Scientific American: Up to 1 million eventual deaths estimated from Chernobyl exposure — Sweden, Finland, others concerned about risk of forest fires near disaster area

Published: June 25th, 2013 at 1:22 pm ET
By

63 comments


Title: At Chernobyl, Radioactive Danger Lurks in the Trees
Source: Scientific American
Author:  Jane Braxton Little and The Daily Climate
Date: June 24, 2013

At Chernobyl, Radioactive Danger Lurks in the Trees

For 26 years, forests around Chernobyl have been absorbing radioactive elements but a fire would send them skyward again – a concern as summers grow longer, hotter and drier [...]

[...] scientists at several institutions in Europe and North America analyzed a worst-case scenario: A very hot fire that burns for five days, consumes everything in its path, and sends the smoke 60 miles south to Kiev. A separate worst-case study is underway looking at the risks for Sweden, Finland and other European countries heavily impacted by the 1986 explosion.

Women in their 20s living just outside the zone face the highest risk from exposure to radioactive smoke, the 2011 study found: 170 in 100,000 would have an increased chance of dying of cancer. Among men farther away in Kiev, 18 in 100,000 20-year-olds would be at increased risk of dying of cancer. [No mention of those under 20, who are at much greater risk] These estimates pale in comparison to those from the 1986 Chernobyl explosion, which predict between 4,000 and over a million eventual deaths from radiation exposure. [...]

See also: 3 million children require treatment because of Chernobyl, many will die prematurely -U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in 2000

Published: June 25th, 2013 at 1:22 pm ET
By

63 comments

Related Posts

  1. Death toll estimate from Chernobyl now around 1.5 Million -Expert (VIDEO) December 22, 2012
  2. Seattle TV: Children now sicker than ever from Chernobyl disaster — Contamination to go on for centuries to come — Many with heart and digestive problems (VIDEO) June 26, 2013
  3. Footage of new giant sarcophagus at Chernobyl — Still nowhere near dealing with corium over 25 years later — Storage area for fuel debris not yet built (VIDEO) November 28, 2012
  4. 3 million children require treatment because of Chernobyl, many will die prematurely -U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in 2000 February 28, 2013
  5. Russian Gov’t Radio: “The number of victims has reached one million people today” — Consequences of Chernobyl meltdown are endless and uncontrollable April 26, 2012

63 comments to Scientific American: Up to 1 million eventual deaths estimated from Chernobyl exposure — Sweden, Finland, others concerned about risk of forest fires near disaster area

  • Jay

    Think again : there are two way to die from radiation 1) a lot of killed cells at the moment of irradiation ( fryed ) , and 2) by small quantities of radioactive particles lodged into the body .

    Now , while we understand the situation when the cell are killed in seconds or minutes from the intensity of radiation , what I invite Scientific American and other orgs , is to Ponder : in order to induce Cancer the cell Mutation must be such as not to kill the cell , but to turn it into a cancerous , living cell .

    OK , the ODDS to That happening are LOTTERY ODDS !!!

    It is well known that ( induced ) Mutations are 99.999 % DAMAGING and KILLING the cell . So when you have a lodged radioparticle damaging the neighboring cells it will kill them 99.999 % of the time instead of producing a WORKING , LIVABLE Mutation !!

    Now we understand why in 25 years the Chernobyl didn't produced tha number of cancers expected .

    Some one tell this to 'Scientific' American …


    Report comment

    • amberlight amberlight

      Wow, Jay, I had to read your comments over a few times to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting what you were trying to say. So, according to your logic, if I am exposed to radioactive particles over time I won't get cancer, but the cells in my body will die off piecemeal, because, as any fool knows, radionuclides only invade the body one at a time. Sorta like those kung fu movies where the opponents dance around on the perimeter waiting their turn to take on the hero who is handily defeating each one of them in turn.

      But you gotta watch out for that sneaky .001% of "workable, livable" mutations. If you live long enough you could wind up looking like Jeff Goldblum in "The Fly."


      Report comment

      • amberlight amberlight

        Oops. "their" logic. The SA web site didn't come up (flaky internet connection) so I haven't read the article. I assume they are offering data to downplay the cancer numbers so far, but are concerned about radionuclides being released by fire.


        Report comment

      • Trawling4Trolls

        This is good,

        "but the cells in my body will die off piecemeal, because, as any fool knows, radionuclides only invade the body one at a time. Sorta like those kung fu movies where the opponents dance around on the perimeter waiting their turn to take on the hero who is handily defeating each one .."

        :)


        Report comment

      • Jay

        @amberlight+ , it's not My logic , it's biology , check the books and blame Them , if you can .

        1) I denounce nuclear energy , must be stopped now , make a note of it for future reference .

        2) be aware of shills who use reverse-psycology : they claim that a million will die , Than 25 years later it didn't happened and now nobody trusts the anti-nuke movement , goal acomplished .

        … and keep the real target/enemy in the cross-hairs : Organized Crime and the 'Nuclear Clean-up' Golden Project .


        Report comment

    • Now we understand why in 25 years the Chernobyl didn't produced tha number of cancers expected .

      tell that to the mothers who misscarried and the people with respiratory ilness Jay!
      peace


      Report comment

      • Jay

        @arclight , Why leave the door open to be taken to task and produce the numbers ?

