“not until 2016, at the earliest, will we know the full number of those likely to develop serious medical conditions.” former Secretary-General Kofi Annan http://www.un.org/ha/chernobyl/docs/sgsm7778.htm
Yury Bandazhevsky said that Chernobyl began and is not over: http://www.king5.com/news/nation-now/exiled-scientist-chernobyl-is-not-finished-it-has-only-just-begun/138546166targe
this is the inside of central hall of Chernobyl reactor 4. Below is the 2,000 tons lid, which was blown aside. still there today. Below the lid is the (empty) reactor vault.
In this article you will learn things never heard before. They sound absurd, crazy. But these things have official sources. Partly even of the nuclear industry itself.
You, reader deserve the truth. I think you are someone who believes the following, as do 99 % of all people: Chernobyl 4 exploded 1986. It was a meltdown. It irradiated parts of Europe and the World. You probably know that a new sarcophagus is being built right now in Ukraine. A Shell as big as the statue of liberty above and around the ruin. Liquidators were there, connstructing the first sarcophagus in 1986. You probably believe people died, how many you don’t know. And now it’s 30 years since then.That’s what you know, what you believe.
Are you ready? For one of the biggest lies in human history, along with the lies of TEPCO Japan. And IAEA. And UNSCEAR.
All say: Meltdown. A meltdown is a theoretical assumption. It helps to keep evacuation and compensation small. Because Meltdown means: Only 2 – 5 percent of the radioactive inventory / the core, escaped the reactor. It is a theory. It helps the industry to survive.
Here are facts with Sources next to them / below.
The core of almost all reactors worldwide consists of Uranium Oxide (UO²). Chernobyl was a double core, seperated hydrauligcally. Making this thing 190 tons heavy. This data is from NRC. It says, each Kg consisted of 2 % Unraium 235 enrichment – which can be used for bombs. Reactors use it to become critical, or to operate – in other words. Did you know that? For example each german reactor is a so called MOX reactor. The number of MOX reactors worldwide increase. Sometimes they are fed with weapons plutonium. But this is only wishy washy. They consume it to become critical. But each reactor produces 250 kg Plutonium per year and unit, worldwide. If plutonium enriched or Uranium 235 enriched. Ok, so there were 450 Kg Plutonium in Chernobyl – from the beginning there were 450 kg Uranium 235. Do you know how much Plutonium was used for Nagasaki and how much Uranium 235 was used for Hiroshima? Answer: 64 Kg Uranium 235 for Hiroshima and 6,2 Kg Plutonium for Nagasaki. Your average reactor contains a lot of bombs in its core, Chernobyl even 100% more. It contains the radioactivity of 1,000 Hiroshima bombs, or 15 billion curie (Source: NIRS). Its “only” enriched, but reactors are nothing else than decelerated nuclear bombs.
2. The plutonium isotopes in different reactor types (Chernobyl is RBMK):
3. Let’s make a shortcut: What happened at Cherobyl 4?
The Chernobyl Core was 190 tons of Uranium Oxide UO².
Each Kg consisted of 2,4 g of Uranium 235. To make the reactor work. This is the situation in each reactor worldwide. To get it run, beginning of life fuel needs this. After a certain period there is Plutonium in the reactor. For Chernobyl it makes 450 Kg Pu239 all together in both halves of the Core.
Ca. 250 Kg Pu239 in normal reactors. With smaller cores. The core was split in two halves, together 10 m length. An electromechanical experiment was started.
Purpose: Could a tripped generator maintain the electrical feed to the main circulation pumps during generator coast down?
Reactivity was reduced.
Security System was blocked, so was the >automatic< scram.
Both turbo generators were shut down.
The behaviour of Chernobyl is similiar to Fast Breeder Reactors (Sodium / lead cooled), also in terms of void coefficient.
The loss of pumping power induced by the experiment caused a rapid fail in pressure, so the water began to boil, at the bottom of the reactor and even at the inlet of the water! The reactor was unstable.
The crew pushed the button of the Emergency Protection System:
The water lies between the moderator (graphite) and the fuel. It captures thermal neutrons. It is more like a neutron shield than an additional moderator. The energy once stored in the fuel was transferred to the coolant.
It continued to boil and saturate and steam and water met very hot surfaces:
So the first explosion occurred and set the reactor dry – this can be described as steam / hydrogen explosion, BUT that was not was the reactor destroyed. Not, what the reactor lid has thrown aside, not what destroyed the reactor hall.
The first explosion had an energy of 200 Gigajoules. All water was expelled from the reactor. All fuel channels became dry. And Water was pushed back into the inlet and the steam drum seperators.
A DRY reactor heats up 100°C (180°F) evey 0,1 seconds! At the same time nuclear reactions take place, NEUTRONS – just below the speed of light. No chance for Reactor Emergency Systems:
A dry reactor heats up 100°C every 0,1 seconds.
The Doppler Effect was saturated. Phase transition was faster than the heating. NO MELTDOWN.
You would need “only” 50 Gigajoules to boil all that water.
Xenon build up. The reactor poisoned itself. But that was not the main cause for the next events:
The Void Coefficient increased. More than 5 $. This is higher than the total antireactivity of the Doppler effect.
A final supercritical state was achieved – This is nothing else than a nuclear Explosion / reaction of the Reactor Type. This principle is known since the first graphite gas cooled reactors were build.
Fuel Disaggregation requires very high energy: More than 250 Gigajoules.
The crew pushed the Scram Button AZ5. Control rods moved it. They needed 10 seconds, which took much too long. Only a small number of them reached the core.
2 seconds later the Nuclear Explosion / Reaction occurred. This one was 1,000 Gigajoules = 1 Terrajoule. This is the equivalent of 200 – 300 Tons of TNT, or just the yield of a U.S. nuclear W54 warhead.
This nuclear warhead existed and was actually tested. It`s yield: 250 Tons TNT, or, in other words: 1,12 Terrajoule. Exactly the amount of Energy Chernobyl`s two explosions had (one setting the core dry, the other destroying it):
The U.S. NUREG-1250 report, the official U.S. analyses says in Figure 4.3: 1,400 calories energy were deposited into each gram of reactor fuel UO². That is exactly the 1 Terrajoule: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0716/ML071690245.pdf
The fuel was damaged. Each explosion took 1 second.
It included Shock Waves, Cladding rupture, Fuel fragmentation, Phase transition, and as an eye witness said, a blue flash.
The fuel can become vaporized (official NRC data):
If 65 % of the fuel is smeared that means the reactor is prompt supercritical = Nuclear explosion / reaction. This is called bigger than 1 $.
The total power of the reactor at the time of its destruction was 47,000 % over normal.
This all happened in 1 second.
Fast neutron reactions happen 1,000 times faster than any chemical or physical reaction.
