CEREA (also here)

 

The Chernobyl Catastrophe:
The Horrific Dress Rehearsal For
The Even More Horrific Fukushima Disaster



From web page: Chernobyl Victims, Faces of Death Pictures, Chernobyl Thread, by "Bylot," November 25, 2009

Chernobyl Start Date: April 26, 1986
Chernobyl End Date: None in sight
Lives Ruined So Far: Over 9 Million, half of which are children
under the age of five . . . and the victim list keeps growing . . .
(Source: The Academy award-winning documentary (2004) Chernobyl Heart, Part 1, 3:26)

 


Radioactive Cloud/Fallout Over Europe From the Chernobyl Disaster 2:17), uploaded 1 March 2009. Caption from the French IRSN web page where this animation is also embedded: "Discover the path travelled by the radioactive cloud in the model-generated image depicting caesium-137 activity concentration over Europe between 26th April and 6th May 1986."

 

The price of political errors is human lives:

  • WWI - 21 million
  • WWII - 50 million
  • Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombing - 500,000 (not including the 1945 - 1950 numbers)
  • Nuclear bomb production and testing - approx 3 million
  • Chernobyl reactor explosion - short term effect, nearly 7 million recovery operation workers and inhabitants of the contaminant area (UNSCEAR 2011)
  • Chernobyl - middle term effect - the number of the people in the area with thyroid issues had increased from 5 million to 100 million between 1998 and 2008
  • Chernobyl - long term effect - 600 million people across the world (UNSCEAR 2011)

The number of victims is still increasing

[Source: A slide used at 7:15 into the presenetation of Dr. Natalia Miranova titled: CHERNOBYL to FUKUSHIMA - Part 2 - Lessons Ignored (28:49), the second of five parts of a seminar held at San Francisco State University on April 8, 2011].

 

Introduction

by William B. Fox
Publisher, America First Books
President, America First Institute
Author of this web page
First published 25 May 2012
Last updated, reedited 27 July 2012

Chernobyl deserves special study for everyone concerned about the continuing Fukushima catastrophe. Most Americans and Europeans are still unaware that prolonged (or "chronic") low level radiation is extemely dangerous and destructive to human gene pools -- not to mention all other forms of life on this planet. It can be even more hazardous than short bursts of high level radiation. People around the Northern Hemisphere -- particularly in North America -- have been bathed in chronic low level radiation ever since the Fukushima melt-downs that began on March 11th. (Please see my weekly radiation chart series). Furthermore, this invisible, tasteless, colorless, and odorless threat has delayed effects which typically grow worse over time, to include increasing effects from bio-accumulation in the food chain.
On top of all this, most Americans have been subjected to other forms of low level radiation from continuous nuclear power plant emissions, bomb test fallout (much of it still up in the atmosphere), and global depleted uranium contamination. They have also been bombarded with unhealthy chemical additives in their food, drinking water, and vaccines, not to mention dangers that exist in genetically modified foods (GMO) which are now being slipped into a wide range of foods without any package label alerts. Many of these different types of toxins actually multiply each other's evil effects rather than add to each other. (For example cigarrete smoke combined with uranium dust creates cancer rates among uranium miners that is five to ten times greater than the additional cancer rates caused by cigarrette smoke alone and uranium dust alone that are added together).
Fortunately, there are many things that you can do to protect yourself, your family, and others that you care about:

* Please see my web page which addresses individual and group protective measures against radiation.

* Please study the works profiled on this web page created by leading scientists such as Dr. Alexey V. Yablokov and Dr. Chris Busby who dare to tell the truth about the breadth, depth, and longevity of the terrible problems created by Chernobyl radiation -- terrible truths suppressed by mainstream media. Then please extrapolate the likely consequences to Fukushima, which Dr. Busby believes could be as much as 300 to a 1,000 times worse than Chernobyl. As a "case study," Chernobyl is the best "comparable" available to help us predict the future -- and it is not pretty. You need to understand this before you can adequately protect yourself. In fact, the situation could become even worse if any of North America's aged and functionally obsolete reactors get sabotaged or melt down for other reasons. (The current situation even without a meltdown is very disturbing. Energy News reports that three quarters of U.S. nuclear plants have major leaks. Radiation expert Leuren Moret reports that according to a TVA report, virtually all nuclear reactors periodically leak as much as 1,300 fission products -- everything that comes out of a nuclear bomb blast -- into the environment ). Please see my 2011 U.S. nuclear crisis web page for more details.
Here is a sneak preview of key points regarding the Chernobyl disaster. The public should already have been made aware of these points by national media during the more than quarter century following the 1986 explosion -- but it has been kept in the dark:

a) In major areas of Belarus and Ukraine today only about 20% of the children are healthy. Radiation does more than cause cancer -- it exacerbates every form of disease and weakness known to man. Diseases include heart disease, cancer, autism, and neurological damage. Weaknesses include lowered IQs, muscular degeneration, and accelerated aging.

b) Some radiation-induced mutations can persist for over 16 generations, or until they are selected out of the gene pool by evolutionary processes. Radiation increases gene pool ("genomic") instability. Future generations who were never exposed to radiation become significantly more sensitive to new radiation based upon the damaged DNA they have inherited.

c) Radiation-related diseases and abnormalities not only persist at high rates in human populations for decades, but often accumulate and get worse over time. The most dangerous levels of Cesium contamination will not significantly decline for 300-400 years. Human populations that live in heavily contaminated areas become so loaded with sick, nonproductive people that they can hardly sustain themselves, much less advance civilization, science, and technology. Radiation-related degradation of a society can easily push it in the direction of a new Dark Age or drop it down to permanent economic basket case Third World status.

d) Bioaccumulation in the food and water supply often becomes more dangerous over time compared to spikes in fallout that might take place within a few months of a bomb blast or nuclear reactor melt-down. All of this is usually vastly more dangerous than short bursts of external forms of radiation, such as cosmic radiation and X-rays, because once radioactive particles are ingested, they wreak vastly more damage as they continuously irradiate the nearby cells structures they get lodged in.

e) Chernobyl is still ongong. It is currently leaking and needs a an extremely expensive new sarcophagus. Once the reactor wreckage is dismantled and molten fuel is finally extracted, certain components of the contaminated material will remain very hazardous for hundreds of thousands, millions, or even billions of years. This is typical of the long term impact of "nuclear accidents" that leak nuclear fuel.

This web page also covers the strong possibility that Chernobyl was induced by sabotage. This is a vitally important but little studied aspect of the Chernobyl accident. Worse yet, denial and cover-ups were major factors in shaping the public response to Chernobyl in the twenty five years that followed.
Denial and cover-ups have also been major factors in thwarting appropriate civil defense measures in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. Paradoxically, government denial and mainstream media cover-ups around the world have been even more extreme in the wake of the 3-11-2011 Fukushima meltdowns than they were after the 4-26-1986 Chernobyl meltdown and explosion. This may be interpreted in many different ways. Perhaps nothing was learned from Chernobyl due to ignorance, laziness, cowardice, and incompetence. Or perhaps, if one subcribes to various "false flag" or sabotage-related theories, a malevolent power elite learned all too well. Once it became clear that they could go unpunished for Chernobyl, they proceeded to inflict another "Chernobyl" on the world at Fukushima on a vastly greater scale.
To fully protect oneself, one must be able to grasp the full social and political reality behind who in the power elite is trying to keep us in the dark and why..
The most important objective of this web page is to prod readers to start asking the right questions -- many of which are very painful for most people. In this regard, I think this public education project is a success.

“If they can get you asking the wrong questions,
they don't have to worry about the answers.”

-- Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow

 

Table of Contents

Immediate and Long Term Consequences of Chernobyl as a Humanitarian Disaster

Extracts from Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment by Alexey V. Yablokov, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko, consulting editor Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger, New York Academy of Sciences, 2009 (PDF here; hosted at this web site with via short URL http://tinyurl.com/nysha5w). This is probably the most comprehensive, honest, and scientific study of Chernobyl that has been conducted.

Extracts from Chernobyl: 20 Years On: Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident, Edited by C. C. Busby and A. V. Yablokov. European Committee on Radiation Risk, Documents of the ECRR 2006 No1, (PDF here)

Extracts from Health Effects of Chernobyl 25 years after the reactor catastrophe by Dr. rer. nat. Sebastian Pflugbeil, Society for Radiation Protection, Henrik Paulitz, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), Dr. med. Angelika Claussen, IPPNW, Prof. Dr. Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake, Society for Radiation Protection, Published by the German affiliates of IPPNW April 2011, (PDF here)

The Continuing Impact of Chernobyl from News Update Sources

Eastern Europe (Principally Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus)
Scandinavia
Britain, Scotland, and Ireland
Northern and Central European Countries (South of the Baltic and English Channel, North of Italian Alps)
Southern European Countries (Italy, Balkans, Greece)
North America and Elsewhere

Comparisons of Chernobyl with Fukushima

Conflicting Accounts Regarding the Cause of the Chernobyl Catastrophe

Eastern European Government and Mainstream Media (MSM) Questionable Behavior Patterns
Regarding Chernobyl During the Soviet Era

Post-Soviet Era Eastern European Questionable Behavior Patterns

U.S. and Canadian Government and Mainstream Media (MSM) Questionable Behavior Patterns


UK Government and Mainstream Media (MSM) Questionable Behavior Patterns

U.N. and Other International Organization Questionable Behavior Patterns

Criminal and Other Subversive Analysis: The Case for Chernobyl as a False Flag (Covert Sabotage) Event

Key False Flag Characteristics


Political and Technological Solutions

Overcoming Corrupt or Incompetent Power Elites

Special Equipment and Other Technological Approaches

Conferencing, Networking, Organizing, Building International Support

Empowering Honorable and Competent Leadership

Additional References

Miscellaneous Links

Wikipedia Articles

Free Online Ebooks

Individual and Group Protective Measures

Significant Videos

MP3 Downloads 

 

 


A memorial to the heroic work done by Dr. Vassily Nesterenko, from a blog page by Jan Hemmer, who has also devoted much of his professional life to studying the consequences of Chernobyl. Dr. Nesterenko was a coauthor of the epic study Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment depicted below.


The Immediate and Long Term Consequences of Chernobyl as a Humanitarian Disaster:

 

Key Sources

 

 



This is widely considered the most scholarly and comprehensive scientific study in existance to help people understand the full spectrum of Chernobyl radiation consequences over time. The copyright is now held by Dr. Alexey V. Yabolokov, who selflessly converted this work into a free PDF in an effort to help quickly educate as many people as possible about this extremely urgent and serious topic. From the inside cover "ON THE COVER: Pine trees reveal changes in wood color, density, and growth rate following irradiation from the Chernobyl disaster. T. A. Mousseau, University of South Carolina (2009)"

 

Extracts from Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment (PDF) by Alexey V. Yablokov, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko, consulting editor Janette D. Sherman-Nevinger

Editor's Note: This work is like a "Rosetta Stone" for gaining an introductory overview of the consequences of a major nuclear melt-down on civilian populations. The extreme degree of damage caused by radiation is hard for most people to comprehend, therefore this work, combined with the scholarly works of Dr. Chris Busby and his colleagues at EURRAD, provides a necessary critical mass of facts and analysis that many people require to finally overcome denial and willful ignorance and finally "get it."
On this web page I focus upon providing extracts from Chapter I and II. On my Individual and Group Radiation Protection and Contamination Avoidence web page, I provide numerous extracts from
Chapter IV. Radiation Protection after the Chernobyl Catastrophe
All of this is meant to just be an appetizer. People should feel inspired to review the entire work. We also need to achieve the largest audience possible in this time of terrible crisis.

