[ RadSafe ] Hormesis evidence from Chernobyl- Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski

Mon May 8 10:26:44 CDT 2006

Dr. Long,
I am quite secure in my job.  I do not have to use
"fear-mongering."  I hope that your comments are not a
personal indictment against what I say.

The accident at Chernobyl is not related to the issue
of ALARA.  The response to accidents is quite
different as personnel would be expected in their
response to get higher, but not lethal, doses.  Of
course, since you are not a professional in radiation
safety and health, I would not expect you to know the
difference.

Personally, I think that the claims of over 100,000
abortions were performed in Europe as a result of
Chernobyl are an exaggeration.  
------------
See, for example: Biomed Pharmacother.
1991;45(6):225-8. 

Incidence of legal abortion in Sweden after the
Chernobyl accident.

Odlind V, Ericson A.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University
of Uppsala, Academic Hospital, Sweden.

The number of legal abortions in Sweden increased
around the time of the Chernobyl accident, . . .
However, seen over a longer time perspective, the
increase in the number of abortions started before and
continued far beyond the time of the accident. . . .
Therefore, it seems unlikely that fear of the
consequences of radioactive fall-out after the
Chernobyl accident resulted in any substantial
increase of the number of legal abortions in Sweden.
-------------
As noted at
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/radevents/1986USSR1.html
" . . . studies suggest about 100 excess abortions in
Italy and 400 excess abortions in Denmark in the
months following the accident. . . ."  [My comment is
that this is certainly not thousands! It also
contradicts the previous paper.]
---------------
See Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Oct;167(4 Pt 1):1025-31.
Related Articles, Links  

The influence of the post-Chernobyl fallout on birth
defects and abortion rates in Austria.

Haeusler MC, Berghold A, Schoell W, Hofer P, Schaffer
M.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karl-Franzens
University, Graz, Austria.

OBJECTIVES: We analyzed the influence of the
radioactive fallout after the Chernobyl disaster on
the rate and regional distribution of birth defects
and abortion rates in southern Austria. . . .RESULTS:
No significant changes in the incidence of birth
defects, abortion rate, or counseling rate at
pregnancy termination clinics were observed. . . .
--------------

Dr. Long, do you have any proof that the claim of
+100,000 abortions were due to Chernobyl is true? 
Please TRY to get your facts straight.

--- howard long <hflong at pacbell.net> wrote:

> ALARA kills! 
>   100,000 + abortions were caused by Chernobyl fear-
> mongering.
>   Why else would data like this be suppressed than
> to preserve jobs, John J? 
> 
>   " - the worst harm was caused not by radiation, 
>   and not to the flesh, but to the minds."
>    
>   Howard Long 
>   
> Jerry Cuttler <jerrycuttler at rogers.com> wrote:
>   From: "Jerry Cuttler" <jerrycuttler at rogers.com>
> To: "Canadian Nuclear Discussion List"
> <cdn-nucl-l at mailman1.cis.mcmaster.ca>,
> "ANS Member Exchange Listserv"
> <mbrexchange at list.ans.org>,
> "RAD-SCI-L" <rad-sci-l at WPI.EDU>
> Subject: Op-ed article on Chernobyl accident by Dr.
> Zbigniew Jaworowski
> Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 09:27:46 -0400
> 
> It seems this article could not get published in the
> "media".
> Not politically correct.
> 
> Jerry
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> CHERNOBYL: THE FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN
> Zbigniew Jaworowski
> Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection,
> Warsaw, Poland
> 
> 
> For twenty years the drama of the Chernobyl accident
> at the end of April 
> 1986 has persisted. Vivid worldwide in the memory of
> the public, even now it 
> affects millions in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.
> 
> On the night of 25-26 April 1986, an enormous
> quantity of radioactive dust 
> was released into the air from the melting reactor
> core of the badly-built 
> and poorly-maintained Soviet reactor at Chernobyl,
> in the Ukraine. It put 
> out as much radioactivity as 0.5% of all previous
> 543 nuclear explosions in 
> the atmosphere. The Chernobyl dust covered all
> Europe and Northern 
> Hemisphere. It penetrated up into the lower
> stratosphere and fell even at 
> the South Pole. Nothing worse could happen with a
> power reactor: a total 
> meltdown of its core, and a ten days free release of
> radioactive material 
> into the open air.
> 
> Surprisingly, however, the worst harm was caused not
> by radiation, and not 
> to the flesh, but to the minds.
> 
> In terms of human losses (31 early deaths), the
> accident in the Chernobyl 
> nuclear power plant was a minor event compared with
> many other man-made 
> catastrophes. In 1984, about 15,000 died from the
> eruption of a fertilizer 
> factory in Bhopal in India; the collapse of a
> Chinese dam on the Banqiao 
> river in 1975 caused some 230,000 fatalities.
> Counted per electricity units 
> produced, which is the only practical comparison,
> fatalities in Chernobyl 
> were lower than from most other energy sources:
> three times lower than 
> oil-fired power stations, 13 times lower than
> liquefied gas, and 15 times 
> lower than hydroelectric stations. But the
> political, economic, social and 
> psychological impact of Chernobyl was enormous. Let
> us have a look at what 
> happened, starting with my personal experience.
> 
> About 9 a.m. on Monday 28 April 1986 at the entrance
> to my institute in 
> Warsaw I was greeted by a colleague saying: "Look,
> at 07:00h we received a 
> telex from a monitoring station in northern Poland
> saying that the 
> radioactivity of air there is 550,000 times higher
> than a day before. A 
> similar increase I found in the air filter from the
> station in our backyard, 
> and the pavement here is highly radioactive".
> 
> This was a terrible shock. It is curious that all my
> attention was 
> concentrated on this enormous rise of "total beta
> activity" used to detect 
> radioactivity, although I knew that the actual dose
> rate of external 
> radiation penetrating our bodies was only three
> times higher than the day 
> before and was similar to the average natural
> radiation dose which we all 
> receive from the ground and cosmic radiation. This
> "Chernobyl" dose was more 
> than 100 times lower than the natural radiation
> level in some other areas of 
> the world, where no adverse health effects among
> inhabitants have ever been 
> observed.
> 
> But in 1986 the impact of a dramatic increase in
> atmospheric radioactivity 
> dominated the thinking of me and everybody else.
> This state of mind led to 
> immediate consequences. First there were various
> hectic actions, such as ad 
> hoc setting of different limits for radiation in
> food, water etc. These 
> limits varied between countries by a factor of many
> thousands, reflecting 
> the emotional state of decision-makers and political
> and mercenary factors. 
> For example, Sweden allowed for 30 times more
> radioactivity in imported 
> vegetables than in domestic ones and Israel allowed
> less radioactivity in 
> food from Eastern than from Western Europe. The
> limit of cesium-137 
> concentration in vegetables imposed in the
> Philippines was 8,600 times lower 
> than in the more pragmatic United Kingdom.
> 
> Most of these restrictions were meaningless from the
> point of view of human 
> health but their costs were enormous. As an example,
> Norwegian authorities 
> introduced a limit for cesium-137 concentration in
> reindeer meat and game 
> that was about 200 times lower than the natural dose
> in some regions of 
> Norway. The costs of this false protection climbed
> to over US$51 million.
> 
> Other countries were no better. Professor Klaus
> Becker from the German 
> Institute for Standards estimated recently that this
> kind of practice, 
> together with its consequences for nuclear industry,
> meant that the costs of 
> the Chernobyl accident in Western Europe probably
> exceed US$100 billion.
> 
> The most nonsensical action, however, was the
> evacuation of 336,000 people 
> from the contaminated regions of the former Soviet
> Union, where the 
> radiation dose from Chernobyl fallout was about
> twice the natural dose. 
> Later, the officially acceptable limit was set below
> the natural level and 
> was five times lower than radiation at Grand Central
> Station in New York. 
> "Contaminated regions" were defined, using a level
> of radioactive cesium-137 
> in the ground ten times lower than the level of
> natural radioactive matter 
> in the soil. The evacuation caused great harm to the
> populations of Belarus, 
> Russia and Ukraine. It led to mass psychosomatic
> disturbances, great 
> economic losses and traumatic social consequences.
> According to Academician 
> Leonid A. Ilyin, the leading Russian authority on
> radiation protection, the 
> mass relocation was implemented by the Soviet
> government under the pressure 
> of populists, ecologists and self-appointed
> "specialists", against the 
> advice of the best Soviet scientists.
> 
> Besides the 28 fatalities among rescue workers and
> the employees of the 
> power station due to extremely high doses of
> radiation, and three immediate 
> deaths due to other reasons (the UN's Chernobyl
> Forum gives "less than 50" 
> by adding in some later deaths from causes not
> related to radiation, such as 
> lung tuberculosis, fat thrombosis, car accident,
> suicide etc. In fact, the 
> mortality rate of survivors of the acute radiation
> sickness, at 1.09%, was 
> much lower than the mortality rates for the whole
> population of Belarus of 
> 1.4%, Russia's 1.38%, and Ukraine's 1.65%), the only
> real adverse health 
> 
=== message truncated ===

+++++++++++++++++++
"People will be shocked to see how safe it is to live in New York City."
ANDREW KARMEN, a sociology professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, on murder trends in the city.

-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 