A steam explosion was not possible anymore. At high temperatures steam ionizes into hydrogen and oxygen. Both do not explode at temperatures above 2,000 / 2,100°C:
Reaching 4,000 – 5,000°C these temperatures were no longer chemical, they were nuclear. Officials tell us: “Chernobyl was a hydrogen / steam explosion” – maybe the first one. But with the heating up, it became too hot for these kind of explosions. Don Arnott (below) said: At these temperatures steam ionizes and dissociates into the gases oxygen and hydrogen. These detonating gases do not explode above 2,000 / 2,100 °C.
The phase transition Uranium Oxide core flew like a turbo jet engine into the air, ca. 20 – 30 m above the central hall and exploded in a nuclear explosion of the reactor type. The temperatures reached at this moment: 40,000°C.
But the Temperature of the Chernobyl nuclear explosion was 100,000 times lower (10,000,000%) than the nuclear explosion of the bomb type.
“Two different models of the nuclear explosions are known. According to, the core of the Chernobyl reactor transformed to a turbo-jet solid-phase engine after a very short initial overheating of fuel. It flied like a missile from the reactor vault to the central reactor hall by the hydrodynamic forces of gas-phase streams flushing down from the fuel channels. Then it exploded as an atomic bomb in the spaceof the central hall.” source: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/kr79pdf/Malko1.pdf
No water has enough thermal conductivity for that.
This exceeds every safety system human can design and build.
The not welded lid has a weight of 2,000 tons. It was superheated during the explosion and neutron activity. It was seen from the helicopter crew and IAEA as well as soviet officials misinterpreted it as fuel in melting process. Steel glows cherry red at Temperatures 770°C to 800°C and yellow at Temperatures 1,150°C to 1,250°C.
The paint is also still there. It survive a max. Temp. of 300°C.
The thermal observation showed no melting process and no graphite fire.
IAEA says 96% of the fuel is still in the reactor. But it is not.
In September 1986 126 tons of graphite and 26 tons of fuel were removed from roofs at Chernobyl plant site.
If much Boron is used in western reactors, similar over moderated situations can happen.
Western reactors avoid explosions, via cooking and steaming the reactor cores and letting the aerolized inventory fly through the safety relief valves (SRVs). It`s like a pressure cooker.
NUREG 1250 also speaks of “aerolized” fuel particles after phase transition, on page 6-7.
The industry simply avoids the term “nuclear explosion in a reactor” and simply calls it: “prompt critical excursion.” That`s all.
“an average operating nuclear power reactor will have approximately 16 billion curies in its reactor core. This is the equivalent long-lived radioactivity of at least 1,000 Hiroshima bombs.” http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/routineradioactivereleases.htm
Vladimir M. Chernousenko, Scientific Director of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences Institute of Physics in Kiev’s Task Force for the Rectification of the Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident- HE SAID:
“Radiation emission was no less that 80% of the core (with a total of 192 tons), which amounted to 6.4 x 10^9 Ci (Ci = Curie = 37,000,000,000 becquerel) If we divide the figure by the population of the whole earth (4.6 x 10^9 people) then we get 1 Ci per person.”
“15m³ of radioactive substances emitted from Block 4 at this time could be diluted in 15 x 5 x 10,000,000,000,000 km³ if water, In 100 years 15,000 km³ would be needed. In 1,000 years 15 km³ would be the required amount. For comparsion: the total outflow of the world`s rivers is 36,380 km³.” Dilution is just another word for retransmission. More radiation for everyone.
The Temperature reached more than 2,000°C degrees – reaching 47,000 % POWER!
A steam explosion can not develop 1,2 Terrajoule. Steam explosion’s Maxium -> 50 Gigajoules. But the explosion lifted the 2,000 tons lid away, and then even destroyed the reactor hall! How powerful is that. Only a maximum of 10 to 50 Gigajoule of Energy are possible by a Steam explosion in Chernobyl – it was the water expelled from Reactor 4:
image from: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/seminar/IS/Imanaka20120627.pdf
Yes: 1,400 Cal/gm (calories per gram) are 1,1 Terrajoules = equivalent of 0,2 – 0,3 Kilotons TNT.
There was not enough water, power in water, to create so a high energy explosion, for the 2nd one. This was nuclear.
W54 nuclear warhead is the energy yield equivalent of Chernobyl explosion (0,2 – 0,3 KT TNT):
Footage from the inside of Reactor 4:
There is this interview with a scientist who was with russian Checherov in reactor 4:
Here they can be seen: Walking around the empty reactor:
AN Kiselev, Chernobyl, 1986, block 3: “Power of gamma radiation from a channel, lying on the roof of the third block measured by Zherdev was 2 Sievert per Hour (the limit of the measuring range of the instrument DP-5V ) at a distance of three meters” / “we had to work in an environment where radiation levels could exceed the 10 Sievert per Hour and even higher” / “As soon as the rotary drill bit to the fuel clusters, fuel chips along with the water got into the room , and immediately dramatically increased gamma-ray background” / “Biological protection of the camera has been redesigned in accordance with the requirements of radiation safety.” / “On the tube sites were about 15-20 tons of fuel. On the roof lay the whole fuel assemblies. Approximate weight of 300-350 kg each. The rate per person was calculated by removing 50 kg of graphite or 10-15 kg pieces of fuel rod.” / “the total amount of fuel in the lava-like clusters is within 20 % of the entire nuclear fuel that the reactor had at the time of the accident.”
“Checherov analyzed all the reports and minutes of the Integrated expedition with measurements and calculations. The analysis estimated the amount of fuel made on the basis of thermal measurements showed that this estimate was based on assumptions that do not reflect the real picture of the thermal situation in unit 4, and secondly, were based on experiments that are not based on reliable measurements, and voluntarist declarations of expenditure thermal parameters experimentally recorded variations of which varies in the range of up to two orders of magnitude.” / “The maximum thickness of the fuel accumulation , measured on the spot and recorded on the film is 0.5 meters , and if you increase the thickness of the layer 8 times, then this cluster should have a thickness of 4 meters.” / “At the time of the accident in the reactor core were 1,659 fuel channels withg 190,257 kilograms of uranium or its kg Uranium Oxide (UO2).”