 

Chernobyl
Consequences of the Catastrophe for People
and the Environment

ALEXEY V. YABLOKOV
VASSILY B. NESTERENKO
ALEXEY V. NESTERENKO


Consulting Editor
JANETTE D. SHERMAN-NEVINGER

CONTENTS

 

Chapter Sub-
Chapter/Sub-Chapter/Author(s)
Page
 
Chapter
 
 
  Foreword
vii
  By Prof. Dr. Biol. DimitroM. Grodzinsky
  Preface
x
  By Alexey V. Yablokov and Vassily B. Nesterenko
  Acknowledgments
xiv
  Introduction: The Difficult Truth about Chernobyl
1
  By Alexey V. Nesterenko, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Yablokov
   
I.
  Chernobyl Contamination: An Overview
   
 
1.
Chernobyl Contamination through Time and Space
5
  By Alexey V. Yablokov and Vassily B. Nesterenko
   
II.
  Consequences of the Chernobyl Catastrophe for Public Health
   
 
2.
Chernobyl’s Public Health Consequences: Some Methodological Problems
32
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
 
3.
General Morbidity, Impairment, and Disability after the Chernobyl Catastrophe
42
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
 
4.
Accelerated Aging as a Consequence of the Chernobyl Catastrophe
55
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
 
5.
Nonmalignant Diseases after the Chernobyl Catastrophe
58
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
 
6.
Oncological Diseases after the Chernobyl Catastrophe
161
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
 
7.
Mortality after the Chernobyl Catastrophe
192
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
  Conclusion to Chapter II
217
   
III.
  Consequences of the Chernobyl Catastrophe for the Environment
   
 
8.
Atmospheric, Water, and Soil Contamination after Chernobyl
223
  By Alexey V.Yablokov, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko
 
9.
Chernobyl’s Radioactive Impact on Flora
237
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
 
10.
Chernobyl’s Radioactive Impact on Fauna
225
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
 
11.
Chernobyl’s Radioactive Impact on Microbial Biota
281
  By Alexey V. Yablokov
  Conclusion to Chapter III
285
   
IV
  Radiation Protection after the Chernobyl Catastrophe
   
 
12.
Chernobyl’s Radioactive Contamination of Food and People
289
  By Alexey V. Nesterenko, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Yablokov
 
13.
Decorporation of Chernobyl Radionuclides
303
  By Vassily B. Nesterenko and Alexey V. Nesterenko
 
14.
Protective Measures for Activities in Chernobyl’s Radioactively Contaminated
311
    Territories  
  By Alexey V. Nesterenko and Vassily B. Nesterenko
 
15.
Consequences of the Chernobyl Catastrophe for Public Health and the
318
    Environment 23 Years Late  
  By Alexey V. Yablokov, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko
  Conclusion to Chapter IV
327

 

Foreword

by PROF. DR. BIOL. DIMITRO M. GRODZINSKY

[Boldface and comments added by William B. Fox, Ed.]


More than 22 years have passed since the Chernobyl catastrophe burst upon and changed our world. In just a few days, the air, natural waters, flowers, trees, woods, rivers, and seas turned to potential sources of danger to people, as radioactive substances emitted by the destroyed reactor fell upon all life. Throughout the Northern Hemisphere radioactivity covered most living spaces and became a source of potential harm for all living things.
Naturally, just after the failure, public response was very strong and demonstrated mistrust of atomic engineering. A number of countries decided to stop the construction of new nuclear power stations. The enormous expenses required to mitigate the negative consequences of Chernobyl at once “raised the price” of nuclear-generated electric power. This response disturbed the governments of many countries, international organizations, and official bodies in charge of nuclear technology and led to a paradoxical polarization as to how to address the issues of those injured by the Chernobyl catastrophe and the effects of chronic irradiation on the health of people living in contaminated areas. Owing to the polarization of the problem, instead of organizing an objective and comprehensive study of the radiological and radiobiological phenomena induced by small doses of radiation, anticipating possible negative consequences, and taking adequate measures, insofar as possible, to protect the population from possible negative effects, apologists of nuclear power began a blackout on data concerning the actual amounts of radioactive emissions, the doses of radiation, and the increasing morbidity among the people that were affected.
When it became impossible to hide the obvious increase in radiation-related diseases, attempts were made to explain it away as being a result of nationwide fear. At the same time some concepts of modern radiobiology were suddenly revised. For example, contrary to elementary observations about the nature of the primary interactions of ionizing radiation and the molecular structure of cells, a campaign began to deny non-threshold radiation effects. On the basis of the effects of small doses of radiation in some nonhuman systems where hormesis was noted, some scientists began to insist that such doses from Chernobyl would actually benefit humans and all other living things.
The apogee of this situation was reached in 2006 on the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl meltdown. By that time the health and quality of life had decreased for millions of people. In April 2006 in Kiev, Ukraine, two international conferences were held in venues close to one another: one was convened by supporters of atomic energy and the other by a number of international organizations alarmed by the true state of health of those affected by the Chernobyl catastrophe. The decision of the first conference has not been accepted up to now because the Ukrainian party disagrees with its extremely optimistic positions. The second conference unanimously agreed that radioactive contamination of large areas is accompanied by distinctly negative health consequences for the populations and predicted increased risk of radiogenic diseases in European countries in the coming years.
For a long time I have thought that the time has come to put an end to the opposition between technocracy advocates and those who support objective scientific approaches to estimate the negative risks for people exposed to the Chernobyl fallout. The basis for believing that these risks are not minor is very convincing.
Declassified documents of that time issued by Soviet Union / Ukraine governmental commissions in regard to the first decade after 1986 contain data on a number of people who were hospitalized with acute radiation sickness. The number is greater by two orders of magnitude than was recently quoted in official documents. How can we understand this difference in calculating the numbers of individuals who are ill as a result of irradiation? It is groundless to think that the doctors’ diagnoses were universally wrong. Many knew in the first 10-day period after the meltdown that diseases of the nasopharynx were widespread.We do not know the quantity or dose of hot particles that settled in the nasopharyngeal epithelium to cause this syndrome. They were probably higher than the accepted figures.
To estimate doses of the Chernobyl catastrophe over the course of a year, it is critical to consider the irradiation contributed by ground and foliage fallout, which contaminated various forms of food with short-half-life radionuclides. Even in 1987 activity of some of the radionuclides exceeded the contamination by Cs-137 and Sr-90. Thus decisions to calculate dose only on the scale of Cs-137 radiation led to obvious underestimation of the actual accumulated effective doses. Internal radiation doses were defined on the basis
of the activity in milk and potatoes for different areas. Thus in the Ukrainian Poles’e region [Ed. Note: This is probably the same as Ukrainian Polesia], where mushrooms and other forest products make up a sizable share of the food consumed, the radioactivity was not considered.
The biological efficiency of cytogenic effects varies depending on whether the radiation is external or internal: internal radiation causes greater damage, a fact also neglected. Thus, there is reason to believe that doses of irradiation have not been properly estimated, especially for the first year after the reactor’s failure. Data on the growth of morbidity over two decades after the catastrophe confirm this conclusion. First of all, there are very concrete data about malignant thyroid disease in children, so even supporters of “radiophobia” as the principal cause of disease do not deny it. With the passage of time, oncological diseases with longer latency periods, in particular, breast and lung cancers’, became more frequent.
From year to year there has been an increase in nonmalignant diseases, which has raised the incidence of overall morbidity in children in areas affected by the catastrophe, and the percent of practically healthy children has continued to decrease. For example, in Kiev, Ukraine, where before the meltdown, up to 90% of children were considered healthy, the figure is now 20%. In some Ukrainian Poles’e [Polesia] territories, there are no healthy children, and morbidity has essentially increased for all age groups. The frequency of disease has increased several times since the accident at Chernobyl. Increased cardiovascular disease with increased frequency of heart attacks and ischemic disease are evident. Average life expectancy is accordingly reduced. Diseases of the central nervous system in both children and adults are cause for concern. The incidence of eye problems, particularly cataracts, has increased sharply. Causes for alarm are complications of pregnancy and the state of health of children born to so-called “liquidators” (Chernobyl’s cleanup workers) and evacuees from zones of high radionuclide contamination.
Against the background of such persuasive data, some defenders of atomic energy look specious as they deny the obvious negative effects of radiation upon populations. In fact, their reactions include almost complete refusal to fund medical and biological studies, even liquidating government bodies that were in charge of the “affairs of Chernobyl.” Under pressure from the nuclear lobby, officials have also diverted scientific personnel away from studying the problems caused by Chernobyl.
Rapid progress in biology and medicine is a source of hope in finding ways to prevent many diseases caused by exposure to chronic nuclear radiation, and this research will advance much more quickly if it is carried out against the background of experience that Ukrainian, Belarussian, and Russian scientists and physicians gained after the Chernobyl catastrophe. It would be very wrong to neglect the opportunities that are open to us today. We must look toward the day that unbiased objectivity will win out and lead to unqualified support for efforts to determine the influence of the Chernobyl catastrophe on the health of people and biodiversity and shape our approach to future technological progress and general moral attitudes. We must hope and trust that this will happen.
The present volume probably provides the largest and most complete collection of data concerning the negative consequences of Chernobyl on the health of people and on the environment. Information in this volume shows that these consequences do not decrease, but, in fact, are increasing and will continue to do so into the future. The main conclusion of the book is that it is impossible and wrong “to forget Chernobyl.” Over the next several future generations the health of people and of nature will continue to be adversely impacted.

