Not catastrophe, not accident, and simply a fire?

(Remarks on margins of the report of the United Nations 2002.)

The material of this part is presented based on Remarks for the Report of the United Nations 2002, written by academician of the Ukrainian Academy of Science D.M.Grodzinsky (Ukraine), academician A.V.Yablokov (Russia) and member - correspondent of National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Belarus V.B.Nesterenko (Belarus). There are two polar points of view to Chernobyl. These positions have been reflected and in structures of the United Nations: United Nations Scientific Committee of the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), and also International agency on atomic energy (IAEA) and the World health organization (WHO) amicably speak, that except about 1800 additional cases of disease of thyroid gland cancer after an irradiation at children's age, and also death of several dozens of "liquidators", no other reliably established consequences of the Chernobyl irradiation were found. On the other hand, the Secretary general of United Nations Kofi Annan wrote in 2000 in the foreword to the publication of Office of the United Nations on coordination of humanitarian aid about which we already spoke in the beginning of this chapter: “The exact number of victims, maybe, never becomes known. But three million children demanding treatment and not up to 2016, but earlier, give us performance about number of those who can be ill seriously … their future life will be deformed by it, as well as their childhood. Many will die prematurely. Really we shall give them to live and die, thinking, what the world is indifferent to their distress?”

The report of the United Nations 2002 represents attempt somehow to smooth these distinctions in the points of view – not without reason among the organizations which sponsored it, there were also WHO, known for its sympathies to the nuclear industry.

In the Report it is spoken, that, radioactive deposits “will continue to affect a life of rural population within several decades ”. It is not so. Even essentially reduced contamination on caesium and strontium will continue to influence several hundreds years (ten half-life periods), and the territories contaminated with plutonium and americium, will be dangerous practically forever – many millennia. By the way, the life has shown, what even at reduction of volumes of radioactivity (that inevitably occurs during natural transformation of radionuclides) radioactive contamination of people can not be reduced, and even is increasing and this is observed now everywhere in Chernobyl territories.

Scientifically incorrectly is also the statement, that risks connected with significant initial radiation influence already were realized. It is known, that radiation causes change of genetic material (mutation), and these changes of genetic material are handed down. Already therefore, unfortunately, Chernobyl radiation impact will sound during many following generations. Besides it is known also, that cancers induced by radiation are shown not at once: cancer of breast and lungs - in 20 years, cancer of a stomach, cancroids, and cancer of rectum – in 30 years. So only after 2016 it will be possible to say, that risks for those who has got under the first impact of radiation in 1986, were realized.

Groundless fears will help nobody. However and levity concerning radiation is dangerous. A deceit the statement looks, that in affected territories it is possible “ to create a favorable environment ”. The environment here will be always adverse. Other business, as in such adverse environment is possible to adjust somehow rather safe life if to observe a lot of rules and restrictions (see further). But the life here during centuries will demand various safety measures.

Developing the thesis about an opportunity of safe residing in the affected territories, authors approve, that there are “ kinds of agricultural production which can be raised safely on soils, contaminated by radionuclides ”. It is also the half-truth. Really, there are kinds of plants, which accumulate much less radionuclides from soil, than other kinds. However there are no kinds of plants, which would not extend radionuclides from soil at all. It means, that the radiation control over the contents of radionuclides in food should be carried out and in the future also.

But, perhaps, the most serious deviations from the truth at authors of the Report are connected to the analysis of disease of people on territories contaminated by radiation.

The statement is incorrect, that the growth of congenital developmental anomalies (CDA) connected to an additional irradiation, is not supported with the statistical data – such data are. So, for example, as a whole across Belarus since 1986 to 1995 frequency of cases of large congenital developmental anomalies (bifurcation of a lip and palate, anomaly of structure of finiteness, infringements in development of the central nervous and blood systems, overgrowth of gullet, anus) has increased on 40%. And if to take into account and the abortions made under medical indications – up to 22 (that is, more than on 80%). On other data, during 1988-1999 frequency of CDA in Belarus has increased more than twice. The data on essential growth of CDA are also for Ukrainian and Russian contaminated territories.