“where, how much and in what state the nuclear fuel ?” / “Our reports of fuel found in the Unit 4 was several times smaller, but the debate as to why such differences exist and where the truth is – was not gebated in this symposium” / “regardless of the fact that the reactor vault is empty and you can not see this amount of fuel and the amount of such fuel just could not fit in the observed areas, those who were there and personally saw it with their own eyes the empty space – you can not convince the others that there are not huge amount of fuel as declared by those who have not been there ” / ” it turns out that the minimum found fuel is 53 % of the fuel, and if we accept the second version, you still have to find the 91%!” http://www.souzchernobyl.org/?section=31&id=563
We are fooled by IAEA and soviet agencies since 1986!
b) What you see here in this video is NOT the fuel melting, because it was thrown completely out by a force of 1,2 terrajule (0,2 – 0,3 KT TNT) and it is NOT graphite fire, there was none according to a heat photo scanner Checherov used shortly after the explosions. What you see is the 2,000 tons reactor lid, that was thrown aside and is GLOWING because of HEAT, it was so hot, that it turned from Red (770 – 800°C) into Yellow (1150 – 1250°C). The helicopter crew did not survive. Interivew with above Infos: Constantine Checherov – Senior Researcher of the Kurchatov Institute – one of the first people who visited the reactor hall after the explosion. He does not believe that the explosion of Chernobyl in ’86 exploded was hydrogen. It was a nuclear
explosion scattered hundreds of tons of radioactive fuel around the station: http://www.novayagazeta.ru/society/6095.html
4. So, why a new sarcophagus? Chernobyl as you have read released so much radioactivity as a whole nuclear war. This is where it went down:
Chernobyl irradiated the whole European Continent – even pro nuclear UNSCEAR clearly admits that (although their numbers are from the textbook). http://www.unscear.org/docs/JfigXI.pdf
To understand the principle of the nuclear explosion of the reactor, and unmask probably the biggest lie in technological history of human history, just have a look at this:
– Chernobyl was a nuclear explosion
– No containment can keep such a explosion
– The weight of the reactor lid was 2,000 tons (NOT 1,000!) – important for energy calculation later below
– A containment would increase the yield of the explosion (pressure!)
– This principle is as old as the principle of man made nuclear fission:
From the book “History of the British nuclear industry” by Margaret Gowing, “Britain and Atomic Energy”, on page 382 the former U.S. water-cooled graphite reactor at Hanford is described: “To be built in view of the risks of an accident, the reactor is at an isolated location. Because water absorbs neutrons, and when the water flow is interrupted and the control rods do not occur immediately in action, the water evaporates in the cooling system and can no longer absorb the neutrons . These neutrons were therefore available to increase the fission rate in the reactor, which is super critical with power. The temperature rises, the fuel evaporated and the radioactivity is spreading widely. “
On page 385 we find the position:
“The gas cooling is to avoid the risk of severe supercritical state …”
What is supercritical?
The knowledge of the danger of an atomic explosion that can occur in a water-cooled graphite-gas reactor, is as old as the principle of the reactor itself.
Safety Assessment Principle 152 requires ‘The containment should adequately contain such radioactive matter as may be released into it as a result of any fault in the reactor.’ Clearly if nuclear explosions are possible a licence should not be granted. LAST PAGE: http://www.spokesmanbooks.com/Spokesman/PDF/91Gifford.pdf
“The number of fissions and the energy released quickly escalate, and if the process is unchecked, the result is a violent explosion. Reactions that multiply in this fashion are called chain reactions.” Quote from: http://wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/3313/3392670/blb2107.html
The critical mass in a reactor (even on a pro nucler site): “After pushing the AZ-5 button the emergency protection system added, according to calculations, about a ß of positive reactivity and created a local critical mass in the lower part of the core – resulting in a sharp increase of power there (see Figure 3) and the coming into play of the positive power coefficient of reactivity. The power in the lower part of the core rose to the level at which the fuel exploded and got dispersed.” quote Anatoly Dyatlov, former deputy engineer for operations at Chernobyl: http://www.neimagazine.com/features/featurehow-it-was-an-operator-s-perspective/
Chernobyl was build by ROSATOM – the ones who build a new reactor in Chernobyl irradiated Belarus, the ones who helped Iran with their nuclear reactors, and probably delievered Polonium 210 to kill Litvenenko in London.
The new sarcophagus is built to contain this dangerous truth. The truth that Chernobyl was emptied by a nuclear explosion (of the reactor type, not bomb type).
Who finances this new project? The “nuclear” bank:
Who supervises it? Former IAEA General Secretary Hans Blix. He said in 1986 in Le Monde: “A yearly Chernobyl is acceptable for the world…”
Chernobyl needs no sarcophagus, not today and not in 1986, because it was and is EMPTY. The establishment of a sarcophagus was crazy, senseless and deadly – But right now, they build the 2nd one. A new Containment for a dangerous truth.
The liquidators have not liquidated Chernobyl. The liquidators have liquidated themselves.
800,000 worked in the area. On site, as doctors, workers… but they worked in the Chernobyl Core – which was scattered everywhere. In microparticles. This means: Soviet officials evacuated 130,000 civilans, but sent 800,000 into the irradiated areas!
Valery Legasov probably knew. BUT:
“Valery A. Legasov” – who was the first russian official who spoke about Chernobyl to the IAEA in 1986, and committed suicide. Before his death he made an audiotape, with untold facts about the Chernobyl explosion. Here are the abstracts of his tapes: “About the accident at Chernobyl” by Academician VA Legasov (text from the 4 cassettes) – in russian: http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/Legasov_V._Ob_Avarii_Na_Chernobiylsk.pdf
He knew about the insanity of sending liquidators to Chernobyl – he could not convince the IAEA and soviet officials. And decades later, Checherov – also from the same institute, indrectly supported the Legasov.
Some say a quake caused the Chernobyl catastrophe. But is the quake maybe the result of the explosion – expressed as seismic data? Here is the seismis data from 1986, by soviet sources: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr139/pdf/karpan.pdf
Again the summary, from 1996 IPPNW PSR papers, Vienna:
by peace researcher NZ:
This is the NECK SHOT for the nuclear industry. But we failed, because we were blinded by the Meltdown Lie. And we are again blinded by TEPCO and IAEA. They have three empty reactors in Fukushima. They have no evidence where the fuel is. But call it Meltdown.
30 years dear readers. One human generation. One irradiated earth.
Often officials as former soviet Agencies, IAEA, NRC, UNSCEAR, tell the lie of a “hydrogen” or “steam” explosion. That is a lie. It comes from the textbook. Because otherwise reactors would get no licence to be built. They have to keep their inventory inside at all cost. The nuclear textbook is a template and experts push reality through it. The Officials lie about the temperature, or the weight of the reactor lid, or any other data, at least one of them. To downplay the nature of the explosion. But the reactor hall is no more. A fact. Plus the 2,000 tons reactor lid.
50 million Chernobyl curies? IAEA? “The pro-nuclear Time magazine reported in 1989 that perhaps “one billion or more” curies were released, rather than the 50 to 80 million estimated by Russian authorities.” Source: http://www.ratical.org/radiation/Chernobyl/Chernobyl@10p2.html
All radiation maps, doses, emissions are from the text book – not from reality. 50 million curie are: 1,850,000,000,000,000,000 Becquerel (1.85e+18) released by CHERNOBYL. A lie!
There is nearly NOTHING left in the Chernobyl 4 reactor! This is proven!
Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois: 9 Billion Curie
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California: 4,5 Billion Curie
1,85 1,85 1,85 1,85 1,85 1,85… Just remember this number ONE point EIGHT FIVE and the 50
let’s look at the Boiling Water Manual from GE, also for Fukushima:
and page 76:
Each reactor releases 50 micro curie of radioactive gases: which is 1,850,000 becquerel PER SECOND!