PROF. DR. BIOL. DIMITRO M. GRODZINSKY
Chairman, Department of General Biology,
Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences,
Chairman, Ukrainian National Commission on Radiation Protection

 

Introduction: The Difficult Truth
about Chernobyl


Alexey V. Nesterenko,
a Vassily B. Nesterenko,a

and Alexey V. Yablokov b
a Institute of Radiation Safety (BELRAD), Minsk, Belarus
b Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia


For millions of people on this planet, the explosion of the fourth reactor of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant on April 26, 1986 divided life into two parts: before and after. The Chernobyl catastrophe was the occasion for technological adventurism and heroism on the part of the “liquidators,” the personnel who worked at the site attempting to contain the escaping radiation, and, in our view, for cowardice on the part of people in public life who were afraid to warn the population of the unimaginable threat to innocent victims. Chernobyl has become synonymous with human suffering and has brought new words into our lives — Chernobyl liquidators, children of Chernobyl, Chernobyl AIDs, Chernobyl contamination, Chernobyl heart, Chernobyl dust, and Chernobyl collar (thyroid disease), etc.
For the past 23 years it has been clear that there is a danger greater than nuclear weapons concealed within nuclear power. Emissions from this one reactor exceeded a hundredfold the radioactive contamination of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No citizen of any country can be assured that he or she can be protected from radioactive contamination. One nuclear reactor can pollute half the globe. Chernobyl fallout covered the entire Northern Hemisphere.
The questions persist: How many radionuclides spread over the world? How much radiation is still stored inside the sarcophagus, the dome that covers the reactor? No one knows for certain, but the estimates vary from 50 × 106 Ci, or 4–5% of the total radionuclides released from the reactor, to the reactor being essentially empty and more than 10 × 109 Ci dispersed over the globe (Chapter I.1). It is not known how many liquidators ultimately took part in the mitigation; a directive from the USSR Ministry of Defense, dated June 9, 1989, mandated secrecy (Chapter II.3).
In April 2005, prior to the 20th anniversary of the catastrophe, the Third Chernobyl Forum Meeting was held in Vienna. Forum experts included representatives from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), the World Health Organization (WHO), and other individuals from the United Nations, the World Bank, and governmental organizations from Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. The result was a three-volume report presented in September 2005 (IAEA, 2005; UNDP, 2002; WHO, 2006; for the latest short version see IAEA, 2006).
The basic conclusion of the report’s medical volume is that 9,000 victims died or developed radiogenic cancers, but given the background of spontaneous cancers, “it will be difficult to determine the exact cause of the deaths.” Some 4,000 children were operated on for thyroid cancer. In the contaminated areas, cataracts were increasingly seen in liquidators and children. Some believe that poverty, feelings of victimization, and fatalism, which are widespread among the population of the contaminated areas, are more dangerous than the radioactive contamination. Those experts, some of whom were associated with the nuclear industry, concluded that as a whole, the adverse consequences for the health of the people were not as significant as previously thought.
An opposing position was voiced by Secretary-General Kofi Annan:

Chernobyl is a word we would all like to erase from our memory. But more than seven million of our fellow human beings do not have the luxury of forgetting. They are still suffering, everyday, as a result of what happened . . .The exact number of victims can never be known. But three million children demanding treatment until 2016 and earlier represents the number of those who can be seriously ill . . . their future life will be deformed by it, as well as their childhood. Many will die prematurely.
(AP, 2000)

No fewer than three billion persons inhabit areas contaminated by Chernobyl’s radionuclides.
More than 50% of the surface of 13 European countries and 30% of eight other countries have been contaminated by Chernobyl fallout (Chapter I.1). Given biological and statistical laws the adverse effects in these areas will be apparent for many generations.
Soon after the catastrophe, concerned doctors observed a significant increase in diseases in the contaminated areas and demanded help. The experts involved with the nuclear industry and highly placed tribunals declared that there is no “statistically authentic” proof of Chernobyl radiation, but in the 10 years immediately following the catastrophe, official documents recognized that the number of thyroid cancers grew “unexpectedly.” Prior to 1985 more than 80% of children in the Chernobyl territories of Belarus, Ukraine, and European Russia were healthy; today fewer than 20% are well. In the heavily contaminated areas it is difficult to find one healthy child (Chapter II.4).
We believe it is unreasonable to attribute the increased occurrence of disease in the contaminated territories to screening or socioeconomic factors because the only variable is radioactive loading. Among the terrible consequences of Chernobyl radiation are malignant neoplasms and brain damage, especially during intrauterine development (Chapter II.6).
Why are the assessments of experts so different?
There are several reasons, including that some experts believe that any conclusions about radiation-based disease requires a correlation between an illness and the received dose of radioactivity. We believe this is an impossibility because no measurements were taken in the first few days. Initial levels could have been a thousand times higher than the ones ultimately measured several weeks and months later. It is also impossible to calculate variable and “hot spot” deposition of nuclides or to measure the contribution of all of the isotopes, such as Cs, I, Sr, Pu, and others, or to measure the kinds and total amount of radionuclides that a particular individual ingested from food and water.
A second reason is that some experts believe the only way to make conclusions is to calculate the effect of radiation based upon the total radiation, as was done for those exposed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For the first 4 years after the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, research was forbidden. During that time more than 100,000 of the weakest died.Asimilar pattern emerged after Chernobyl. However, theUSSR authorities officially forbade doctors from connecting diseases with radiation and, like the Japanese experience, all data were classified for the first 3 years (Chapter II.3).
In independent investigations scientists have compared the health of individuals in various territories that are identical in terms of ethnic, social, and economic characteristics and differ only in the intensity of their exposure to radiation. It is scientifically valid to compare specific groups over time (a longitudinal study), and such comparisons have unequivocally attributed differences in health outcomes to Chernobyl fallout (Chapter II.3).
This volume is an attempt to determine and document the true scale of the consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe...

 


Interview - Dr. Alexey Yablokov - Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe (YouTube), Caption "Interview with Dr. Alexey Yablokov co-author of "Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment" recorded March 27, 2011. Dr. Alexey Yablokov is a prominent Russian scientist, environmentalist, former member of the USSR parliament, and environmental advisor to former Russian President Boris Yeltsin and the Gorbachev administration. Dr. Yablokov has been a leader in efforts to reveal conservation and pollution challenges in Russia such as illegal whaling and radiation contamination, particularly in marine ecosystems and the biology of marine mammals."

 

1. Chernobyl Contamination through
Time and Space

Alexey V. Yablokov and Vassily B. Nesterenko


Radioactive contamination from the Chernobyl meltdown spread over 40% of Europe (including Austria, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, Romania, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, France, Greece, Iceland, Slovenia) and wide territories in Asia (including Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, Emirates, China), northern Africa, and North America. Nearly 400 million people resided in territories that were contaminated with radioactivity at a level higher than 4 kBq/m2 (0.11 Ci/km2) from April to July 1986. Nearly 5 million people (including, more than 1 million children) still live with dangerous levels of radioactive contamination in Belarus, Ukraine, and European Russia. Claims that the Chernobyl radioactive fallout adds “only 2%” to the global radioactive background overshadows the fact that many affected territories had previously dangerously high levels of radiation. Even if the current level is low, there was high irradiation in the first days and weeks after the Chernobyl catastrophe. There is no reasonable explanation for the fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organization (Chernobyl Forum, 2005) have completely neglected the consequences of radioactive contamination in other countries, which received more than 50% of the Chernobyl radionuclides, and addressed concerns only in Belarus, Ukraine, and European Russia.


To fully understand the consequences of Chernobyl it is necessary to appreciate the scale of the disaster. Clouds of radiation reached heights between 1,500 and 10,000 m and spread around the globe, leaving deposits of radionuclides and radioactive debris, primarily in the Northern Hemisphere (Figure 1.1).
There has been some dispute over the years as to the volume of radionuclides released when reactor number four of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (ChNPP) exploded, and it is critical to be aware of the fact that there continue to be emissions. That release, even without taking the gaseous radionuclides into account, was many hundreds of millions of curies, a quantity hundreds of times larger than the fallout from the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

1.1. Radioactive Contamination

Immediately after the explosion, and even now, many articles report levels of radioactivity calculated by the density of the contamination — Ci/km2 (Bq/m2). While these levels form a basis for further calculations of collective and individual doses, as shown below, such an approach is not completely valid as it does not take into account either the ecological or the physical aspects of radioactive contamination, nor does it provide exact calculations of received doses (see Chapter II.2).

1.2. Geographical Features of Contamination

Immediately after the NPP explosion, attempts began to reconstruct the radioactive fallout picture to determine radioactive fallout distribution levels using hydrometeorological data (wind direction, rainfall, etc.) for each subsequent day and include emissions of fuel particles, aerosol particles, and radioactive gases from the destroyed reactor (see, e.g., Izrael, 1990; Borzylov, 1991; UNSCEAR, 2000; Fairlie and Sumner, 2006). Geographic distribution of Chernobyl radionuclides around the globe is shown in Figure 1.2. It is clear that most of the gaseous–aerosol radionuclides settled outside of Belarus, Ukraine, and European Russia (Figure 1.3, Table 1.1).


1.2.1. Europe

According to other data (Fairlie and Sumner, 2006, table 3.6, cc. 48 & 49) Europe received from about 68 to 89% of the gaseous–aerosol radionuclides from the Chernobyl clouds in a distribution that was extremely nonuniform. From April 26 through May 5, 1986, the winds around Chernobyl varied by 360 degrees, so the radioactive emissions from the mix of radionuclides varied from day to day and covered an enormous territory (Figures 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6).
Figure 1.7 is a reconstruction of only one of the Chernobyl clouds (corresponding to No. 2 on Figure 1.4). It is important to understand that radionuclide emissions from the burning reactor continued until the middle of May.
The daily emissions formed several radioactive clouds, and each such cloud had its own radionuclide composition and geography. We do not have accurate instrumental data for Chernobyl radionuclide contamination for all of Europe. Calculated data (averaged for 1 km2) were published only for Cs-137 and Pu, while Cs-137 contaminated all of the European countries, without exception (Table 1.2).
The data in Table 1.2 refer only to the distribution of Cs-137, but there were significant quantities of many other radionuclides in the form of gases, aerosols, and “hot particles” (see below) widely dispersed across Europe in the first weeks and months following the explosion: Cs-134, I-131, Sr-90, Te-132, and I-132. For example, in May 1986 in Wales and in the Cumbria area of England rainwater contained up to 345 Bq/liter of I-132 and 150 Bq/liter Cs- 134 (Busby, 1995). The effective doses in May 1986 for Chernobyl radionuclides in England were: Cs-134 and Cs-137, 27 mSv; I-131, 6 mSv; Sr-90, 0.9 mSv (Smith et al. (2000).

 

 

If the distribution of radioactivity for Cs-134 and Cs-137 corresponds to their ratio in emissions (i.e., 48 and 85 PBq, or 36 and 64%, respectively), then the proportional distribution of the main Chernobyl radionuclides in England should be as follows [Dreicer et al., 1996; Fairlie and Sumner, 2006, Table 3.8(i)]:

 
mSv %
%
Cs-137
17.3
51.0
Cs-134
9.7
28.6
I-131
6.0
17.7
Sr-90
0.9
2.7
Total
33.9
100

If the proportional distribution of Chernobyl radionuclides in England is similar to that of other European countries (i.e., 70 PBq Cs-137 made up 51% of all the radionuclide fallout), one can assume that the total amount of radioactive
fallout in Europe is nearly 137 PBq:

 
mSv %
%
Cs-137
51.0
70
Cs-134
28.6
39
I-131
17.7
24
Sr-90
2.7
3.7
Total
100
138.7

Twenty years after the Chernobyl catastrophe, many areas in Europe remain contaminated. For example, in 2006, according to Great Britain’s Ministry of Health 355 farms in Wales, 11 in Scotland, and 9 in England, pasturing more than 200,000 sheep, continue to be dangerously contaminated with Cs-137 (McSmith, 2006).

1.2.1.1. Belarus

Practically the entire country of Belarus was covered by the Chernobyl cloud. I-131, I-132, and Te-132 radioisotope fallout covered the entire country (Figures 1.8 through 1.12). A maximum level of I-131 contamination of 600 Ci/km2 was measured in the Svetlovichi village in Gomel Province in May 1986.
Some 23% of the area of Belarus (47,000 km2) was contaminated by Cs-137 at a level higher than 1 Ci/km2 (Nesterenko, 1996; Tsalko, 2005). Until 2004, the density of Cs- 137 contamination exceeded 37 kBq/m2 in 41,100 km2 (Figure 1.10).

