Re: Chernobyl Health Study Findings

["Robert A. Jones" <raj6582@acs.tamu.edu>]

DAVE GILMORE wrote:
> 
> > Scientists: Chernobyl Not the Health Hazard Many Think
> >
> >   The scientists, presenting the results of a four-year study on the
> > consequences of the 1986 disaster, said the accident did not cause an increase
> > in leukemia or other diseases often blamed on it.
> >
> >   The study also refuted claims of widespread fatalities as a result of the
> > explosion. The Ukrainian Health Ministry has said that 125,000 people had died
> > in Ukraine alone, while the scientists at Friday's conference maintain that only
> > 45 deaths are attributable to the accident.
> 
> Well, I'm confused.  I had been thinking about mentioning the article
> I saw in the newspaper the other day about all the cancer deaths
> related to Chernobyl.  Funny how that "statement of fact" appeared in
> the newspaper, yet this little study didn't seem to get mentioned.
>     I've seen a lot of postings about an "all-radiation-is deadly"
> bias in the media; maybe there is something to that.  Comments?
> 
> 
> 
> David F. Gilmore,
> Assistant Professor of          0  0
> Environmental Biology            __    "have a day"
> Arkansas State University


This reminds me of the ABCC (Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission)study on 
genetic effects from the Hiroshima and Nagisaki bombings.  There was 
reported to be no significant increase in congenital malformations, 
stillbirths, birthweight, or neo-natal death (there was an increase in 
neo-natal death, but was thought to be due to other factors - disease, 
syphillus, etc.).  It cannot be said that there are no genetic effects, 
because there was some data masks - such as survival of the fittest; 
meaning that the survivors of the bombings were more likely to be at an 
advantage, genetically to survive, thus thrive (Please don't get upset, I 
am only reporting what is in the literature, I am not trying to evaluate 
the morality of the theory.  

This does bring out the question, "If this was the finding, why all the 
bad press that there are wild genetic malformations that will be observed 
in humans from radiation exposure."  If there were wild 
malformations, don't you think we would have seen them by now?  How many 
fish-faced gill people do you know?  I believe that it is up to the cool 
heads in science to keep a straight face and get the correct info out.
-- 
*************************************************************************
Robert A. Jones
2909 B. Prairie Flower Circle
Bryan, TX  77802
Phone:  (409) 731-8219
RAJ6582@ACS.TAMU.edu

"The Walls have ears and mouths" - Me

*************************************************************************