There is the 50 and the 1,85 again!
It’s all from the textbook!
It’s not the reality!
Can you control atoms?
>>>> A normal reactor releases 1,850,000 becquerel per second. Multiply it with x 10 = 18,500,000 becquerel – these are also the offical MAXIMUM LEVELS of radionuclide activity in the exclusion Chernobyl zone in Belarus (from the 1995 Belarus NATIONAL Report):
Again the 1,85 !
daily dose at a 1000 Curie per km² area, for example near Chernobyl reactor 4 with 37 mio becquerel per m² (map) is something like 10 mSv PER DAY – while normal is 1 – 2 mSv per year
They press reality into their simulation models. Especially Chernobyl. The 50 Mio Curie are used to conceal the fact, that ALL Inventory was thrown out in 1986, thats more than 5 billion curie, not 50 million. But they use the textbook to conceal it, in order to prove that even during an explosion a reactor safe. And now these madmen build a 2nd sarcophagus around and EMPTY reactor, to even underline the 30 years old lie!
More than a million people died because of Chernobyl:
n contrast (by Alexey Jablokov, co-author of the 1000,000 Chernobyl Deaths-Study: http://www.strahlentelex.de/Yablokov%20Chernobyl%20book.pdf ):
The UNSCEAR Committee for the Scientific Investigation of the effects of radiation United Nations has declared:
The UNCEAR committee has decided not to extrapolate the effects of Low-level radiation from the Chernobyl accident on the population on the basis of models extrapolate absolute terms, because these predictions are afflicted with unacceptable unreliability (UNSCEAR, 2011; 98, p.18).
This “unreliability” depends on both the methodological errors of the officially recognized system for the determination of radiation risk (eg: ECRR, 2003, 2010), as well as with the underestimation of the extent of the effects of the atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined (eg: Bertell, 1985, Stewart, 1989)
One of the methodological error of traditional approaches to determining the scope of Radiation risk is the exclusive use of data on cancer mortality, although it is not the most important cause of mortality after the Chernobyl accident, in radioactively contaminated territories. Another methodological error of UNSСEAR approach is a complete disregard of the Increase in perinatal mortality rate after the disaster that after the Chernobyl Accident in the many highly radioactively contaminated areas in Belarus (Petrova et al. 1997, Korblein, 2002, 2006), Ukraine (Dzykovich et al., 2004), Russia (Balewa, et al., 2001), Germany (Schreb, Incited, 2000, Korblein, Kuchenkoff, 1997, Schreb et al., 2000), Poland (Korblein, 2003, 2006) and UK (Bentham, 1999, Busby, 1995) showed. Since the time of the nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere is known that the radioactive Contamination, an increase of prenatal mortality rate (stillbirths and Miscarriages) and infant mortality rate (Sternglass, 1972; White, 1992;. Playford et al, 1992; Overview here Busby, 1995; Yablokov, 2002, Durakovic, 2003) causes.
My part: Infant Mortality Changes Following the Three Mile Island Accident,” from 1980: http://atomichistory.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/sternglass_infantmortalitytmi.pdf quote “The discrepancy in infant deaths between the two sources for the period of April 1 through June 30, 1979, had been two; from October 1 through December 31 it had also been two. For eighty-eight to surface between July 1 and September 30, precisely in the controversial summer months after the TMI accident, seemed unlikely.”
My part: Quote: “The victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and patients treated with X-rays because of such dubious indications as thymus hyperplasia demonstrate the exceptionally high sensitivity of children. However, the important discovery of Stewart and coworkers in 1958 , an enhancement of childhood leukaemia following diagnostic X-ray pictures during pregnancy, listed as historic milestone by Mossman also, has provoked a deep controversy. Their findings were an impressive support of the postulated linear non-threshold relationship for leukaemia” SOURCE Page 2: http://www.staff.uni-marburg.de/~kunih/all-doc/doserele.pdf
In the period 1987-88 is a well-documented increase in infant mortality in the leaves radioactive contaminated areas of Ukraine (Grodzinsky, 1999; Omelianetz, Klementjew, 2001, Dubowaja, 2010), Russia (Fetisow, 1999; Hworostenko, 1999; Komogortseva, 2001, Utka et al. 2005, ZYB et al., 2006) and Germany (Korblein, 2006 notice) was found. After the Chernobyl Accident increased infant mortality affects even the entire demographic Statistics of a number of countries. In the more contaminated areas of Ukraine and Russia an increased Overall mortality observed. (The most recent 1995;. Omelianets et al, 2001; Оmelianets, Klement’ev, 2001, Grodzinsky, 1999;. Golubchikov et al, 2002, Kaschirina, 2005; Sergeeva et al. 2005; Dubowaja, 2010, Kaschirina, 2005; Sergeewa et al, 2005;. Fetisow, 1999; Sukalska et al.
2004 and many others).
The methodological error of the epidemiological approach to determining the number of victims is based on the accounts of the radiation risk is that the estimation of the number of victims on the comparison of relatively well-documented mortality and morbidity rates (the number the sick and the dead carried out), while levels of radioactive Load can not be accurately determined. Moreover, this approach to determine the Number of victims is not capable of the effects of low radiation dose precisely to record (which have added even the inventor of this approach): “The currently available Epidemiological data provide no basis for reasonable assurance to the radioactive contamination attributable morbidity and mortality in test groups from the To predict the population of the three republics and other European countries, with a average dose of less than 30 mSv were charged in the past 20 years. Any rise in [the morbidity and mortality among these groups] would be lower than the Emerging scientific measurability. “(UNSCEAR, 2011, (97), p. 18).
The methodological Defectiveness of the epidemiological approach leads to the large deviation of forecasts the numbers of victims. (Table 1):
CHERNOBYL DEATHS :
4,000 deaths (in 90 years. Belarus, Ukraine, European part Russia) according to IAEA / WHO – press paper Chernobyl forum 2005
8,930 deaths (in 90 years. Belarus, Ukraine, European part Russia) according to Chernobyl forum 2005
7,400 deaths (Whole world for 50 years) according to Anspaugh et al., 1988
30,000 deaths (Whole world for 50 years) according to Goldman, 1987
18,000 (8,000 – 32,000) deaths (Europe, 1986 – 2065 without Thyroid cancer) according to Cardis et al., 2006
30,000 – 60,000 deaths (Whole world. About the entire period) according to Fairley, Sumner,2006
117,000 (37,000 – 181,000) deaths (Whole world. in the period 1986 – 2056) according to Malko, 2010
317,000 – 475,000 (495,000 with Leukemia) deaths (Whole world. About the whole period. only radiocesium) according to Hofman,1994
899,000 – 1,786 000 deaths (Whole world. About the entire period. only radionuclides) according to Bertell,2006
Some estimates of the additional through by the ‘Chernobyl’ caused mortality Cancer, which made the epidemiological approach (“dose” method) were Based on the spread of the “dose” method estimates, which are set out in the table are more than 400 times higher than the usual scientific disagreement. You can with the Opinion of UNSCEAR agree that not a forecast of the number of victims work but with one caveat: This does not work only if the traditional “dose” – Method is applied.