 

 

Maximum levels of Cs-137 contamination were 475 Ci/km2 in the village of Zales’ye, Braginsk District, and 500 Ci/km2 in the village of Dovliady and the Narovlja District of Gomel Province. The maximum radioactive contamination in the soil found in 1993 in the village of Tchudyany, Mogilev District, was 5,402 kBq/m2 or 145 Ci/km2, exceeding the precatastrophe level by a factor of 3,500 (Il’yazov, 2002).

Contamination from Sr-90 has a more local character than that of Cs-137. Some 10% of the area of Belarus has levels of Sr-90 soil contamination above 5.5 kBq/m2, covering an area of 21,100 km2 (Figure 1.11). Soil contaminated by Pu-238, Pu-239, and Pu-240 at levels higher than 0.37 kBq/m2 was found in 4,000 km2, or nearly 2% of the country (Konoplya et al., 2006; Figure 1.12). As a whole, more than 18,000 km2 of agricultural land or 22% of Belarus farmland is heavily contaminated. Of that, an area of 2,640 km2 cannot be used for agriculture and the 1,300-km2 Polessk state radioactive reserve near the Chernobyl NPP is forever excluded from any economic activity owing to contamination by long half-life isotopes.

1.2.1.2. Ukraine

Chernobyl radionuclides have contaminated more than a quarter of Ukraine, with Cs-137 levels higher than 1 Ci/km2 in 4.8% of the country (Figure 1.13).

1.2.1.3. European Russia

Until 1992 contamination in European Russia was found in parts of 19 Russian provinces (Table 1.3), so consideration must be given to serious contamination in the Asian part of Russia as well.

1.2.1.4. Other European Countries

The level of Chernobyl’s Cs-137 contamination in each European country is shown in Table 1.2; some additional comments follow.
1. BULGARIA. The primary Chernobyl radionuclides reached Bulgaria on May 1–10, 1986. There were two peaks of fallout: May 1 and 9 (Pourchet et al., 1998).
2. FINLAND. Chernobyl fallout clouds over southern Finland reached peak concentrations between 15:10 and 22:10 hours on April 28, 1986.
3. FRANCE. Official Service Central de Protection Contre les Radiations Ionisantes initially denied that the radioactive cloud had passed over France. This is contrary to the finding that a significant part of the country, especially the alpine regions, were contaminated on April 29 and 30, 1986 (see Figure 1.5).

 

4. GERMANY. The scale of Chernobyl’s contamination in Germany is reflected in the fact that several shipments of powdered milk to Africawere returned toWest Germany because they were dangerously contaminated with radiation (Brooke, 1988).
5. GREECE. Greece reported significant fallout of several Chernobyl radionuclidesincluding: Ag-110 m, Cs-137, and Sb-125 (Papastefanou et al., 1988a,b; see Figure 1.16). Noting unusual contamination (see Section 1.4.1 below) is important, but it is also evidence of the inadequacy of the available data relevant to Chernobyl contamination: where are comparable data about radioactive Ag-110 m contamination in other countries? Do data not exist because no one has compiled it or because this radioactive Ag contaminated only Greece, Italy, and Scotland (Boccolini et al., 1988; Martin et al., 1988)?

6. ITALY. There were several radioactive plumes, but the main Chernobyl fallout cloud passed over northern Italy on May 5, 1986. Some 97% of the total deposition in Italy occurred between April 30 and May 7 (Spezzano and Giacomelli, 1990).
7. POLAND. The main plume passed over Poland around April 30, 1986, with Te-122 as the primary radionuclide. Numerous “hot particles” were detected with a prevalence of Ru-103 and Ru-106 (Broda, 1987). In June 1987, a 1,600-ton shipment of powdered milk from Poland to Bangladesh showed unacceptably high levels of radioactivity (Mydans, 1987).
8. SCOTLAND. The main radioactive plume passed Scotland between 21:00 and 23:00 hours on May 3, 1986, with the largest concentrations of Te-132, I-132, and I-131 (Martin et al., 1988).
9. SWEDEN. The peak concentration of Cs-137 in air occurred on April 28, 1986, but 99% of Chernobyl-derived radionuclides were deposited in Sweden during a single period of rain on May 8, 1986. Patterns of fallout related to local weather conditions: Cs-137 dominated on the coast of southern Norrland, I- 131 in the north and south, and Te-132 in the central Upland area (Kresten and Chyssler, 1989; Mattson and Vesanen, 1988; Mellander, 1987).

[Ed. Note: Figures 1.10 and 1.11 ommitted]

10. UNITED KINGDOM. Official reports grossly underestimated the Chernobyl-derived fallout and its radiological impact on the United Kingdom. Cs-137 deposition in Cumbria was up to 40 times higher than originally reported by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (RADNET, 2008; Sanderson and Scott, 1989).
11. YUGOSLAVIA. The main radioactive fallout occurred on May 3–5, 1986 (Juznic and Fedina, 1987).

1.2.2. Asia

Up to 10% of all the Chernobyl radionuclides fell on Asia, including, basically, some tens of PBq of the first,most powerful emissions on the first days of the catastrophe. Huge areas of Asian Russia (Siberia, Far East), East and CentralChina (Figure 1.14), and the Asian part of Turkey were highly contaminated. Chernobyl fallout was noted in central Asia (Imamniyazova, 2001) and in Japan (Imanaka, 1999;
Figure 1.14).
1. TRANS-CAUCASUS. Western Georgia was especially heavily contaminated. The average soil radioactivity due to Cs-137 from 1995 to 2005 was 530 Bq/kg, and that figure was twice as high in East Georgia. The combined activity of Cs-137 and Sr-90 reached 1,500 Bq/kg (Chankseliany, 2006; Chankseliany et al., 2006).
2. JAPAN. Twenty Chernobyl radionuclides were detected in two plumes in early and late May 1986, with the highest level in northwestern Japan and a maximum concentration on May 5. Chernobyl-derived stratospheric fallout continued until the end of 1988 (Higuchi et al., 1988; Imanaka and Koide, 1986).
There is still a high probability of small but dangerously radioactive areas in the Caucasus; Trans-Caucasia; lower, central, and middle Asia (including Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan);China; and the Persian Gulf area, continuing until the present time.

1.2.3. North America

Areas in North America were contaminated from the first, most powerful explosion, which lifted a cloud of radionuclides to a height of more than 10 km. Some 1% of all Chernobyl radionuclides—nearly several PBq—fell on North America.
1. CANADA. There were three waves of Chernobyl airborne radioactivity over eastern Canada composed of: Be-7, Fe-59, Nb-95, Zr-95, Ru-103, Ru-106, I-131, La-140, Ce-141, Ce-144, Mn-54, Co-60, Zn-65, Ba-140, and Cs-137. The fallout of May 6 and 14 arrived via the Arctic, and that of May 25 and 26 via the Pacific (Roy et al., 1988). By the official “Environmental Radioactivity in Canada” report for 1986 (RADNET, 2008) Chernobyl Ru-103, Ru-106, Cs-134, and Cs-137 were consistently measurable until about mid-June.
2. UNITED STATES. The Chernobyl plumes crossed the Arctic within the lower troposphere and the Pacific Ocean within the mid-troposphere, respectively. Chernobyl isotopes of Ru-103, Ru-106, Ba-140, La-140, Zr-95, Mo-95, Ce-141, Ce-144, Cs-134, Cs- 136, Cs-137, I-132, and Zr-95 were detected in Alaska, Oregon, Idaho, New Jersey, New York, Florida, Hawaii, and other states (Table 1.4).
An Associated Press release on May 15, 1986, noted “Officials in Oregon have warned that those who use rainwater for drinking should use other sources of water for some time”...

 

 

 

 

[Editor's Note: I am skipping part of this Chapter, not because it is not important, but because I am constrained for space and a major purpose of this extract is to provide enough of a teaser to motivate the reader to study the pdf original in its entirety. ]

1.4. Ecological Features of Contamination

The three most important factors in connection with the Chernobyl contamination for nature and public health are: spotty / uneven deposits of contamination, the impact of “hot particles,” and bioaccumulation of radionuclides (also see Chapter III).

 

1.4.1. Uneven/Spotty Contamination

Until now the uneven/spotty distribution of the Chernobyl radioactive fallout has attracted too little attention. Aerogamma studies, upon which most maps of contamination are based, give only average values of radioactivity for 200–400 m of a route, so small, local, highly radioactive “hot spots” can exist without being marked. The character of actual contamination of an area is shown on Figure 1.15. As can be seen, a distance of 10 m can make a sharp difference in radionuclide concentrations.

 

“Public health services of the French department Vosges found out that a hog hit by one of local hunters ‘was glowing.’ Experts, armed with supermodern equipment, conveyed a message even more disturbing: practically the entire mountain where the dead animal had just run is radioactive at a level from 12,000 to 24,000 Bq/m2. For comparison, the European norm is 600 Bq/m2. It was remembered that radioactive mushrooms were found in these forests last autumn. The level of Cs-137 in chanterelles, boleros and stalks of mushrooms exceeded the norm by approximately forty times . . .” (Chykin, 1997)

 

There is still uncertainty in regard to contamination not only by Cs-137 and Sr-90, but also by other radionuclides, including beta and alpha emitters. Detailed mapping of territories for the varying spectra of radioactive contamination could not be done owing to the impossibility of fast remote detection of beta and alpha radionuclides.
Typical Chernobyl hot spots measure tens to hundreds of meters across and have levels of radioactivity ten times higher than the surrounding areas. The concentration density of Cs-137 can have several different values even within the limits of the nutrient area of a single tree (Krasnov et al., 1997). In Poland, Ru-106 was the predominant hot spot nuclide in 1986, although a few hot spots were due to Ba-140 or La-140 (Rich, 1986).
Figure 1.16. shows distinct large-scale spotty radioactive distribution of Sb, Cs, and Ag in areas of continental Greece.