Tab. 7

Occurrence of congenital developmental anomalies (on 100,000 children) in Bryansk and Kaluga region (Baleva, etc., 2001)

Region			Increase
Kaluga	104.7	352.6	In 3.4 times
Bryansk	32.3	404.2	In 12.5 times

Such data are and for some regions of Belarus (Gomel, Mogilyov), both Ukraine (Zhitomir), and Russia (Bryansk). Due to well adjusted statistics, such data were collected even in Germany: here recently at the detailed analysis of medical statistics, is found out small, but statistically caught peak of number of CDA in Bavarian (the most injured part from Chernobyl losses of Southern Germany). In the contaminated territories of Belarus growth of lot of the newborns died from developmental anomalies of nervous system, growth of stillbirths is marked, – all this also reflects occurrence of incompatible with life changes of development of fruit under action of even rather small doses of radiation.

Tab. 8

Death rate (on 1,000 people) in Bryansk region in 1998-1999 (Komogortseva, 2001)

Death rate regions	On region	On three most radiation contaminated
Infantile	10.2	17.2
General	16.3	20.1-22.7

Catastrophic deterioration of health of children on all classes of illnesses in Chernobyl territories does not cause doubts: in Chernobyl territories in 1985 were more than 80% of practically healthy children and in 2000 – less than 20%. In southern, especially injured districts of the Gomel region, there are practically no healthy children.

Among other changes in structure of disease of the population in radiation contaminated territories (compared with the population of the nearly located territories similar on social and economic conditions):

· Increase of number of the weakened and sick newborns;

· increase of number of genetic infringements and congenital developmental anomalies;

· increase of number of cancer diseases (not only cancers of thyroid gland);

· infringement (delay) of intellectual (psychological) development;

· growth of number of psychiatric diseases (including – schizophrenia);

· infringement of immunity and hormonal (endocrine) status;

· growth of number of diseases of bodies of blood circulation and lymphatic system, respiratory and urinogenital system, integument, diseases endocrine gland and body of eyesight;

· abnormal growth of children, abnormal exhaustions;

· the slowed down recovery after illnesses;

· accelerated consenescence.

In the Report of the United Nations on some from listed diseases it is mentioned, but with introductions "not absolutely clearly", "probably, not unreasonably", “it is not supported with the statistical data”. Behind these expressions disappears obvious default even statistically quite authentic data. One concrete example. In the Report occurrence of a cataract at the liquidators who have received the big doses of an irradiation is mentioned

Tab. 9

Frequency of primary disease of cataract (on 100,000 people) in 1993 and 1994 in Belarus (Goncharova, 2000)

Average frequency in the country	In a zone 1-15 Ci/km^2	In a zone more than 15 Ci/km^2	Evacuated from zone of more than 40 Ci/km^2	Liquidators
136.2*	189.6*	225.8*	354.9*	281.4*
146.1	196.0	365.9	425.0	420.0

* 1993

among the so-called "determined" consequences of accident. Thus it is held back, that similar changes are observed not only at liquidators, but also in the contaminated territories. Thus at evacuated from zone of strictly control (more than 40 Ci/km²) they even are more expressed, than at liquidators.

Authors of the Report at the analysis of material on medical and biological consequences of accident have admitted two methodological mistakes. The first mistake concerns logic of the argument, meaning, that the big number of collected data does not respond these criteria.

The second methodological mistake of authors of the Report – ignoring of principle of precaution. The history of mankind shows, that if consequences of any action are insufficiently clear to us, it is necessary to issue that follows consequences could be negative, instead of positive. Authors of the Report recognize, that many parties and consequences of Chernobyl accident are not clear yet, including: the initial doses received in the first days after accident, feature of a geographic distribution of dropped out radionuclides, the forecast of an irradiation of inhabitants of radiation contaminated territories for the future, medical and genetic consequences not enough clear moments of influence of radiation.