For the estimation of the total number of victims is another method (the so-called “Balance” method) reliable. It consists of the data of the health status of Population of the radioactively contaminated areas with high data. To compare health status of the population from the “clean” areas. The basic source data consist of physical instrumental measurements of radioactive Contamination of an area and the incidence rate and mortality (morbidity and mortality) in this area.
The best example of this method is the Additional calculations on the “Chernobyl” accident declining mortality, Hudolej W. et al. (2006) in the six regions of Russia was performed. In these
Areas that were affected by the fallout from Chernobyl were the worst, 7.5 million People.
I leave the details of the bills and put aside just before the results: Total number of excess deaths in these six radioactively contaminated areas was 60 400. This corresponds to 3.75% of total mortality of the population during the examined 15 years (from 1990 to 2004.) or 37 of every 1,000 people. Conversion to at all levels of ≥ 1 Ci / km ² contaminated areas within the former Soviet Union (and taking into account the mortality of liquidators and evacuees from these areas after 1986) could all of the additional mortality rate in Ukraine, Belarus and in the European part of Russia in the period 1990-2004 by the Chernobyl accident was caused, amounted to around 240 000 cases.
In Europe, outside the areas affected by radioactive releases from the Ukraine, Belarus and the European part of Russia could be the additional “Chernobyl” – Mortality in areas with a level of contamination Cesium137> 1.08 Ci / km ² (> 40 kBq / m) in the period 1990 to 2004 a number of 185 000 cases, represent, and in the areas with a higher population density and a contamination level of
To this figure should be even mortality within the first 3.5 years after the Disaster (May 1986 – 1989) and add the period 2006-2011. If it is suspected that the annual death rate for the first 3.5 years of the 1990-2004 period at about corresponded to (the infant mortality rate is higher, while the mortality of adults lower), adds even further 240 000 cases. If one assumes that the Mortality rate during 2005-2010 was about half (on the one hand, the population older and “collected” diseases are clear and the latent period of several Cancer is over, on the other hand, the level of chronic radiation decreases due to the decay of cesium-137 and strontium-90), there are again additional 170 000 cases.
In this way, the overall level of additional “Chernobyl” in the mortality rate Period of the first 25 years are estimated by the disaster: 1 034 000 + 240 000 + 170 000 = 1.444 million victims. But this figure also shows the entire “Chernobyl” mortality is not complete. It is known that the disaster to a sudden increase in prenatal mortality has done. The increase in the number of still-births and miscarriages can be divided into a number highly radioactively contaminated areas in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia to determine (Kulakov et al, 1993;. Buzhievskaya et al, 1995; Buldakov et al, 1996;. Golovko, Ishewski, 1996; Medvedeva et al, 2001; Lypik, 2004;. Serdjulk et al, 2004; Timchenko et al, 2006;. ZYB et al. 2006) (. Scherb et al, 2000; Scherb, Wiegel, 2010) as well as the phenomenon is in Bavaria, Croatia (Korblein, 2008), UK (Bentham, 1991, Busby 1995), Finland (Auvinen et al, 2001.) Italy (Semisa, 1988) and Norway (Ulstain et al., 1990) measurable. The calculation of the total Number of such cases is not entirely accurate, but might, according to the experts’ assessments about 170 000 cases estimated for whole Europe.
If we agree with the opinion of the nuclear society, in the UNSCEAR (2001) is expressed, and thus give up the tests, the exact number of victims of To predict the Chernobyl disaster, because we seem to inaccurate estimates, then comes the one thought prohibition. The other approach is to consider all arguments and vague estimates to clarify gradually. With regard to the scale of the disaster, the whole territory of
northern hemisphere and thus affected more than one billion people and has concerns, it clear that it is impossible to exactly the number of victims up to thousands or tens of thousands of people determine. But it seems important to determine the magnitude of the numbers: Some thousands (Which is unnoticeable in the overall mortality rate) or a few million (which is a Forcing a rethink in terms of nuclear technology would).
The “balance” – method for determining the number of victims of the Chernobyl accident, which during the last years has developed rapidly and is still evolving, it looks advantageous- Especially in comparison with that used with the calculation of the radiation risk “Dose” method, which is based on unreliable estimates of radiation dose. The “Balance” – method is not ideal because it is the formation of average values of
demographic characteristics and an assessment of the radiation rate in the observed Areas needed. The undoubted advantage of the “Balance” method when compared with the “dose” Method, however, is that it makes no less verifiable assumptions. In the analysis of the mortality situation in the Chernobyl radionuclides on by one level of ≥ 1 Ci / km ² (40 kBq / m) contaminated areas in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine has been found that the overall mortality rate here is around 4% higher than in the relatively “clean” neighboring areas. In the other, huge sections of the northern Hemisphere, which were affected by the Chernobyl fallout is weaker, the number of additional Low mortality, no doubt, but given the large amount of people affected they certainly still essential. The rough estimation of the total possible number of Chernobyl victims in the period of the last 25 years is about 1.44 million cases (under Consideration of prenatal deaths – 1.6 million cases). This confirms the known Statement: The Chernobyl accident is the biggest technological catastrophe in Human history.
5. The DAMAGE TO HUMANS by CHERNOBYL:
Chernobyl: The Accident and it’s implications for other Nuclear Reactors
> Dr. Sergij Mirnyi, Engineer, Physico-Chemist, Liquidator (http://www.mirnyi.arwis.com/)
> Prof. Vesily Nesterenko, Physicist, founder BELRAD institute, liquidator (http://www.belrad-institute.org/)
CLICK TO ENLARGE:
Chernobyl and the Human Rights of the Victims (ALARA, ICRP, IAEA):
Reactors – build by nuclear military-industrial complex
Dose Limits – invented by nuclear military-industrial complex
Compensation rules – designed by nuclear military-industrial complex
Prof. Larisa Skuratovskaya, Institute of General Pathology and Pathopsychology, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow (http://www.imow.org/community/directory/user/index?id=18306)
Prof. Hari Sharma, Nuclear Chemistry, University of Waterloo, Canada, International Medical Commission on Chernobyl (http://iicph.org/du_update_1_3)
CLICK TO ENLARGE:
Chernobyl: Evidence of Genetic or Teratogenic Damage to Environment and Humans:
CLICK TO ENLARGE:
Insects and their fast mutagenic “reaction” on low radiation are some kind of early warning system for us humans: Irradiated Insects in Japan: http://www.freeml.com/bl/8694840/25149/
Chernobyl: Development failures in the NEWBORN: http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/Lazyuk-ChernobylBelarus.pdf According to Michel Fernex (former WHO, Switzerland) The IAEA said in 1996: “Because there was no register in Belarus for malformations BEFORE Chernobyl, there are no abnormalities.” A LIE, not logic, unethic and unsicentific.