1.4.2. Problem of “Hot Particles”

A fundamental complexity in estimating the levels of Chernobyl radioactive contamination is the problem of so-called “hot particles” or “Chernobyl dust.”When the reactor exploded, it expelled not only gases and aerosols (the products of splitting of U (Cs-137, Sr-90, Pu, etc.), but also particles of U fuel melted together with other radionuclides — firm hot particles. Near the Chernobyl NPP, heavy large particles of U and Pu dropped out. Areas of Hungary, Germany, Finland, Poland, Bulgaria, and otherEuropean countries sawhot particles with an average size of about 15 µm. Their activity mostly was determined to be (UNSCEAR, 2000) Zr-95 (half-life 35.1 days), La-140 (1.68 days), and Ce-144 (284 days). Some hot particles included beta-emitting radionuclides such as Ru-103 and Ru-106 (39.3 and 368 days, respectively) and Ba-140 (12.7 days). Particles with volatile elements that included I-131, Te-132, Cs-137, and Sb-126 (12.4 days) spread over thousands of kilometers. “Liquid hot particles” were formed when radionuclides became concentrated in raindrops:

 

 

“Hot particles” were found in new apartment houses in Kiev that were to be populated in the autumn of 1986. In April andMay they stood without roofs or windows, so they absorbed a lot of a radioactive dust, which we found in concrete plates of walls and ceilings, in the carpenter’s room, under plastic covers on a floor, etc. For the most part these houses are occupied by staff of the Chernobyl atomic power station. While planning occupancy the special dosimeter commands I developed (I then was the deputy chief engineer of Chernobyl NPP on radiation safety and was responsible for the personnel in areas found to be contaminated) carried out a radiation check on the apartments. As a result of thesemeasurements I sent a report to the Governmental Commission advising of the inadmissibility of inhabiting these “dirty” apartments. The sanitation service of the Kiev municipality . . . answered with a dishonest letter in which it agreed that there was radioactivity in these apartments, but explained it away as dirt that was brought in by tenants.” (Karpan, 2007 by permission)

 


Radioactivity of individual hot particles reached 10 kBq.When absorbed into the body (with water, food, or inhaled air), such particles generate high doses of radiation even if an individual is in areas of low contamination. Fine particles (smaller than 1 µm) easily penetrate the lungs, whereas larger ones (20–40 µm) are concentrated primarily in the upper respiratory system (Khruch et al., 1988; Ivanov et al., 1990; IAEA, 1994). Studies concerning the peculiarities of the formation and disintegration of hot particles, their properties, and their impact on the health of humans and other living organisms are meager and totally inadequate.

1.5. Changes in the Radionuclide Dose Spectrum

To understand the impact of Chernobyl contamination on public health and the environment it is necessary to consider the essential changes in the radionuclide spectrum during of the first days, weeks, months, and decades after the Chernobyl catastrophe. The maximum level of activity from Chernobyl’s fallout in the first days and weeks, which was due mostly to short-lived radionuclides, exceeded background levels by more than 10,000-fold (Krishev and Ryazantsev, 2000; and many others). Today radioactive contamination is only a small part of all the radiation emitted during the catastrophe. Based on data from Sweden and Finland, ratios of Cs-137 and other radionuclide fallout in the first days and weeks allows for reconstruction of the relative value of the various nuclides that make up the total external dose (Figure 1.17).

[Ed. Note: "Figure 1.16 continued" not provided]

During the first days after the explosion the share of total external radiation due to Cs-137 did not exceed 4%, but the level of radiation from I-131, I-133, Te-129, Te-132, and several other radionuclides was hundreds of times higher. Within the succeeding months and the first year after the explosion the major external radiation was due to isotopes of Ce-141, Ce- 144, Ru-103, Ru-106, Zr-95, Ni-95, Cs-136, and Np-239. Since 1987, most external radiation levels have been defined by Cs-137, Sr-90, and Pu. Today these radionuclides, which are found mostly in soil, seriously impact agricultural production (for details see Chapters III.9 and IV.13).
Timescales of radiation contamination can be determined by an analysis of tooth enamel. Such analyses were conducted by experts with the German group “Physicians of theWorld for the Prevention of Nuclear War.” They tested the teeth of 6,000 children and found that children born soon after the Chernobyl catastrophe had 10 times more Sr-90 in their teeth compared with children born in 1983 (Ecologist, 2000).

 

Problem of Americium-241. The powerful alpha radiation emitter Am-241, formed as a result of the natural disintegration of Pu-241, is a very important factor in the increasing levels of contamination in many areas located up to 1,000 km from the Chernobyl NPP. The territory contaminated by Pu today, where the level of alpha radiation is usually low, will again become dangerous as a result of the future disintegration of Pu-241 to Am-241 in the ensuing tens and even hundreds of years (see also Chapter III.9). An additional danger of Am-241 is its higher solubility and consequent mobility into ecosystems compared with Pu.

1.6. Lead Contamination

During operations to quench the fires in the fourth reactor of the Chernobyl NPP, helicopters dumped 2,400 tons of Pb into the reactor (Samushia et al., 2007; UNSCEAR, 2000); according to other data, the figure was 6,720 tons (Nesterenko, 1997). During several subsequent days, a significant part of the Pb was spewed out into the atmosphere as a result of its fusion, boiling, and sublimation in the burning reactor. Moreover, Pb poisoning is dangerous in itself, causing, for example, retardation in children (Ziegel and Ziegel, 1993; and many others).

  1. Blood Pb levels in both children and adults in Belarus have noticeably increased over the last years (Rolevich et al., 1996). In the Brest Province of Belarus, for example, of 213 children studied, the level of Pb was 0.109 ± 0.007 mg/liter, and about half of these children had levels of 0.188 ± 0.003 mg/liter (Petrova et al., 1996), whereas the World Health Organization (WHO) normfor children is no more than 0.001 mg/liter.
  2. In Ukraine in the Poles’e District of Kiev Province, levels of Pb in the air breathed by operators of agricultural machinery was up to 10 times or more, exceeding maximum permissible concentrations. Increased levels of Pb were apparent in the soil and atmosphere and in the urine and the hair of adults and children in Kiev soon after the explosion (Bar’yakhtar, 1995).
  3. Pb contamination added to radiation causes harm to living organisms (Petin and Synsynys, 1998). Ionizing radiation causes biochemical oxidation of free radicals in cells. Under the influence of heavy metals (such as Pb) these reactions proceed especially intensively. Belarussian children contaminated with both Cs-137 and Pb have an increased frequency of atrophic gastritis (Gres and Polyakova, 1997).


1.7. Evaluation of Chernobyl’s Population Doses

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and WHO (Chernobyl Forum, 2005) estimated a collective dose for Belarus, Ukraine, and European Russia as 55,000 persons/Sv. By other more grounded estimates (see Fairlie and Sumner, 2006) this collective dose is 216,000 – 326,000 persons/Sv (or even 514,000 persons/ Sv only for Belarus; National Belarussian Report, 2006). The worldwide collective dose from the Chernobyl catastrophe is estimated at 600,000 – 930,000 persons/Sv (Table 1.6). However, it is now clear that these figures for collective doses are considerably underestimated.

1.8. How Many People Were and Will Be Exposed to Chernobyl’s Contamination?

The first official forecasts regarding the health impact of the Chernobyl catastrophe included only several additional cases of cancer over a period of some 10 years. In 20 years it has become clear that no fewer than 8 million inhabitants of Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia have been adversely affected (Table 1.7).
One must understand that in areas contaminated above 1Ci/km2 (a level that undoubtedly has statistical impact on public health) there are no fewer than 1 million children, and evacuees and liquidators have had no fewer than 450,000 children. It is possible to estimate the number of people living in areas subject to Chernobyl fallout all over the world. Some 40% of Europe has been exposed to Chernobyl’s Cs-137 at a level 4–40 kBq/m2 (0.11–1.08 Ci/km2; see Table 1.2). Assuming that about 35% of the European population lives in this territory (where radionuclides fell on sparsely populated mountain areas) and counting the total European population at the end of the 1980s, we can calculate that nearly 550 million people are contaminated. It is possible to consider that about 190 million Europeans live in noticeably contaminated areas, and nearly 15 million in the areas where the Cs-137 contamination is higher than 40 kBq/m2 (1.08 Ci/km2).
Chernobyl fallout contaminated about 8% of Asia, 6% of Africa, and 0.6% of North America, so by similar reasoning it appears that outside of Europe the total number of individuals living in areas contaminated by Chernobyl Cs-137 at a level up to 40 kBq/m2 could reach nearly 200 million (Table 1.8).

 

 

 

Certainly, the calculated figures in Table 1.8 are of limited accuracy. The true number of people living in 1986 in areas outside of Europe with noticeable Chernobyl contamination can be no fewer than 150 million and no more than 230 million. This uncertainty is caused, on the one hand, by calculations that do not include several short-lived radionuclides, such as I-131, I-133, Te-132, and some others, which result in much higher levels of radiation than that due to Cs-137. These include Cl-36 and Te-99 with half-lives of nearly 30,000 years and more than 21,000 years, respectively (Fairlie and Sumner, 2006). The latter isotopes cause very low levels of radiation, but it will persist for many millennia. On the other hand, these calculations are based on a uniform distribution of population, which is not a legitimate assumption. In total, in 1986 nearly 400 million individuals (nearly 205 million in Europe and 200 million outside Europe) were exposed to radioactive contamination at a level of 4 kBq/m2 (0.1 Ci/km2).
Other calculations of populations exposed to Chernobyl radiation have been based on the total collective dose. According to one such calculation (Table 1.9) the number of people who were exposed to additional radiation at a level higher than 2.5 × 10-2 mSv might be more than 4.7 billion and at a level of higher than 0.4 mSv more than 605 million.

1.9. Conclusion

Most of the Chernobyl radionuclides (up to 57%) fell outside of the former USSR and caused noticeable radioactive contamination over a large area of the world — practically the entire Northern Hemisphere.

 

 

Declarations that Chernobyl radioactivity adds only 2% to the natural radioactive background on the surface of the globe obscures the facts because this contamination exceeded the natural background in vast areas, and in 1986 up to 600 million men, women, and children lived in territories contaminated by Chernobyl radionuclides at dangerous levels of more than 0.1 Ci/km2.
Chernobyl radioactive contamination is both dynamic and long term. The dynamic is delineated as follows: First is the natural disintegration of radionuclides so that levels of radioactive contamination in the first days and weeks after the catastrophe were thousands of times higher than those recorded 2 to 3 years later. Second is the active redistribution of radionuclides in ecosystems (for details see Chapter III). Third is the contamination that will exist beyond the foreseeable future— not less than 300 years for Cs-137 and Sr-90, more than 200,000 years for Pu, and several thousands of years for Am-241. From the perspective of the 23 years that have passed since the Chernobyl catastrophe, it is clear that tens ofmillions of people, not only in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia, butworldwide, will live under measurable chronic radioactive contamination for many decades. Even if the level of external irradiation decreases in some areas, very serious contamination in the first days and weeks after the explosion together with decades of additional and changing conditions of radioactivity will have an inevitable negative impact on public health and nature...

 


Chernobyl: A Million Casualties (YouTube) 24 March 2011. Interview with Janette Sherman, M.D., toxicologist and contributing editor of the book Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment.

 

 

Chapter II. Consequences of the Chernobyl
Catastrophe for Public Health

Alexey B. Nesterenko,a Vassily B. Nesterenko,a,b
and Alexey V. Yablokov c

aInstitute of Radiation Safety (BELRAD), Minsk, Belarus
cRussian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia
bDeceased
Key words: Chernobyl; secrecy; irradiation; health statistics

 

2. Chernobyl’s Public Health Consequences
Some Methodological Problems


Alexey V. Yablokov


Problems complicating a full assessment of the effects from Chernobyl included official secrecy and falsification of medical records by the USSR for the first 3.5 years after the catastrophe and the lack of reliable medical statistics in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. Official data concerning the thousands of cleanup workers (Chernobyl liquidators) who worked to control the emissions are especially difficult to reconstruct. Using criteria demanded by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) resulted in marked underestimates of the number of fatalities and the extent and degree of sickness among those exposed to radioactive fallout from Chernobyl. Data on exposures were absent or grossly inadequate, while mounting indications of adverse effects became more and more apparent. Using objective information collected by scientists in the affected areas — comparisons of morbidity and mortality in territories characterized by identical physiography, demography, and economy, which differed only in the levels and spectra of radioactive contamination — revealed significant abnormalities associated with irradiation, unrelated to age or sex (e.g., stable chromosomal aberrations), as well as other genetic and nongenetic pathologies.

