Professor John Crown: " Chernobyl did not cause increase in birth defects"

Niall M said:
There was an increase in thyroid cancer in children - are we just going to ignore this part. Straight after your highlighted paragraph....
Click to expand...

Here is the W.H.O. (World Health Organisation) organisations figures from the 2005 report

"About 4000 cases of thyroid cancer, mainly in children and adolescents at the time of the accident, have resulted from the accident’s contamination and at least nine children died of thyroid cancer; however the survival rate among such cancer victims, judging from experience in Belarus, has been almost 99%."

"The report’s estimate for the eventual number of deaths is far lower than earlier, well-publicized speculations that radiation exposure would claim tens of thousands of lives. But the 4000 figure is not far different from estimates made in 1986 by Soviet scientists, according to Dr Mikhail Balonov, a radiation expert with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, who was a scientist in the former Soviet Union at the time of the accident"

Though the leak was may have been potentially horrendous, if you take into account the nuclear bomb devastion of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the fate of the surviviors and their offspring and their childrens offspring the atomic bomb radiation had very little impact on subsequent generations
 
the nuclear bomb devastion of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the fate of the surviviors and their offspring and their childrens offspring the atomic bomb radiation had very little impact on subsequent generations
Click to expand...

werner - that is very interesting. Is there any official data on this to which you can link?
 
Brendan Burgess said:
werner - that is very interesting. Is there any official data on this to which you can link?
Click to expand...

From Hiroshima please see this link


Despite the horrible initial effects of a nuclear explosion, and the atomic bombing of Japan resulted in incredible levels of exposure of radiation and contaminated a huge area of the Japanese population, subsequent generations suffered little after effects.

Today, the safety margin for exposure to radiation levels is in the order of 1000 times to 10,000 times (and even higher!) above the level of a exceptionally low base line, i.e. there is a huge safety margin built in, too huge in many scientific opinions and tests to have any real validity but it is there to reassure the general population.
 
I spent some time in Belarus near the contamination zone working in an orphanage a decade ago. I did not see children with deformities; what I did see was the huge state neglect of damaged kids who had been left there by alcoholic parents. There were a number of deaf children, however, who could say if this was down to radiation?
In some cases, kids had grandparents outside who did what they could; and the over-worked staff in the orphanage who did their best to care for their welfare were heart-warming.
It was desperately sad. However, I came away with a slightly jaundiced view of the arguments put forward by some Irish aid charities about deformities and radiation. The problems in Belarus is grinding poverty, alcoholism, neglect of its population by its government, and yes, disabilities in the general population.
 
Hi Splash

But this must be the state of affairs in many second and third world countries - it is not linked to Chernobyl. Unless you blame the alcoholism on Chernobyl?

Brendan
 
Hi Brendan, no I agree, I don't think the alcoholism is related to what happened in 1986. Vodka is cheap and plentiful, and life there is tough, the winters are cold, and people are living under a dictatorship.
 
I've always thought it strange that the charities focus on Belarus, even though Chernobyl is in Ukraine. Strange how people in the immediate area, which is close to Kiev seem to have been largely unaffected, yet those further away in Belarus are all supposed to be suffering. Doesnt add up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top