Chernobyl consequenses

[Kärnfysikern]

Here is a IAEA report on the consequenses of chernobyl. Not current news since its from 2005 but I dont think it got the media attention it deserved. But I guess it sells more papers to scream wolf...

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Boo.../chernobyl.pdf

The most interesting thing is that thyroid cancer is without a doubt the most serious consequens and whats more interesting is that it could have been avoided. So chernobyl wasnt the killer of millions that many people would think. The absolute worst case scenario for a reactor wasnt as bad as the enviromental fanatics try to paint it.

This quote is also interesting

It should be noted that the average
doses received by residents of the territories
‘contaminated’ by Chernobyl fallout
are generally lower than those received by
people who live in some areas of high
natural background radiation in India,
Iran, Brazil and China (100–200 mSv in
20 years)

This quote is about the number of deaths caused by chernobyl

The number of deaths attributable to the Chernobyl accident has been of paramount interest to the general public, scientists, the mass media, and politicians. Claims have been made that tens or even hundreds of thousands of persons have died as a result of the accident. These claims are highly exaggerated

The number of deaths due to acute radiation syndrome(ARS) during the first year following the accident is well documented. According to UNSCEAR (2000), ARS was diagnosed in 134 emergency workers. In many cases the ARS was complicated by extensive beta radiation skin burns and sepsis. Among these workers, 28 persons died in 1986 due to ARS. Two more persons had died at Unit 4 from injuries unrelated to radiation, and one additional death was thought to have been due to a coronary thrombosis. Nineteen more have died in 1987–2004 of various causes; however their
deaths are not necessarily — and in some cases are certainly not — directly attributable to radiation exposure.

The international expert group predicts that among the 600 000 persons receiving more significant exposures (liquidators working in 1986-1987, evacuees, and residents of the most ‘contaminated’ areas), the possible increase in cancer mortality due to this radiation exposure might be up to a few per cent. This might eventually represent up to four thousand fatal cancers in addition to the approximately 100 000 fatal cancers to be expected due to all other causes in this population

So about 4% of cancer deaths are linked to chernobyl among the most exposed. 4000, not millions like greenpeace morons would like us to belive. 4000 deaths are 4000 to many, but putting this against the bhopal disaster http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
its obvious that the nuclear industrie isnt the grand devil its painted to be.
Most of those 4000 deaths could probably have been avoided aswell if people hadnt consumed milk from cows eating contaminated grass.

Put all of this up against this(I dont know how credible this page is though) and to me its pretty ****ing obvious that nuclear power would save far more lifes than it could potentialy take even if something like chernobyl happened again(and Im more worried about a meteorite smashing down on my head than that happening).

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0817-01.htm

Reducing air pollution in just four of the world's largest cities--New York; Mexico City; Sao Paulo, Brazil; and Santiago, Chile--could prevent 64,000 premature deaths and 37 million lost workdays over the next two decades, according to research that examines the health effects of the use of fossil fuels.

[RA]

Maybe you said but my add kicked in. When will people be able to go back there??

[IronFreakX]

According to his post, they can now.

[Kärnfysikern]

Maybe you said but my add kicked in. When will people be able to go back there??

Most areas can be repopulated now. The radiaton levels have already dropped several hundrad times since the accident.

I think its just the imidiet area around the plant that needs to be keept safe. I havent read the whole IAEA article yet. I just focues on the health consequenses.

[thegodfather]

So Johan, what if the immediate population had been supplied with Iodine pills?

[Kärnfysikern]

So Johan, what if the immediate population had been supplied with Iodine pills?

Cant say for sure since I dont know much about the biological effects. But I would guess that if everyone in the area would have eaten iodine pills daily(like around swedish plants)it would have cut down cancer alot. Somewhere in the article it was stated that handing out iodine pills after the accident cut down possible cancer cases 6 times.

[MatrixGuy]

Was it true that plants and trees started growing upside down? or did i dream that? lol.

[Kärnfysikern]

Was it true that plants and trees started growing upside down? or did i dream that? lol.

you dreamt that the area around chernobyl is acctualy the area with the most vivid(is this the right word in this contex??)wildlife nowdays since there is no human disturbance anymore.

[MatrixGuy]

you dreamt that the area around chernobyl is acctualy the area with the most vivid(is this the right word in this contex??)wildlife nowdays since there is no human disturbance anymore.

I can't believe i thought that now. I would love to see what it looks like round there.

[gixxerboy1]

I saw a documentary on HBO about the aftermath and the birth defects. It was horrible. I couldn't even watch the whole thing. Some of these kids were so deformed i couldn't even imagine something that ****ed up in my head nether the less it be real

[Kärnfysikern]

I saw a documentary on HBO about the aftermath and the birth defects. It was horrible. I couldn't even watch the whole thing. Some of these kids were so deformed i couldn't even imagine something that ****ed up in my head nether the less it be real

I suspect that might have just been media blaming things on chernobyl without any proof. Media sure loves to spinn stories without checking the facts

Quote from the article

Because of the relatively low dose levels to which the populations of the Chernobyl affected regions were exposed, there is no evidence or any likelihood of observing decreased fertility among males or females in the general population as a direct result of radiation exposure. These doses are also unlikely to have any major effect on the number of stillbirths, adverse pregnancy outcomes or delivery complications or the overall health of children.Birth rates may be lower in ‘contaminated’ areas because of concern about having children (this issue is obscured by the very high rate of medical abortions) and the fact that many younger people have moved away. No discernable increase in hereditary effects caused by radiation is expected based on the low risk coefficients estimated by UNSCEAR (2001) or in previous reports on Chernobyl health effects. Since 2000, there
has been no new evidence provided to change this conclusion.