 

The first official forecasts of the catastrophic health consequences of the Chernobyl meltdown noted only a limited number of additional cases of cancer over the first decades. Four years later, the same officials increased the number of foreseeable cancer cases to several hundred (Il’in et al., 1990), at a time when there were already 1,000 people suffering from Chernobyl-engendered thyroid cancer. Twenty years after the catastrophe, the official position of the Chernobyl Forum (2006) is that about 9,000 related deaths have occurred and some 200,000 people have illnesses caused by the catastrophe.
A more accurate number estimates nearly 400 million human beings have been exposed to Chernobyl’s radioactive fallout and, for many generations, they and their descendants will suffer the devastating consequences. Globally, adverse effects on public health will require special studies continuing far into the future. This review concerns the health of the populations in the European part of the former USSR (primarily, Ukraine, Belarus, and European Russia), for which a very large body of scientific literature has been published of which but little is known in the Western world.
The aim of the present volume is not to present an exhaustive analysis of all available facts concerning Chernobyl’s disastrous effects — analyzing all of the known effects of the Chernobyl catastrophe would fill many full-size monographs — but rather to elucidate the known scale and spectrum of its consequences.

2.1. Difficulties in Obtaining Objective Data on the Catastrophe’s Impact

For both subjective and objective reasons, it is very difficult to draw a complete picture of Chernobyl’s influence on public health.
The subjective reasons include:

  1. The official secrecy that the USSR imposed on Chernobyl’s public health data in the first days after themeltdown, which continued for more than 3 years—until May 23, 1989, when the ban was lifted. During those 3 years an unknown number of people died from early leukosis. Secrecy was the norm not only in the USSR, but in other countries as well, including France, Great Britain, and even the United States. After the explosion, France’s official Service Central de Protection Contre les Radiations Ionisantes (SCPRI) denied that the radioactive cloud had passed over France (CRIIRAD, 2002) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture failed to disclose that dangerous levels of Chernobyl radionuclides had been found in imported foods in 1987 and 1988. The first public announcement of these contaminations was not made until 8 years later (RADNET, 2008, Sect. 6 and Sect. 9, part 4).
  2. The USSR’s official irreversible and intentional falsification of medical statistics for the first 3.5 years after the catastrophe.
  3. The lack of authentic medical statistics in the USSR and after its disintegration in 1991, as well as in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia, including health data for hundreds of thousands of people who left the contaminated territories.
  4. The expressed desire of national and international official organizations and the nuclear industry to minimize the consequences of the catastrophe.

 

 

The number of persons added to the Chernobyl state registers continues to grow, even during the most recent years, which casts doubt on the completeness and accuracy of documentation. Data about cancer mortality and morbidity are gathered from many and various sources and are coded without taking into account standard international principles . . . public health data connected to the Chernobyl accident are difficult to compare to official state of health statistics . . . (UNSCEAR, 2000,
Item 242, p. 49).

 

 

The situation of the liquidators is indicative. Their total number exceeds 800,000 (see Chapter I).Within the first years after the catastrophe it was officially forbidden to associate the diseases they were suffering from with radiation, and, accordingly, their morbidity data were irreversibly forged until 1989.

 

EXAMPLES OF OFFICIAL REQUIREMENTS THAT FALSIFIED LIQUIDATORS’ MORBIDITY DATA:
1. “. . . For specified persons hospitalized after exposure to ionizing radiation and having no signs or symptoms of acute radiation sickness at the time of release, the diagnosis shall be ‘vegetovascular dystonia.’” [From a letter from the USSR’s First DeputyMinister of Public Health O. Shchepin, May 21, 1986, # 02–6/83–6 to Ukrainian Ministry of Public Health (cit. by V. Boreiko, 1996, pp. 123–124).]
2. “. . . For workers involved in emergency activities who do not have signs or symptoms of acute radiation sickness, the diagnosis of vegetovascular dystonia is identical to no change in their state of health in connection with radiation (i.e., for all intents and purposes healthy vis-`a-vis radiation sickness). Thus the diagnosis does not exclude somatoneurological symptoms, including situational neurosis . . ..” [From a telegram of the Chief of the Third Main Administration of the USSR’s Ministry of Health, E. Shulzhenko, # “02 DSP”-1, dated January 4, 1987 (cit. by L. Kovalevskaya, 1995, p. 189).]
3. “(1) For remote consequences caused by ionizing radiation and a cause-and-effect relationship, it is necessary to consider: leukemia or leukosis 5–10 years after radiation in doses exceeding 50 rad. (2) The presence of acute somatic illness and activation of chronic disease in persons who were involved in liquidation and who do not have ARS (acute radiation sickness –Ed.), the effect of ionizing radiation should not be included as a causal relationship. (3) When issuing certificates of illness for persons involved in work on ChNPP who did not suffer ARS in point “10” do not mention participation in liquidation activities or the total dose of radiation that did not reach a degree of radiation sickness.” [From an explanatory note of the Central Military-Medical Commission of the USSR Ministry of Defense, # 205 dated July 8, 1987, directed by the Chief of 10thMMC Colonel V. Bakshutov to the military registration and enlistment offices (cit. by L. Kovalevskaya, 1995, p. 12).]

 

Data from the official Liquidators Registers in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus cannot be considered reliable because the status of “liquidator” conveyed numerous privileges. We do not know if an individual described as a “liquidator” was really directly exposed to radiation, and we do not know the number of individuals who were in the contaminated zone for only a brief time. At the same time, liquidators who served at the site and were not included in official registers are just now coming forward. Among them are the military men who participated in the Chernobyl operations but lack documentation concerning their participation (Mityunin, 2005). For example, among nearly 60,000 investigated military servicemen who participated in the clean-up operations in the Chernobyl zone, not one (!) had notice of an excess of the then-existing “normal” reading of 25 R on his military identity card. At the same time a survey of 1,100 male Ukrainian military clean-up workers revealed that 37% of them have clinical and hematological characteristics of radiation sickness, which means that these men received more than 25 R exposure (Kharchenko et al., 2001). It is not by chance that 15 years after the catastrophe up to 30% of Russian liquidators did not have radiation dose data on their official certificates (Zubovsky and Smirnova, 2000).
Officially it is admitted that “the full-size personal dosimeter control of liquidators in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (ChNPP) zone managed to be adjusted only for some months” (National Russian Report, 2001, p. 11). It was typical to use so-called “group dosimetry” and “group assessment.” Even official medical representatives recognize that a number of Russian liquidators could have received doses seven times (!) higher than 25 cGy, the level specified in the Russian state register (Il’in et al., 1995). Based on official data, this evidence makes the liquidators’ “official” dose/sickness correlation obsolete and unreliable.

 

 

TWO EXAMPLES OF CONCEALMENT OF TRUE DATA ON THE CATASTROPHE’S CONSEQUENCES

  1. “(4) To classify information on the accident. . . (8) To classify information on results of medical treatment. (9) To classify information on the degree of radioactive effects on the personnel who participated in the liquidation of the ChNPP accident consequences.” [From the order by the Chief of Third Main Administration of the USSR’s Ministry of Health E. Shulzhenko concerning
    reinforcing the secrecy surrounding the activities on liquidation of the consequences of the nuclear accident in ChNPP, #U-2617-S, June 27, 1986 (cit. by L. Kovalevskaya, 1995, p. 188).]
  2. "(2) The data on patients’ records related to the accident and accumulated inmedical establishments should have a ‘limited access’ status. And data generalized in regional andmunicipal sanitary control establishments, . . . on radioactive contamination of objects, environment (including food) that exceeds maximum permissible concentration is ‘classified’.” [From Order # 30-S by Minister of Health of Ukraine A. Romanenko on May 18, 1986, about reinforcing secrecy (cit. by N. Baranov’ska, 1996, p. 139).]

 

 

Comparison of the data received via individual biodosimetry methods (by the number of chromosomal aberrations and by electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) dosimetry) has shown that officially documented doses of radiation can be both over- and underestimated(Elyseeva, 1991; Vinnykov et al., 2002; Maznik et al., 2003; Chumak, 2006; and others). The Chernobyl literature widely admits that tens of thousands of the Chernobyl liquidators who worked in 1986–1987, were irradiated at levels of 110–130 mSv. Some individuals (and, accordingly, some groups) could have received doses considerably different than the average. All of the above indicates that from a strictly methodological point of view, it is impossible to correlate sickness among liquidators with the formally documented levels of radiation. Official data of thyroid-dosimetric and dosimetric certification in Ukraine were revised several times (Burlak et al., 2006). In addition to the subjective reasons noted above, there are at least two major objective reasons for the difficulty in establishing the true scale of the catastrophe’s impact on public health. The first impediment is determining the true radioactive impact on individuals and population groups, owing to the following factors:

  • Difficulty in reconstructing doses from the radionuclides released in the first days, weeks, and months after the catastrophe. Levels of radioisotopes such as I-133, I-135, Te-132, and a number of other radionuclides having short half-lives were initially hundreds and thousand of times higher than when Cs-137 levels were subsequently measured (see Chapter I for details). Many studies revealed that the rate of unstable and stable chromosome aberrations is much higher — by up to one to two orders of magnitude — than would be expected if the derived exposures were correct (Pflugbeil and Schmitz-Feuerhake, 2006).
  • Difficulty in calculating the influence of “hot particles” for different radionuclides owing to their physical and chemical properties.
  • Difficulty determining levels of external and internal radiation for the average person and/or group because “doses” were not directly measured and calculations were based on dubious assumptions. These assumptions included an average consumption of a set of foodstuffs by the “average” person, and an average level of external irradiation owing to each of the radionuclides. As an example, all official calculations of thyroid irradiation in Belarus were based on about 200,000 measurements done in May–June 1986 on fewer than 130,000 persons, or only about 1.3% of the total population. All calculations for internal irradiation of millions of Belarussians were made on the basis of a straw poll of several thousand people concerning their consumption of milk and vegetables (Borysevich and Poplyko, 2002).
    Objective reconstruction of received doses cannot be done on the basis of such data.
  • Difficulty determining the influence of the spotty distribution of radionuclides (specific for each one; see Chapter I for details) and, as a result, the high probability that the individual doses of personal radiation are both higher and lower than “average” doses for the territory.
  • Difficulty accounting for all of themultiple radionuclides in a territory. Sr-90, Pu, and Am can also contaminate an area counted as contaminated solely by Cs-137. For instance, in 206 samples of breast milk, from six districts of the Gomel, Mogilev, and Brest provinces (Belarus), where the official level of radiation was defined only by Sr-90 contamination, high levels of Cs-137 were also found (Zubovich et al., 1998).
  • Difficulty accounting for the movement of radionuclides from the soil to food chains, levels of contamination for each animal species and plant cultivar. The same difficulties exist for different soil types, seasons, and climatic conditions, as well as for different years (see Chapter III of this volume for details).
  • Difficulty determining the health of individuals who have moved away from contaminated areas. Even considering the incomplete official data for the period 1986–2000 for only Belarus, nearly 1.5 million citizens (15% of the population) changed their place of residence. For the period 1990–2000 more than 675,000 people, or about 7% of the population left Belarus (National Belarussian Report, 2006).