The UN is divided into 7 organisations, of which two are of interest to us, the Economic and Social Council and the Security Council.The “Economic and Social Council” oversees ALL the United Nations agencies with the exception of the “IAEA”.
In fact, the IAEA is the only agency that reports directly to the “Security Council” which is made up of representatives of 15 countries, of which 5 are permanent members of the Council : the United States, the Untied Kingdom, the Russian Federation, China and France.
These 5 nations are all nuclear powers, both civil and military, and almost all are exporters of nuclear technology.
The 10 remaining members (or countries) have a mandate which lasts for 2 years.
The influence of these 5 permanent members of the Security Council on policy making within the IAEA is enormous and ongoing. With no counterbalancing power, it is almost impossible to claim that the IAEA has an objective view of the nuclear industry and the consequences of its use.
On 28th May 1959, the IAEA (not yet two years old !) and WHO signed an agreement referred to as “WHA 12-40” which, though it might, on paper, appear balanced and reciprocal, in practice, puts WHO in a subordinate position to the IAEA.
From this day on all information policy by the media, the ministeries, the universites and commissions is directly affected by that. We’ve seen it happening with Chernobyl and in Japan.
“…the IAEA will endeavour to organize conferences, seminars and workshops, in cooperation with the University, with the aim of enhancing public awareness of radiological effects on human health and addressing the issue of “radiation fear” and post-traumatic stress disorders in the Fukushima population…”
Direct Damage To People attributable to Chernobyl
Prof. Irina Pelevina, Semenov Institute of Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Prof. Leonid Titov, Director of the Belarusian Research Institute for Epidemiology, Immunology and Microbiology, Minsk (http://nasb.gov.by/eng/members/correspondents/titov.php)
Dr. Andreas Nidecker, Medical Radiologist, Past-President of IPPNW Switzerland, International Medical Commission on Chernobyl, Basel (https://www.facebook.com/andreas.nidecker)
Prof. Sushima Acquilla, Epidemiological Department, University of Newscastle-on-Tyne, UK (http://www.fph.org.uk/working_abroad)
Click to Enlarge:
The BIMODAL effect of low radiation on health – proven by Burlakova 1996, ignored by science and IAEA, today’s science ONLY looks for LINEAR dose effects. They use the model of HIGH radiation (acute syndrome) on LOW radiation effects (cancer, diseases, mutation – …) – result: ALL radiation victims are and latency in general ignored! Please share: http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/BurlakovaChernobyl-Belarus.pdf
The IAEA is unscientific and unethic. They ignore the bimodal effect of low radiation.
“Presently the international organizations (WHO, IAEA) recognize as the main cause of increase of thyroid cancer in liquidators and children population after the accident their irradiation with radioactive iodine, I-131. The rest of diseases, they suppose, are provoked by psycho-emotional reactions..” (!!!…RADIOPHOBIA…!!!) There is no linear dose effect correlation, but “The bimodal dependence of effects on dose was revealed for all studied parameters. Namely, effects increased at low doses, reached maximum (for low doses), then decreased (in some cases the effect sign reversed) and thereafter increased with the increase of dosage”: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/kr21pdf/Burlakova.pdf IGNORED BY IAEA, UNSCEAR, ICRP, WHO
Prof. Gould explains How Radiation Kills Infants
Click to Enlarge:
In the late 70s, there were in Wisconsin / USA seven nuclear power plants without incident. The mortality of infants of lower weight (less than 2500 grams) was examined: If the officially published emission rates of the nuclear power plants increased from year to year (Source: Government of the United States), also the mortality of underweight babies was increased. http://books.google.de/books?id=Rdgo5cXrO94C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=Small%20babies%20die%20near%20nuclear%20plants&f=false
“According to the ICRP in 1991, just 5 mSv to the testes could cause damage to offspring – yet this dose was permitted yearly to members of the public, and ten times more was permitted to nuclear workers, in all countries prior to 1990. It continues today to be permitted yearly for nuclear workers in most countries.” http://iicph.org/victims_of_the_nuclear_age
“Possible scale of lost or impaired children after Chernobyl in all of Europe and the part of Asia coveredMissing Children: 2,5 Million.” PAGE 34 http://www.ratical.org/radiation/Chernobyl/RIGEinEuroandCNPPc.pdf
“Children receive the highest doses, because the dose coefficients, in a 3 year old child, are 5 times higher than in adults.“ Vassily Nesterenko:
“the human infant while nursing may attain higher body bur dens of radiocesium than would be the case for somewhat older children.”: http://radionucleide.free.fr/Stresseurs/419.pdf
“By mid 1998 first draft of the Guidelines was circulating between IAEA and WHO at the management level.“
“Although there had been a clear agreement between the two organisations at
the management level and the work had taken place openly the IAEA withdrew
at that stage strongly advising that the whole issue should either be dropped or
revised. The issue was the proposal to lower the action level for implementation
from 100mGy to 10mGy dose to the thyroid’s of children.”
“Managerial level of IAEA refuses to endorse the report and refuses to endorse the report but WHO publishes Guidelines in 1999 but IAEA describes them as “DRAFT” and WHO Geneva agrees”
Congenital Malformation and Stillbirth in Germany and Europe Before and
European stillbirth proportions before
“After Chernobyl, infant mortality rates in Sweden, Finland and Norway increased by a significant 15.8 percent compared to the trend for the period 1976 to 2006. Alfred Körblein calculated that for the period 1987 to 1992 an additional 1,209 (95% confidence interval: 875 to 1,556) infants had died.”
“From the period of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing it is known that the infant mortality parameter is sensitive to radioactivity. It therefore comes as no surprise that there are now numerous studies showing that infant mortality is not only higher in the vicinity of Chernobyl, but also further away – in Europe. In the textbooks there is nothing to be found on this yet, but it is to be found in a number of different journals.”
“n 1986 in Berlin, an unusual increase of infant mortality was observed. Compared to 1985, infant mortality in Berlin rose in 1986 from 10.6 to12.5 per 1,000 live births in the first year of life. The mortality rate of non-German infants increased over-proportionally from 9.6 auf 14.3 per thousand. The mortality rate even increased between the end of the first week and the end of the first year of life by 26 percent. There had previously been a decrease in infant mortality”
“Ever since discovering the mutagenicity of ionising radiation in animal experiments, damaging radiation genetic effects in humans have also been repeatedly considered and examined. The ICRP, however, is of the opinion that teratogenic damage (stillbirths, infant mortality, severe malformation) does not occur below a dose of 100 mSV. Since the mean dose for Germany in 1986-7 was only 0.2 mSV, according to ICRP opinion there can’t have been an increase in teratogenic damage. On the other hand, there are numerous studies from Germany, Europe and the three countries in the Chernobyl region that show that there was indeed an increase in teratogenic damage, contrary to expectations on the part of these scientists.”