Departing from objectivity declared by them (and from the basic purpose of the report), authors of the Report show frankly benevolent attitude to the nuclear industry - an original cause of accident. Nuclear scientists for a long time speak, that Chernobyl – is no more than technological accident where some dozens of people were lost, less than 2000 were ill by cancer of a thyroid gland (which is well treated), its consequences are exaggerated and, basically, connected to a radiophobia and unreasoned resettlements, and that it is time “to forget Chernobyl” for a long time. Though authors right at the beginning of the Report what for have declared, that worked “ at absence of pressure on the part of any interested peoples and organizations ”, they in a unison with nuclear scientists approve, that fears of the population concerning radiation contamination and its consequences "unreasonable" and even "provoked". Authors of the Report have gone in this respect further than nuclear scientists and instead of a word "accident" speak already simply about “a fire on Chernobyl NPP”, as a source of radionuclides. To speak so - incorrectly in essence as emission of radionuclides occurred not as a result of a fire but as summary explosion of nuclear reactor. A fire on the nuclear power plant is the secondary event. Use of "fire" terminology has also obviously emotional meaning: one business when it is spoken about accident, and absolutely other business if the question is only a fire.

Repeating for nuclear scientists, that “the brightest determined effect” after Chernobyl was death after accident of 39 people strongly irradiated, authors of the Report hold back about the data of “the Union Chernobyl” – associations of participants of liquidation of consequences of accident ("liquidators") that almost 70 percent of liquidators are sick (infringements in endocrine system in 10 times more often, than on the average across Russia, mental frustration – five times, illnesses of system of blood circulation and digestion – are twice more often, than on the average across Russia). Liquidators become invalids twice more often, than other Russians, death rate among them in some times exceeds an average parameter. In general, the destiny of 600 thousand liquidators is the major humanitarian aspect of accident too, to which it would be necessary to draw attention of the United Nations. It is already known, that the infringements of genetic material received by them are handed down.

Authors of the report are actually solidary with nuclear scientists whom for a long time speak, that the most terrible consequence of Chernobyl was a stop of development of the nuclear industry, and that “it is time to forget Chernobyl”. The governments of all countries injured from Chernobyl, certainly, are interested in minimization of charges on consequences of Chernobyl. For those and others, then it will be less known about radiogenic illnesses, than better. This unwillingness to learn the bitter truth is expressed in turning Chernobyl researches in budgetary establishments, downturn of the status of the bodies engaged in social problems of Chernobyl, and even direct discharge from scientific researches of the most active and uncompromising researchers of Chernobyl contamination (as it happened in Belarus with professor Jury Bandazhevski).

To the analysis of consequences of Chernobyl accident now there is the same that has taken place with finding-out of medical and radiological consequences of bombardments of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the beginning of August 1945. Then Occupational Forces have forbidden any researches on influence of radiation and have resolved them only with 1950 – only four and a half year later when the huge quantity of the most important information on influence of radiation has been forever lost. These shortened data of medical statistics are based into all modern norms of radiation safety. These norms designed without taking into account-increased destruction of the most sensitive groups of the population (children, old men, sick), do not provide our reliable protection. As has recognized recently one of leading Russian experts on radiation safety the head of Moscow combine "Radon", “… Radioactive norms from the very beginning were formed as a curtsey aside nuclear branch”. In result – many millions victims in XX century from development of the nuclear industry, first of all, certainly, from nuclear tests in an atmosphere, but also and from a x-ray irradiation, from processing of nuclear spent fuel, from usual operation of nuclear power plants.

Disastrous deterioration of population health (and especially) through 16 years after Chernobyl accident allows to affirm, that children are sick not from a stress, not from a radio phobia, not from mass resettlement (in Belarus it has been moved only 140 thousand from 2 million of inhabitants), but because they got under intensive Chernobyl emissions (the same concerns Ukraine), and from prolonged effect of low doses of radiation.

To acceptance of effective measures of protection interfere not only lack of means, but also dual and inconsistent character of state policy (the desire to spend less, and from here aspiration to hide true scales of tragedy).

On the other hand, possessed experience shows, that measurement on WBC of 140 thousand children and carrying out of pectinaceous preventive maintenance with all named complex of protective measures in separate Chernobyl regions appears feasible even to small collectives of enthusiasts in some dozens of people. Considerably to weaken negative consequences of Chernobyl accident it is possible by rational use of available means.

Certainly, to our countries (first of all Belarus) without the purposeful and wide international help during the following several decades it is not possible to cope with the Chernobyl trouble. It is necessary to find means and to carry out the International projects in all injured regions. Such protection should proceed some decades while radionuclides will not leave from root-inhabited levels of the soil and production of pure foodstuffs for all population will be provided.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14