The second objective barrier to determining the true radioactive impact on individuals and/or population groups is the inadequacy of information and, in particular, incomplete studies of the following:

  • Specificity of the influence of each radionuclide on an organism, and their effect in combination with other factors in the environment.
  • Variability of populations and individuals in regard to radiosensitivity (Yablokov, 1998; and others).
  • The impact of the ultralow doses (Petkau, 1980; Graeub, 1992; Burlakova, 1995; ECRR, 2003).
  • The influences of internally absorbed radiation (Bandazhevsky et al., 1995; Bandazhevsky, 2000).

The above are the factors that expose the scientific fallacy in the requirements outlined by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and similar official national bodies that are associated with the nuclear industry. They demand a simple correlation — “a level of radiation and effect”—to recognize a link to adverse health effects as a consequence of Chernobyl’s radioactive contamination. It is methodologically incorrect to combine imprecisely defined ionizing radiation exposure levels for individuals or groups with the much more accurately determined impacts on health (increases in morbidity and mortality) and to demand a “statistically significant correlation” as conclusive evidence of the deleterious effects from Chernobyl. More and more cases are coming to light in which the calculated radiation dose does not correlate with observable impacts on health that are obviously due to radiation (IFECA, 1995; Vorob’iev and Shklovsky-Kodry, 1996; Adamovich et al., 1998; Drozd, 2002; Lyubchenko, 2001; Kornev et al., 2004; Igumnov et al., 2004; and others). All of these factors do not prove the absence of radiation effects but do demonstrate the inaccurate methodology of the official IAEA, WHO, and UNSCEAR approach...
[Ed. Note: I am skipping section 2.2, not because it isn't important, but because of space constraints on this web page. Once again, please refer to the pdf of the entire work.]

2.3. Dismissing the Impact of Chernobyl Radionuclides Is a Fallacy

Natural ionizing radiation has always been an element of life on Earth. Indeed, it is one of the main sources of on-going genetic mutations — the basis for natural selection and all evolutionary processes. All life on Earth — humans included — evolved and adapted in the presence of this natural background radiation.
Some have estimated that “the fallout from Chernobyl adds only about 2% to the global radioactive background.” This “only” 2% mistakenly looks trivial: for many populations in the Northern Hemisphere the Chernobyl doses could be many times higher compared with the natural background, whereas for others (mostly in the Southern Hemisphere) it can be close to zero. Averaging Chernobyl doses globally is like averaging the temperature of hospital patients.
Another argument is that there are many places around of the world where the natural radioactive background is many times greater than the average Chernobyl fallouts and as humans successfully inhabit such areas, the Chernobyl radioactive fallout is not so significant. Let us discuss this argument in detail. Humans have a similar level of individual variation of radiosensitivity as do voles and dogs: 10–12% of humans have lower (and about 10–14% have a higher one) individual radiosensitivity than everyone else (Yablokov, 1998, 2002). Experiments on mammalian radiosensitivity carried out on voles showed that it requires strong selection for about 20 generations to establish a less radiosensitive population (Il’enko and Krapivko, 1988). If what is true for the experimental vole populations is also true for humans in Chernobyl contaminated areas, it means that in 400 years (20 human generations) the local populations in the Chernobyl-contaminated areas can be less radiosensitive than they are today. Will individuals with reduced radio-resistance agree that their progeny will be the first to be eliminated from populations?
One physical analogy can illustrate the importance of even the smallest additional load of radioactivity: only a few drops of water added to a glass filled to the brim are needed to initiate a flow. The same few drops can initiate the same overflow when it is a barrel that is filled to the brim rather than a glass. Natural radioactive background may be as small as a glass or as big as a barrel. Irrespective of its volume, we simply do not know when only a small amount of additional Chernobyl radiation will cause an overflow of damage and irreversible change in the health of humans and in nature.
All of the above reasoning makes it clear that we cannot ignore the Chernobyl irradiation, even if it is “only” 2% of the world’s average background radiation.

2.4. Determining the Impact of the Chernobyl Catastrophe on Public Health

It is clear that various radionuclides caused radiogenic diseases owing to both internal and external radiation. There are several ways to determine the influence of such radiation:

  • Compare morbidity and mortality and such issues as students’ performance in different territories identical in environmental, social, and economic features, but differing in the level of radioactive contamination (Almond et al., 2007). This is the most usual approach in the Chernobyl studies.
  • Compare the health of the same individuals (or genetically close relatives — parents, children, brothers, and sisters) before and after irradiation using health indices that do not reflect age and sex differences, for example, stable chromosomal aberrations.
  • Compare the characteristics, mostly morbidity, for groups with different levels of incorporated radionuclides. In the first few years after the catastrophe, for 80–90% of the population, the dose of internal radiation was mostly due to Cs-137; thus for those not contaminated with other radionuclides, comparison of diseases in people with different levels of absorbed Cs-137 will give objective results of its influence.As demonstrated by the work of the BELRAD Institute (Minsk), this method is especially effective for children born after the catastrophe (see Chapter IV for details).
  • Document the aggregation of clusters of rare diseases in space and time and compare them with those in contaminated territories (e.g., study on the specific leukoses in the Russian Bryansk Province; Osechinsky et al., 1998).
  • Document the pathological changes in particular organs and subsequent diseases and mortality with the levels of incorporated radionuclides, for instance, in heart tissue in Belarus’ Gomel Province (Bandazhevski, 2000).

It is methodologically flawed for some specialists to emphasize “absence of proof” and insist on “statistically significant” correlation between population doses and adverse health effects. Exact calculations of population dose and dose rate are practically impossible because data were not accurately collected at the time. If we truly want to understand and estimate the health impact of the Chernobyl catastrophe in a methodologically correct manner, it will be demonstrated in populations or intra-population group differences varying by radioactive levels in the contaminated territories where the territories or subgroups are uniform in other respects.

 


Caption from the web page Chernobyl Today "The ongoing damage to the human reproductive process being caused by Chernobyl's fallout is never admitted. These boys were born miles outside the fenced-off-land around the wreaked reactor at Chernobyl a decade after the nuclear accident. Deformed children will continue to be born in these poisoned area's until these areas are closed. The map below gives you some idea of the amount of land that should be fenced-off. The Medical Records of people living in the unclosed area's are treated as State Secrets."

 

 

3. General Morbidity, Impairment, and
Disability after the Chernobyl Catastrophe


Alexey V. Yablokov

In all cases when comparing the territories heavily contaminated by Chernobyl’s radionuclides with less contaminated areas that are characterized by a similar economy, demography, and environment, there is a marked increase in general morbidity in the former. Increased numbers of sick and weak newborns were found in the heavily contaminated territories in Belarus, Ukraine, and European Russia.

There is no threshold for ionizing radiation’s impact on health. The explosion of the fourth reactor of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) dispersed an enormous amount of radionuclides (see Chapter I for details). Even the smallest excess of radiation over that of natural background will statistically (stochastically) affect the health of exposed individuals or their descendants, sooner or later. Changes in general morbidity were among the first stochastic effects of the Chernobyl irradiation.
In all cases when territories heavily contaminated by Chernobyl radionuclides are compared with less contaminated areas that are similar in ethnography, economy, demography, and environment, there is increased morbidity in the more contaminated territories, increased numbers of weak newborns, and increased impairment and disability. The data on morbidity included in this chapter are only a few examples from many similar studies.

3.1. Belarus

1. The general morbidity of children noticeably increased in the heavily contaminated territories. This includes deaths from common as well as rare illnesses (Nesterenko et al., 1993).
2. According to data from the Belarussian Ministry of Public Health, just before the catastrophe (in 1985), 90% of children were considered “practically healthy.” By 2000 fewer than 20% were considered so, and in the most contaminated Gomel Province, fewer than 10% of children were well (Nesterenko, 2004).
3. From 1986 to 1994 the overall death rate for newborns was 9.5%. The largest increase (up to 205%), found in the most contaminated Gomel Province (Dzykovich et al., 1996), was due primarily to disease among the growing number of premature infants.
4. The number of children with impaired physical development increased in the heavily contaminated territories (Sharapov, 2001).
5. Children from areas with contamination levels of 15–40 Ci/km2 who were newborn to 4 years old at the time of the catastrophe have significantly more illnesses than those from places with contamination levels of 5– 15 Ci/km2 (Kul’kova et al., 1996).
6. In 1993, only 9.5% of children (0 to 4 years old at the time of the catastrophe) were healthy in areas within the Kormyansk and Chechersk districts of Gomel Province, where soil Cs-137 levels were higher than 5 Ci/km2. Some 37% of the children there suffer from chronic diseases. The annual increase in disease (per 1,000, for 16 classes of illnesses) in the heavily contaminated areas reached 102–130 cases, which was considerably higher than for less contaminated territories (Gutkovsky et al., 1995; Blet’ko et al., 1995).

 

 

7. In the 8 years after the catastrophe, in the heavily contaminated Luninetsk District, Brest Province, illnesses per 1,000 children increased 3.5 times — 1986 – 1988: 166.6; 1989 – 1991: 337.3; 1992 – 1994: 610.7 (Voronetsky, 1995).
8. For children of the Stolinsk District, Brest Province, who were radiated in utero from ambient Cs-137 levels up to 15 Ci/km2, morbidity was significantly higher for the primary classes of illnesses 10 years later. Disease diagnoses were manifest at ages 6 to 7 years (Sychik and Stozharov, 1999).
9. The rates of both premature neonates and small-for-gestational-age babies in Belarus as a whole were considerably higher in the more radioactive contaminated territories for 10 years following the catastrophe (Tsimlyakova and Lavrent’eva, 1996).
10. Newborns whose mothers had been evacuated from a zone of the strict control (=15 Ci/km2) had a statistically significant longer body, but a smaller head and a smaller thorax circumference (Akulich and Gerasymovich, 1993).
11. In the Vetca, Narovly, and Hoyniky districts of Gomel Province and the Kalinkovich District of Mogilev Province, spontaneous abortions and miscarriages and the numbers of low-birth-weight newborns were significantly higher in the heavily contaminated territories (Izhevsky and Meshkov, 1998).
12. Table 3.1 shows the results of two groups of children from the heavily and less contaminated territories surveyed for the years from 1995 to 2001. The state of their health was obtained by subjective (self-estimation) and objective (based on clinical observations) studies. Each child was followed for 3 years, and individual contamination determined by measuring the level of incorporated radionuclides (using an individual radioactivity counter) and the levels of Pb and other heavy metals. Data from Table 3.1 show that within groups the level of radioactive contamination did not change statistically over 3 years, whereas heavy metals levels were slightly reduced, with the exception of the Pb level, which increased in controls.
13. Table 3.2 shows the results of children’s self-estimation of health. It is clear that children living in the heavily contaminated areas complain more often of various illnesses. The number of complaints in the group living in heavily contaminated areas was noticeably greater than in less contaminated places. Although the number of complaints increased in both the heavily contaminated and the less contaminated groups after 3 years of observation, most of the parameters were higher among the heavily contaminated. Data in Table 3.3 show that children living in heavily contaminated areas differed noticeably from those in less contaminated places for practically all diseases in both the first and the second survey. The findings in both Table 3.2 and Table 3.3 give a convincing picture of sharply worsening health for children in the heavily contaminated areas. The authors of this research defined this condition as “ecological dis-adaptation syndrome” which may be another definitive Chernobyl effect (Gres’ and Arinchin, 2001).
14. According to official statistics in 1993– 1994 primary morbidity was significantly higher in territories with Cs-137 levels above 15 Ci/km2 (Kozhunov et al., 1996).