“Energy mix and a weapon strategy inseparably involve human consequences in terms of increased incidence of leukaemia, other cancers, neonatal and infant mortality, mental retardation, congenital malformations, genetic diseases and general health problems.” Source: http://www.ratical.org/radiation/inetSeries/RB89.html
Stochastic effects and children:
There is statistical health damage caused by the so-called low-level radiation (above ZERO up to 500mSv.) That is not assigned to any particular people, but occur in a defined population. This issue is the subject of thousands of studies all over the world since the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, and I will discuss in detail below with reference to examples. Factors such as age, gender, health, immune system, nutrition, social situation and the duration of exposure of the radioactivity influence the onset of cancer and other diseases. Until the Chernobyl disaster, the biological effects in the body of the
radioactive isotopes have been undervalued.
It is now clear: Any radiation poses a risk especially for children who are extremely radiosensitive.
1) A child is constantly increasing in weight and size, it grows from the intrauterine embryo to adult, the younger, the faster. Therefore, the cells divide much more frequently than an adult. Cells in the division phase (mitosis) are more vulnerable to radiation than cells in the resting phase.
2) The ability of the body to recognize “defective” cells and to eliminate them develops during childhood. An embryo has not yet this ability. Therefore “defective” cells can multiply unimpeded and later lead to cancer or heritable diseases.
3) A child that grows must hold more substances than emiting them, more than an adult. The body of a child takes in more radioactive substances in food, drink and air we breathe than adults. Especially dangerous are 137 and Cs-134 and 137 and Sr-90 – deposited in the muscles or in the bone (see below).
4) Children have their whole lives ahead of them. Some diseases caused by radiation take a long time to occur (latency): 20 or even 30 years. Children are more likely than older adults to reach the dubious chance to see the end of this latency. In the human body there are about 200 different cell types, each has a different function.
Basically, each cell can respond to injury with four responses:
1) The damage is so severe that the cell dies.
2) The cell can repair the damage (in children see above).
3) The cell loses its ability to produce certain substances, such as in the pancreas gland which can not produce insulin anymore (increase of diabetes in Belarus among children and adults) or other digestive juices during the growth, of the thyroid hormones.
4) The malignant cells degenerate and there is cancer.
It is now clear: Any radiation poses a risk especially for children who are extremely radiosensitive.
The effect of 4 isotopes of iodine -131, Strontium-90, Tritium (H-3) and cesium – 134 / 137 on the human body I will now show more detail, not without pointing out the most toxic isotope, plutonium (Pu-239), that triggers in micrograms cancer. It is produced in each reactor in the fission of uranium, about 250kg per year and reactor.
“In some areas where congenital diabetes had not been seen at all before the catastrophe, there were occurrences afterward and the number of cases has increased since 1986 (Marples, 1996).” PAGE 99: http://stopnuclearpoweruk.net/sites/default/files/Yablokov%20Chernobyl%20book.pdf
“Children are more endangered than adults, because their cells divide themselves constantly. Because they grow, they need permanent energy and have to deal with the impairment of their cells. With children, ailments will start earlier, one to four years afterwards, such as in the case of Chernobyl. Adults have a latency period for Cesium of 20-25 years. It is a slow death, adults who survived 25 years become ill now. The children got sick much earlier and often died.” http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/11/slow-death/
“Endocrinologists from the Heinrich-Heine-University in Düsseldorf and the Belarussian endocrine advice centre in Minsk cooperated on an investigation into the development of diabetes amongst children and young adults in Belarus. Over a lengthy period, 1980 to 2002, the incidence rate (new illness accumulation per annum) of diabetes mellitus Type1 – diabetes with insulin deficiency, mainly amongst young adults – was observed in two areas of Belarus that had been contaminated to very different degrees. Data from the highly contaminated Gomel area was compared with that of the comparatively slightly contaminated area of Minsk, during the periods 1980-1986 and 1987-2002. A total of 643 patients from the Gomel area and 302 patients from the Minsk area were involved in the analysis. In the years 1980-1986 (before Chernobyl) there was no significant difference between the incidence rates in Gomel and Minsk. In contrast to this, for the years following Chernobyl (1987-2002), there was evidence of a significant difference (p<0.001) in the incidence rates of both areas. The authors also discovered that the incidence rate in the Minsk area before and after Chernobyl was not significantly different, but it was in the highly contaminated Gomel area (p<0.05), where annually about twice as many children and young adults developed diabetes mellitus Type 1 after Chernobyl, as compared to the years before Chernobyl. The highest mean incidence rate was registered in the Gomel area in 1998″ http://www.ratical.org/radiation/Chernobyl/HEofC25yrsAC.html
Radiation is not life-friendly. It is a hostile factor. Life has prevailed against this hostile factor. The natural radiation. The beta radiation of strontium has a range of 1 millimeter. No matter where it is installed, it reaches the stem cells with its beta radiation. From the stem cells, everything is made. So the stem cells are bombarded constantly. What are the symptoms? We received the following reports by the children of Chernobyl: Chernobyl AIDS. Symptoms of anemia with decreased number of red blood cells. A therapy resitant anemia.
Vitamins and iron will not help. The ongoing hemorrhage, the bleeding e.g. from the nose. Decreased number of platelets, which are indeed involved in blood clotting. The immune system of children. They are always sick, every little infection “throws them around”. They constantly have colds, infections. And low white blood cells in the blood. This is easily explained: With a Bone marrow suppression: The bone marrow – due to the constant bombardment – and especially because of the accumulation of strontium – lost the ability to compensate.
Radioactivity means selective delivery of energy. On the molecules in our body. They are tiny pinholes in the shortest possible time. But with full force. We are constantly exposed to such radiation damage each second. Every second. Permanenent.And life could not exist and the information of Life could not be passed on, if we have not developed effective repair mechanisms. But the repair mechanisms are very complex and it takes time. The shorter the life cycle of a cell, the less time remains for the repair. This explains why children with rapidly growing tissue, with rapidly dividing cells – are particularly sensitive to radiation. Mitosis.