        Can you ?? No . I can't neither , but at least I read about how mutations occur to cause cancer . This is the subject , no ?

        How strontium can induce arithmia and possible heart attack/death is another subject . Don't smear me with something that I am not addressing here .

        And you can not argue down that radiation caused mutations produce Bad mutations that kill the cell 99.99 % of the time hence cancerous cell produced by brute gene buthcering by radiation is very rare .
        Let's agree with this Fact and move on , keeping up the fight against nuclear energy , we are on the same team .


        Report comment

        • Can you ?? No . I can't neither
          contact
          Tamara Krasitskava
          at
          Zemlyaki

          for their addresses, ages of death etc (you should do that better than wating time to ask me, i would be interested in the data though..

          i already asked
          A.Cameron (Belarus health worker from UK)
          who turns out to be a Fellow og the Imperial College London Uni. .. i suppose she prevaricates too?

          i met Tamara and many eastern europeans who have a different attitude to you.. and they seemed sincere.. who convinced you that your posits are right anyway?
          who are you?
          any way i am busy.. do your own research if you dont believe others..
          this is me..
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UjI_ho8Bpg


          Report comment

          • sorry if i come across a bit rough there Jay.. i hear you on your points.. and i will get those figures amd details when i have resettled.. In the netherlands most likely as i can apply for citizenship after a month.. press freedom and it is cheap.. peace


            Report comment

            • DUDe DisasterInterpretationDissorder

              @arclight , i don't know if appropiate to ask , but is money a problem that we can help a litle ?


              Report comment

              • hi did
                many thanks for the offer but i have a small savings for relocation and i have also decided on my destination.. the netherlands.. i will have netherland citinship after a month (available to eu passport holders and i have some antinuke connections that might proove fruitful for work and housing etc.. been a busy but productive day! i could meet bnb for a danish and cofffee.. :) so things are looking up!
                thanks for your concern and this opportunity to update everyone on my "mid life" crisis :)
                peace


                Report comment

    • Chernobyl London meeting (27 April 2013) Speech by Tamara Krasitskava from Zemlyaki

      On Sunday the 27 April 2013 in a little room somewhere off Grays Inn road London, a meeting took place. In this meeting was Ms Tamara Krasitskava of the Ukrainian NGO “Zemlyaki”.

      In this meeting she quoted that only 40 percent of the evacuees that moved to Kiev after the disaster are alive today! And lets leave the statistics out of it for a moment and we find out of 44,000 evacuated to Kiev only 19,000 are left alive. None made it much passed 40 years old

      …..3.2 million with health effects and this includes 1 million children…

      T .Kraisitskava

      “….I was told to not talk of the results from Belarus as the UK public were not allowed to know the results we were finding!….”

      A.Cameron (Belarus health worker from UK)

      http://nuclear-news.net/2013/05/02/chernobyl-london-meeting-27-april-2013-speech-by-tamara-krasitskava-from-zemlyaki/

      they die of heart attacks.. under the radar so to speak.. outside statistical parameters.. uncared for… perfect psychopathy!

      Chernobyl Children International annual airlift – Served 22,500 children since 1986

      http://nuclear-news.net/2013/06/24/chernobyl-children-international-annual-airlift-served-22500-children-since-1986/

      but you cant believe the russians/ukrainians etc though eh? what do they know? that we dont??
      peace


      Report comment

    • We cannot rule out the possibility of an underlying increase in incidence for women aged above 50 years in Sweden after 1986. However, a 0.8% annual increase (as seen in Sweden before 1986) can explain only a small part of the 45% increase in Sweden in the age group 50-69 years. Furthermore, a 0.8% increase will cover only a small part of the 50% decline in the age group 70-74 years that Boer et al predicted.1

      http://www.bmj.com/content/328/7445/921

      a little link for you jay
      but in norway the stats are muddled i think as they are not giving the whole story.. ask any norwegian from the western coastline and you will be surprised at the age and prevelance of cancer.. same in ireland too BTW
      and if you dont think the irish can be as corrrupt as anyone else watch this..

      http://nuclear-news.net/2013/06/25/peter-fitzgerald-john-bowe-screwing-the-irish-government-and-the-irish-people/
      :)


      Report comment

    • Jebus Jebus

      He is touching upon the damaged cell "balance" that the body contends with and manages on a daily basis.
      I know this skirts around the hormesis theory, which is junk science, because no one knows where that balance lies in each individual life form.
      By balance, I mean the part he left out which is that the majority of damaged cells don't die with low level internal exposure. The majority are repaired and most continue on with being repaired by the second DNA copy and the balance works. It is when that balance is upset by being overwhelmed with damage or both DNA copies are damaged. Ever wonder why nature gave us two copies of DNA in each cell? What level of damage can your body repair? What is your threshold for cell or DNA damage?
      The other, very bad issue is the damaged cell that doesn't die and or trigger the repair mechanism. That cell might divide as damaged. And if the DNA is damaged, not repaired, and divides, it might just not stop dividing. That is Cancer.

      So the bottom line in the debunking of hormesis is that no one knows at what level of internal emitter activity overwhelms each organism. Your threshold is different than mine and we are so different from non human creatures. There is also the multiplication factor of a very young creature, plant, or human. The more cells dividing at any given time means that many more cells can be damaged into a runaway condition, cancer.


      Report comment