There has been a modest but steady increase in reported congenital malformations in both ‘contaminated’ and ‘uncontaminated’ areas of Belarus since 1986; see Fig. 4.
This does not appear to be radiation-related and may be the result of increased registration.

[Kärnfysikern]

I can't believe i thought that now. I would love to see what it looks like round there.

Its more or less a ghost town and alot of preserved nature.

This site has alot of good pics. But the entire story is totaly and utter bullshit so dont pay any attention to what is written

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chernobyl.../chapter1.html

There are tour guides through chernobyl and I have to go on one of those before the area begins to get repopulated.


A quote from the original article about the area

The recovery of affected biota in the exclusion zone has been facilitated by the removal of human activities, e.g., termination of agricultural and industrial activities. As a result, populations of many plants and animals have eventually expanded, and the present environmental conditions have had a positive impact on the biota in the Exclusion Zone.
Indeed, the Exclusion Zone has paradoxically become a unique sanctuary for biodiversity.

[MatrixGuy]

Wow, Looks kinda errie in places.

This bit shocked me....

Usually, on this leg of the journey, a beeping geiger counter inspires to shift into high gear and streak through the area with great haste. The patch of trees in front of me is called red - or 'magic" wood. In 1986, this wood glowed red with radiation. They cut them down and buried them under 1 meter of earth.

The readings on the asphalt paving is 500 -3000 microroentgens, depending upon where you stand. That is 50 to 300 times the radiation of a normal environment. If I step 10 meters forward, geiger counter will run off the scale. If I walk a few hundred meters towards the reactor, the radiation is 3 roentgens per hour - which is 300,000 times normal. If I was to keep walking all the way to the reactor, I would glow in the dark tonight. Maybe this is why they call it magic wood. It is sort of magical when one walks in with biker's leather and walks out like a knight in a shining armor.

Is that a load of b*llox? lol

[Kärnfysikern]

Wow, Looks kinda errie in places.

This bit shocked me....

Usually, on this leg of the journey, a beeping geiger counter inspires to shift into high gear and streak through the area with great haste. The patch of trees in front of me is called red - or 'magic" wood. In 1986, this wood glowed red with radiation. They cut them down and buried them under 1 meter of earth.

The readings on the asphalt paving is 500 -3000 microroentgens, depending upon where you stand. That is 50 to 300 times the radiation of a normal environment. If I step 10 meters forward, geiger counter will run off the scale. If I walk a few hundred meters towards the reactor, the radiation is 3 roentgens per hour - which is 300,000 times normal. If I was to keep walking all the way to the reactor, I would glow in the dark tonight. Maybe this is why they call it magic wood. It is sort of magical when one walks in with biker's leather and walks out like a knight in a shining armor.

Is that a load of b*llox? lol

cant say for sure. But I have seen the story debunked before. There is no way she could have been allowed to ride a bike alone through the area. Most likely she took a tour guide, snapped the pics and bullshited togheter the story.

[Doc.Sust]

i have heard both sides of the story, most scientists agree the radiation did not have the huge adverse negative effects that were predicted, but who is to say where that info is coming from. i know this, we all receive hefty doses of radiation throughout our lives from simple things like a ride in a jet to x-rays, but i still wouldnt want to put my money where my mouth is and be put in a situation like chernobyl to see if the radiation disaster was just a myth. IMO, everyone has different adverse reactions, some more, some less, depending on genetics and exposure, who is to say that without a doubt that the radiation really wasnt that bad? truth is a believe no one can really tell

[Kärnfysikern]

i have heard both sides of the story, most scientists agree the radiation did not have the huge adverse negative effects that were predicted, but who is to say where that info is coming from. i know this, we all receive hefty doses of radiation throughout our lives from simple things like a ride in a jet to x-rays, but i still wouldnt want to put my money where my mouth is and be put in a situation like chernobyl to see if the radiation disaster was just a myth. IMO, everyone has different adverse reactions, some more, some less, depending on genetics and exposure, who is to say that without a doubt that the radiation really wasnt that bad? truth is a believe no one can really tell

I agree with alot you say. But of all things written about chernobyl I trust this article the most since its from IAEA

I just think its bad how environmentalist always spins everything connected to nuclear out of proportion. Honestly I cant even understand why they opose nuclear power in the first place. Its the most environmental friendly and affordable power source we have aviable.

A good example is a incident we had in a swedish reactor last week. Imidietly greenpeace started screaming we wheren near a mealtdown and it was the worst accident since chernobyl(where they get that from I dont even know since nothing happened except a power failure). While every expert except one say its total bullshit and that it was nowhere close.

The scaremonger they use against nuclear power is just as twisted as the medias reports on steroids unfortunaly the avarage joe belives it all

[gixxerboy1]

I suspect that might have just been media blaming things on chernobyl without any proof. Media sure loves to spinn stories without checking the facts

Quote from the article

Its possible. But what happened to these kids they were showing? They were really deformed.

[Kärnfysikern]

Its possible. But what happened to these kids they were showing? They were really deformed.

birth defects happen all over the world all the time.
No telling what happened to those particular kids but it sounds like they wrongfully attributed it to chernobyl without proof..

[gixxerboy1]

I dont know if we will ever know the whole truth. I would love to go on that tour though. I'm going to Poland soon and i want to go see alot of the stuff from WWII. I dont know how far that is from my fiance's family