health
problems. Rather, the reports denied any connection between the
problems and radiation. Both sets of experts claimed that the
Chernobyl populations which they visited suffered from
exaggerated fears about their radiation exposures.
We
think that the explanation for some of the health
problems may be radiation-induced hypo-thyroidism from
radio-iodine --- rather than "radio-phobia." This essay
explains why.
- "HOLOCAUST" versus "NOTHING HAPPENED" :
Tales from a Distant Place . . .
with a Problem Very Close to All of Us,
Fall 1991,
by Dr. John Gofman
Who will control what information becomes the new "textbook
wisdom" about Chernobyl's radiation consequences? Obviously it
makes a huge difference. . . .
[O]ver
decades and centuries, science has established important
barriers against bias -- rules which are widely disregarded today
in radiation research. Adherence to these rules will not be
demanded by the public, press, and other professions unless they
are aware of them. Some of the basic principles will be listed
in Part 5 . . .
If
the world allows the truth about Chernobyl to become distorted
by bias in the direction of underestimating its radiation
consequences, it would be a warning that the truth about every
chemical pollutant is also in danger of comparable distortion.
And
if all these hazards are systematically distorted by conflicts
of interest in the research, humanity everywhere will face not only
a vast harvest of radiation-induced misery from "permissible"
nuclear pollution, but additional giant harvests from "permissible"
chemical pollution of every type. And "mysteriously rising" rates
of illness can occur even while the average length of life
is growing.
Therefore,
one of the most vital activities in the field of citizen
action and preventive medicine -- today, tomorrow, and forever --
is the fiercest possible defense of objective, untainted databases.
There
can be no activity more important for human health, for if
the databases cannot be trusted and relied upon, then medical science
can be turned on its head by mis-information, which can persist as
textbook wisdom even for centuries.
|
15.9. Conclusion
U.S. President
John F. Kennedy speaking
about the necessity to stop atmospheric nuclear
tests said in June 1963:
. . . The number of children and grandchildren
with cancer in their bones, with leukemia in their
blood, or with poison in their lungs might seem
statistically small to some, in comparison with
natural health hazards, but this is not a natural health
hazard—and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of
even one human life or the malformation of even
one baby—who may be born long after we are
gone—should be of concern to us all. Our children
and grandchildren are not merely statistics toward
which we can be indifferent.
The
Chernobyl catastrophe demonstrates
that the nuclear industry’s willingness to risk
the health of humanity and our environment
with nuclear power plants will result, not only
theoretically, but practically, in the same level
of hazard as nuclear weapons.
|
|
|
- Nuclear Technology: The Inappropriate Exercise of Human Intelligence
by dave ratcliffe, marking the 10th
anniversary of the Chernobyl Catastrophe
- As of November 1995, a partial list of
some of the costs of
Chernobyl Catastrophe:
- Death rates are 30 percent higher for
those in contaminated
regions in the Ukraine compared to the rest of the country.
- Birth rates in Belarus have fallen 50 percent.
- Thyroid cancer, particularly among children, is up 285 percent
in Belarus.
- About 7,000 in Russia alone who helped put out the fire and seal
the reactor are believed to have died and 38 percent are
recovering from some kind of disease.
- Belarus, the most heavily affected country, spends 20 percent of
its budget on dealing with Chernobyl's aftermath; Ukraine
devotes four percent and Russia, one percent.
- Contamination of Lake Kojanovskoe --
downriver from Chernobyl and
used by more than 30 million people -- with "radiation levels 60
times above European Union safety norms".
- Repair estimates for the
disintegrating sarcophagus range from
$1.28 to $2.3 billion.
- 125,000 people alone have died
"from diseases related to the
accident" according to Ukraine's Health Ministry.
- Ivan Kenik, Belarus's Chernobyl
minister, estimates the cost within
the borders of Belarus for "total damages from the Chernobyl
catastrophe from 1986 to 2015" to be $235 billion.
- Testimony about Chernobyl from the World Uranium Hearing conducted in Salzburg in 1992:
|
