[ RadSafe ] Psychocological effects of radiohysteria

Dan W McCarn hotgreenchile at gmail.com
Thu Apr 28 12:51:07 CDT 2011


Dear Mike:

Several years ago I wrote in RadSafe about a Russian study that my old IAEA
Russian boss, Alexander Nechaev (St. Petersburg) referred to on the
psychological effects of the Chernobyl accident.  The study compared all
medical issues of relocated residents from within the 30 km exclusion zone
to residents remaining along the boundaries of the zone.  The results
demonstrated that the relocated individuals suffered from several diseases
at a significantly higher rate than the people who remained in the area.
These include in order of importance 1) Suicide; 2) Drug / Alcohol abuse; 3)
Diabetes; 4) Heart Disease and 5) Stroke. Note that cancer is not in this
list!

I will try to get / find the paper (in Russian).

Dan ii

--
Dan W McCarn, Geologist
108 Sherwood Blvd
Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
+1-505-672-2014 (Home – New Mexico)
+1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com


-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Stabin, Michael
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:22
To: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Psychic effects of radiohysteria?
(FranzSchoenhofer)

> So my question to RADSAFE is, whether there are any investigations known
about the psychological effects of the sensational exaggerations of the
massmedia and the constant absurd indoctrination with fear for life and
health.


Not to my knowledge, either, but this is a study that is badly needed. I
have suggested at times over the years that much of the fear and hysteria
promoted by some with an agenda for funding low-dose investigations or
transmitted (I think more rarely than created) by the media may be
responsible for real cases of harmful stress, possibly cancers (I'm not
entirely joking here) and other maladies. Someone should fund this. I often
complain to my friends about weekly that a new study has appeared that
proved something so completely obvious and stupid that it was a crime for it
to receive funding while other worthy research is refused for funding. An
example (true) - they showed people pictures of other people and fed them
drinks over time, and voila, after a few drinks people found the people in
the photos more attractive. Anyone who has visited a tavern is familiar with
this phenomenon (nicknamed the 'Coyote Ugly' effect). A recent one found
that men watching newscasts with attractive female hosts picked up somewhat
fewer details about the news presented than those who watched the same
newscast with an unattractive female or a male host. No! Really? Even if
this were not ridiculously obvious, it still does not warrant funding, what
is the value of this information? The idea that Franz suggests needs to be
funded. If anyone finds a study, I would be very keen to see it. If anyone
thinks it could be funded I would be thrilled to see a joint US-European
effort to obtain the data! If we could prove that mass media false hysteria
causes cancer, there would be a class action suit that about 4 billion
people could join.



Mike

Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP
Associate Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Vanderbilt University
1161 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37232-2675
Phone (615) 343-4628
Fax   (615) 322-3764
e-mail     michael.g.stabin at vanderbilt.edu
internet   www.doseinfo-radar.com

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu



More information about the RadSafe mailing list