Here I present with the permission of vice director Mr. Babenko of BELRAD, the Children radiation maps of Belarus (below). First, some background on the data: We see here 17 regions of Belarus:
Irradiated areas and relatively “CLEAN” areas. Children have Cesium in their bodies, no matter if they live in “clean” or irradiated areas. This is one important fact these maps show. Why is that? The average irradiated soil in Belarus is: 1 – 40 Curie per square kilometer (= 37,000 – 1,480,000 becquerel per m²) of radionuclides, such as Cesium 137, Strontium 90, Americium 241 and other radionuclides. It reaches also 160 Curie per km², although it is 40 on official maps, but reaches 18,500,000 becquerel per m² in some places. Here is more info: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/japanese-children-cancer-outlook-children-need-absolutely-clean-food/ Here is a list of the radionuclides: http://life-upgrade.com/DATA/Primary%20Radionuclides.gif
A brief introduction:
The Chernobyl Radiation Monitoring System in Belarus today: direct PDF link http://www.ec-sage.net/members/paper2%20V.Nesterenko.ppt (on a pro nuclear website)
BELRAD ベラルーシ 市民の放射線計測協会 – May 12th 2012
The circles on the region graphic mostly show GREEN and YELLOW. Green means: Children have 0 – 20 Becquerel of Cesium 137 per body kilogram (2,20 pounds or 35,20 ounzes). Yellow means: Children have 20 – 100 Becquerel of Cesium 137 per body kilogram.
Whole Body Counters: They give you an average of the WHOLE burden in your body of radioactive atoms (Cesium 137 for example) in Speed (Becquerel) per body Kilogram (bq/kg). BUT: It is a WHOLE and NOT a PARTIAL BODY or PARTIAL ORGAN SCANNER. There is a tiny flash each time energy is given out by the radioactive atoms in your children (in the crystals of the device). It appears below a chair in which your child sits. This flash is “translated” into / via a program / computer into Becquerel per Kg. The device is shielded with lead against background radiation. And it is NOT invasive, not dangerous for you and your child. This means: a) If you have 20 Bq / Kg Cesium 137, you can have 10 or 100 times more Cesium 137 in your heart and / or cardio vascular system, because Cesium mimics potassium. And b) a child takes in even 3 to 5 times more substances, among them of course radioactive atoms. The fast metabolism does not help, and the mitosis even accelerates the damage.
Lessons from Belarus to Japan: 555 kBq per m² (15 Curie per km²) to 1,480 kBq per m² (40 Curie per km²) cause 50 – 60 milli Sievert per year for the people living there – according to Belaraus National Report 1995 [the year when Belarus stopped aid for irradiated areas with 1 – 5 Curie km² (37 kBq per m² – 185 kBq per m²)]. Exclusion Zones start at 18,500 kBq (18,500,000!!!) per m² of Cs-137, 455 kBq per m² of Sr-90 and 150 kBq per m² of Pu-239. Very very high tolerance levels, if we take into account, that Bandashevsy proved, that 20 Bq – 50 Bq of Cs-137 per Kg of the body (not kilo Bq! normal Bq!) are already letal for children! 1995: the level of air contamination exceeded by 10 and more times the pre-accident data even for “clean” places, like Minsk.
The river sediments of Dneeper, Sozh and Pripjat, Neman, Zapadnay and Divina increased Cs-137 by 80%. This is only official state data. It reached also backwaters: The Sr-90 activity varies from 2,2 – 66,0 up to 407 – 4,215 Bq/Kg). Alpha-radionuclides density in riverbed sediments is higher than in river waters: Pu238 from 0,005 – 9,10 Bg/Kg; Pu-239-240 from 0,13 – 28,13 Bq/Kg; Am-241 from 0,07 – 16,2 Bq/Kg. In the 90ies the levels fro Cs-137 and Sr-90 exceed pre-accidental levels in ground water 20 – 30 times and in underground waters 10 times and more. Chernobyl turned the soil into a collector where accumulation and prolonged retention of long-living radionculides occur.
Today contaminated soil functions as the main source, which delivers various components of radionuclides into the biosphere. At at distance of 150 – 200 km to Chernobyl: Gomel in Belarus: 2,271 kBq/m² (61 Curie per km²) and Mogilev (146 Curie per km²) can be found. In Bragin (Gomel) Cs-137 contamination is 174 kBq per m² up to 2,523 kBq per m². Radionuclides are distributed into forest photosynthesis: this is the growth line for Cs-137: wood < branches < needles < forest litter. For the living soil cover the line is as follows: herbaceous plants < lichens < mosses. The maximum is in the root system and ground vegetative part of plants, and considerably lower in generating organs. Accumulation degree for Sr-90 in meadow plants is twice as large as compared to Cs-137. The permissible levels for mushrooms is 7,4 kBq per m² for mushrooms. Terretories are called clean if contamination density is lower than 37 kBq per m². For berries of the red worthle berries family varies from 37 to 185 kBq per m². Migration processes of marketable animals and birds cause high specific activity of game registered even on relatively clean terretories. The presence of radioactive isotopes in practically all components of the natural and natural-techno-genic ecosystems with density much higher than before explains their involvement in the geo-chemical and biological cycles of migration. This stuation causes different ways of external and internal irradiation of the population and jeopardizes people’s health. We don’t get more data today, it is covered up by the state. So we go back into the 90ies: Thyroid illnesses morbidity of the children of Gomel area in 1994 (indices per 100,000 children: Total in Belarus 1086,20 – Total in Gomel area: 3594,30 – Contaminated area (> 555 kBq per m² / > 15 Curie per km²): 16159,70. Thyroid cancer morbidity of the children of Gomel area in 1994 (i.p. 100,000 children): Total in Belarus: 3,20 – Total in Gomel area: 12,00 – Contaminated area (> 555 kBq per m² / > 15 Curie per km²): 77,50. Tumour morbidity of the children in Gomel area in 1994 (i.p. 100,000 chidren): Total in Belarus: 101,10 – Total in Gomel area: 154,90 – Contaminated area (> 555 kBq per m² / > 15 Curie per km²): 245,40. Malignant tumour morbidity of the Children of Gomel area in 1994: Total in Belarus: 13,80 – Total in Gomel area: 27,10 – Contaminated area (> 555 kBq per m² / > 15 Curie per km²): 103,30.
Impact on human health in Belarus: http://tschernobyl-initiative.welcomes-you.com/dokumente/belarus/pdf/band3_s8_23.pdf
Official radiation maps of Belarus (too low): http://www.rbic.by/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=256&Itemid=86
How Belarus makes Chernobyl zones attractive, which are irradiated with 40 Curie per km² (1,480,000 Becquerel per m² – gives 50 – 60 mSv/year only by living there): http://www.kostukovichi.mogilev-region.by/en/news/region
“Schoolchildren in contaminated areas received radiologically clean food free of charge in school canteens and spent a month in a sanatorium, in a clean environment, each year. For reasons of economy the annual sanatorium stay has been shortened, and communities in some contaminated areas have been classified as “clean”, thus ending the supply of clean food from the state. ” PDF: http://www.ratical.org/radiation/radioactivity/ChronicCs137iico.pdf Radio-Cesium helps dying. Masked by “ordinary” causes of death.
Cesium 137 and Children
Cardiac insufficiency in 18% of children with less than 5 becquerel per kg
65% in children with 11 to 26 becquerels per kg
87% in children with 74 becquerels per kg
Read Full Post »