From 1995 “At a press conference on Tuesday, April 25, acting Health Minister Andriy Serdiuk told reporters that the total number of deaths among victims of the Chornobyl accident in the period between 1988 and 1994 is more than 125,000.” http://www.ukrweekly.com/archive/pdf3/1995/The_Ukrainian_Weekly_1995-18.pdf
and at page 6: “The ministry also released the sobering results of research it had conducted among 1 million residents in the three regions most affected by Chornobyl’s fallout. In the Kyyiv, Zhytomyr and Rivne oblasts, the incidence of thyroid cancer has increased 200 percent; heart disease by 75 percent; respiratory diseases by 130 percent; and gastrointestinal ailments by 280 percent. In addition, the ministry noted that the death rate among inhabitants of the three-oblast region had increased by 15.7 percent since the 1986 catastrophe.”
And this is additional Data from belarusian health ministery: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/chernobyl-data-dr-a-okeanov-ministery-of-health-belarus-morbidity-rate-among-children-and-teens/
“Gofman predicts that approximately 400,000 Europeans and Soviets may die of cancer due to fallout from the Chernobyl disaster, a figure far higher than “official” estimates.” http://books.google.de/books?id=mgwAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA43#v=onepage&q&f=false
Health effects of the Chernobyl catastrophe http://enfants-tchernobyl-belarus.org/extra/pdf-divers/telecharge.php?pdf=etb-016.pdf
in contrast, the IAEA (no expert on health and no mandatory, a fake organisation without science and ethic): https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/09/18/the-atomic-devil-strikes-again-iaea-general-conference-2011-sept-19th-23rd/
The main way in which the “radiation protection industry” has succeeded in hugely underrating the ill-health caused by nuclear power is by insisting on a group of extremely restrictive definitions as to what qualifies as a radiation-caused illness statistic. For example, under IAEA’s criteria:
> If a radiation-caused cancer is not fatal, it is not counted in the IAEA’s figures
> If a cancer is initiated by another carcenogen, but accelerated or promoted by exposure to radiation, it is not counted.
> If an auto-immune disease or any non-cancer is caused by radiation, it is not counted.
> Radiation-damaged embryos or foetuses which result in miscarriage or stillbirth do not count
> A congenitally blind, deaf or malformed child whose illnesses are are radiation-related are not included in the figures because this is not genetic damage, but rather is teratogenic, and will not be passed on later to the child’s offspring.
> Causing the genetic predisposition to breast cancer or heart disease does not count since it is not a “serious genetic disease” in the Mendelian sense.
> Even if radiation causes a fatal cancer or serious genetic disease in a live born infant, it is discounted if the estimated radiation dose is below 100 mSv [mSv= millisievert, a measurement of radiation exposure. One hundred millsievert is the equivalent in radiation of about 100 X-Rays].
> Even if radiation causes a lung cancer, it does not count if the person smokes — in fact whenever there is a possibility of another cause, radiation cannot be blamed.
> If all else fails, it is possible to claim that radiation below some designated dose does not cause cancer, and then average over the whole body the radiation dose which has actually been received by one part of the body or even organ, as for instance when radio-iodine concentrates in the thyroid. This arbitrary dilution of the dose will ensure that the 100 mSv cut-off point is nowhere near reached. It is a technique used to dismiss the sickness of Gulf War veterans who inhaled small particles of ceramic uranium which stayed in their lungs for more than two years, and in their bodies for more than eight years, irradiating and damaging cells in a particular part of the body. https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/this-years-911-will-be-japans-2nd-fukushima-warning/
Effect: Only acute deaths aknowledged, 1000,000 latency deaths ingored:
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
How does the IAEA think? Well, since the 1950ies science they only look for linear dose-effect correlation, when studying Low-Dose Radiation effects on health. – SOURCE: http://stopnuclearpoweruk.net/sites/default/files/Yablokov%20Chernobyl%20book.pdf
“…To provide an adequate safety standard the dose limit of 1 mSv/y have to be reduced to 0.02 mSv/y or 20 µSv/y.”Page 9: http://www.staff.uni-marburg.de/~kunih/all-doc/stoakuni.pdf by Dr. Horst Kuni, Nuclear Medicine, University Professor.
The international radiation protection bodies such as ICRP, UNSCEAR and BEIR base their findings on the somatic damage (cancer, leukemia risks) mainly on studies of the victims of the nuclear tests of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, wo still lived in 1950. That’s right, not 1945, 1950! This study is called “T65D.” It was begun in 1950. The five years before that has not been studied. It was observed since 1950. About 800,000 Japanese people harmed by radiation, and the analysation of their causes of death. http://www.rerf.or.jp/glossary_e/t65d.htm and: http://www.rerf.or.jp/library/archives_e/lsstitle.html / For validation of this study the US even did an atomic test in Nevada: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/212/4497/900.extract
Each person has been exposed to a certain dose of radiation that had to be estimated later (!) Because of the location of the bomb explosion at the moment (T65D study). It is at HIGH DOSE SHORT TERM (explosion). This is in contrast to chronic low-level radiation. ICRP, UNSCEAR and BEIR exclude results that you get from high doses to the low dose effects. THIS IS A CRIME and unscientific and unethic.
“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
Swiss Childhood Cancer Cancer and Nuclear Power Plants in Switzerland (as usual attacked by physicists BUT confirmed by physicians: the IPPNW – peace nobel prize 1985): http://www.canupis.ch/index.php?id=studydesign
This is in contrast to the lies of the IAEA, WHO, UNSCEAR, ICRP and OECD: “Chernobyl to the déjà dix. Impact radiologique et sanitaire. OCDE Paris, November 1995″ This report however was prepared by a French team of experts led by Dr. Henri Métiver by the French Institute for Radiation Protection and Safety (IPSN) today IRSN. It basically says: “Very extensive medical studies have shown that to the influence of radiation no anomaly in the field of health can be attributed.” and: “In consequence, the Chernobyl accident will be not considered as a significant accident.”: European OECD ignoring Chernobyl birth defects, sickness and deaths – quote “There are no clear trends in data for birth anomalies in Belarus or Ukraine”: http://www.oecd-nea.org/rp/chernobyl/chernobyl-1995.pdf
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
1,000,000 deaths and counting…
with kind regards,