 

15. Primary invalidism in contaminated territories of Belarus noticeably increased after 1993, especially during 1997 and 1998 (Figure 3.1).
16. The number of invalids was noticeably higher in the more contaminated Gomel and Mogilev provinces than in the country as a whole. In the Gomel Province the relative number of invalids was higher, but in Mogilev Province there were more sick children (Kozhunov et al., 1996).

17. According to official data (Medical Consequences, 2003) morbidity of Belarus liquidators 1986–1987 was significantly higher than for a similarly aged group. The annual disease rate among this group of liquidators was up to eight times higher than for the adult population of Belarus as a whole (Antypova et al., 1997).

3.2. Ukraine

1. For the first 10 years after the catastrophe, general morbidity in Ukrainian children increased six-fold (TASS, 1998) followed by a slight reduction, but 15 years after the catastrophe it was 2.9 times higher than in 1986 (Table 3.4).
2. In 1988, there was no indication of significant differences in general morbidity among children living in heavily contaminated versus less contaminated areas, but comparison of the same groups in 1995 showed that morbidity was significantly higher in the highly contam-

 

TABLE 3.4. Primary and General Morbidity of Children (0 to 14 Years) in the Heavily Contaminated Territories of Ukraine, per 1,000 (Grodzinsky, 1999; Moskalenko, 2003; Horishna, 2005)

Year
Primary
morbidity


General
morbidity


1987
455
787
1994
1,139
1,652
2001
n/a
2,285
2004
1,423 (1384a )
n / a
aBy Stepanova (2006).

inated areas (Baida and Zhirnosecova, 1998; Law of Ukraine, 2006).
3. Children radiated in utero had lower birth weight and more diseases during the first year of life as well as irregularities in their physical development (Stepanova and Davydenko, 1995; Zakrevsky et al., 1993; Zapesochny et al., 1995; Ushakov et al., 1997; Horishna, 2005).
4. From 1997 to 2005 the number of the “practically healthy” children in heavily contaminated areas decreased more than sixfold— from 3.2 to 0.5% (Horishna, 2005).
5. There was appreciably retarded growth in children from 5 to 12 years of age at the time of the survey in the heavily contaminated territories (Arabskaya, 2001).
6. In 1999 there were fourfold more sick children in contaminated territories than the average of such children in Ukraine (Prysyazhnyuk et al., 2002).
7. At the beginning of 2005 the percentage of invalid children in contaminated territories was more than fourfold that of the average among children in other populations (Omelyanets, 2006).
8. Among 252 children in contaminated territories officially recognized as invalids in 2004, 160 had congenital malformations and 47 were cancer victims (Law of Ukraine, 2006).
9. From 1987 to 1989, it was typical for children from heavily contaminated territories to suffer from functional disturbances of various organ systems, indicative of hormonal and immune imbalance. By 1996 those functional disturbances had become chronic pathological processes with long-term relapses that were relatively resistant to treatment (Stepanova et al., 1998).
10. In spite of the intensive social and medical programs in place from 1986 to 2003, the number (percentage) of “practically healthy” children in affected territories decreased 3.7 times (from 27.5 to 7.2%), and the number (percentage) of “chronically ill” children increased from 8.4% in 1986–1987 to 77.8% in 2003 (Figure 3.2). The percent of children with chronic diseases increased steadily—from8.4% in 1986–1987 to 77.8% in 2004 (Stepanova, 2006a). At the same time in less contaminated areas the percentage of healthy children has been constant during the last 20 years—up to 30% (Burlak et al., 2006).
11. In Ukraine in the 15 to 18 years after the catastrophe there has been a steady increase in the numbers of invalid children: 3.1 (per 1,000) in 2000, 4.0 in 2002, 4.5 in 2003, and 4.57 in 2004 (Stepanova, 2006a; Figure 3.3).

 

12. The level of general morbidity among evacuee children increased 1.4 times from1987 to 1992 (from 1,224 to 1,665 per 1,000). The prevalence of diseases for this period rose more than double (1,425 up to 3,046). General morbidity increased 1.5 to 2.4 times in the contaminated territories from the period before the catastrophe until 1992. At the same time, across the whole of Ukraine child morbidity showed a Figure 3.3. Number of invalids (per 1,000) among children in Ukraine from 1987 to 2003 (Stepanova, 2006a). marked increase (Lukyanova et al., 1995). This trend is continuing: 455.4 per 1,000 in 1987; 866.5 in 1990; 1,160.9 in 1995; 1,367.2 in 2000; and 1,422.9 in 2004 (Stepanova, 2006b).

 

 


13. After the catastrophe the number (percentage) of “practically healthy” children in contaminated territories declined markedly and the number of sick children significantly increased (Table 3.5).
14. According to annual surveys during the period from 1988 to 2005 there were severalfold fewer children of liquidators considered “practically healthy” than were found in the control group (2.6–9.2% compared with 18.6– 24.6%); furthermore these liquidators’ children were statistically significantly taller and more overweight (Kondrashova et al., 2006).
15. Children in contaminated territories were undersized and had low body weight (Kondrashova et al., 2006).
16. In the years from 1988 to 2002, among adult evacuees the number of “healthy” fell from 68 to 22% and the number “chronically ill” rose from 32 to 77% (National Ukrainian Report, 2006).
17. Morbidity among adults and teenagers in the heavily contaminated territories increased fourfold: from137.2 per 1,000 in 1987 to 573.2 in 2004 (Horishna, 2005).
18. In 1991 the prevailing primary physical disabilities in the contaminated territories were due to circulatory problems (39.0%) and diseases of the nervous system (32.3%). Since 2001 the primary disability is neoplasm (53.3% in 2005). For the period 1992 to 2005 disability due to neoplasm increased nearly fourfold. The current second set of primary disabilities in the contaminated territories is due to circulatory disease (32.5% in 2005; Table 3.6).
19. According to official Ukrainian data, at the beginning of 2005 there were 148,199 people whose invalidism resulted from the Chernobyl catastrophe; among them were 3,326 children (Ipatov et al., 2006).
20. From 1988 to 1997 increased morbidity related to radiation levels was more apparent in the heavily contaminated territories: up to4.2 times in a zone with more than 15 Ci/km2, up to 2.3 times in a zone with 5–15 Ci/km2, and up to 1.4 times in a zone with 1–5 Ci/km2 (Prysyazhnyuk et al., 2002).

 

 

21. During the period from 1988 to 2004 the number of liquidators who were healthy decreased 12.8 times: from 67.6 to 5.3%, and the number with chronic illnesses increased 6.2 times: from 12.8 to 81.4% (National Ukrainian Report, 2006; Law of the Ukraine, 2006).
22. Among adult evacuees the occurrence of nonmalignant diseases increased 4.8 times (from 632 to 3,037 per 10,000) from 1988 to 2002. Beginning in 1991–1992 the occurrence and prevalence of these diseases was above the average for the country (Figure 3.4).
23. From 1988 to 2002 physical disabilities among adult evacuees increased 42-fold (from 4.6 to 193 per 1,000; National Ukrainian Report, 2006).
24. From 1988 to 2003 disabilities among liquidators increased 76-fold (from 2.7 to 206 per 1,000; Buzunov et al., 2006).
25. From 1988 to 1999 primary morbidity among the populations in the contaminated territories doubled (from 621 to 1,276 and from 310 to 746 per 1,000). Beginning in 1993 these parameters have continually exceeded the Ukrainian norms (Prysyazhnyuk et al., 2002; TABLE 3.6. Primary Diseases (%) Resulting in Invalidism Connected with the Chernobyl Catastrophe, 1992 to 2005 (Ipatov et al., 2006) Illness 1992 2001 2005 Neoplasms 8.3 43.0 53.3 Nervous system diseases 40.9 4.5 4.5 Circulatory diseases 30.6 41.0 32.5 National Ukrainian Report, 2006) and are still increasing (Tables 3.7 and 3.8).

 

 

26. In the heavily contaminated districts of Chernygov Province, the general morbidity significantly exceeded that in areas with less contamination; the general morbidity for the entire province was significantly higher 10 years after the catastrophe as compared with 10 years before (Donets, 2005).
27. The general morbidity of Ukrainian liquidators increased 3.5 times in the 10 years following the catastrophe (Serdyuk and Bobyleva, 1998).
28. Typical complaints in the contaminated territories in the first year after the catastrophe included rapidly developing fatigue (59.6%), headache (65.5%), blood pressure instability (37.8%), abnormal dreaming (37.6%), and aching joints (30.2%) (Buzunov et al., 1995).

 

 

 

 

29. Since 1987 the number of liquidators in the category of “ill” has consistently increased: 18, 27, 34, 42, 57, 64, 75, to 81% (Grodzinsky, 1999). In the 18 years after the catastrophe the number of “sick” liquidators exceeded 94%. In 2003, some 99.9% of the liquidators were officially “sick” in Kiev; 96.5% in Sumy Province were sick and 96% in Donetsk Province (LIGA, 2004; Lubensky, 2004).
30. For the period from 1988 to 1994 there was a manifold increase in primary disabilities (invalidism) among liquidators and evacuees, which exceeded the Ukrainian norms (Table 3.9).
31. Disability among liquidators began to increase sharply from 1991 and by the year 2003 had risen tenfold (Figure 3.5).

3.3. Russia

1. The total measure of the “health of the population” (the sum of invalidism and morbidity)
in the Russian part of the European Chernobyl territories worsened up to threefold during the 10 years after the catastrophe (Tsyb, 1996).

 

 

 

2. Children from radioactive contaminated provinces became ill much more often than children in “clean” regions. The greatest differences in morbidity are expressed in the class of illness labeled “symptoms, phenomena, and inexact designated conditions” (Kulakov et al., 1997).
3. From 1995–1998 the annual prevalence of all registered diseases of children in the southwest districts of Bryansk Province (Cs-137 > 5 Ci/km2), was 1.5–3.3 times the provincial level as well as the level across Russia (Fetysov, 1999; Kuiyshev et al., 2001). In 2004 childhood morbidity in these districts was double the average for the province (Sergeeva et al., 2005).
4. Childhood morbidity in the contaminated districts of Kaluga Province 15 years after the catastrophe was noticeably higher (Ignatov et al., 2001).

 

 

5. Initially diagnosed childhood illnesses measured in 5-year periods for the years from 1981 to 2000 show an increase in the first two decades after the catastrophe (Table 3.10).
6. The frequency of spontaneous abortions and miscarriages and the number of newborns with low birth weight were higher in the more contaminated Klintsy and Novozybkov districts of Bryansk Province (Izhevsky and Meshkov, 1998).
7. The number of low-birth-weight children in the contaminated territories was more than 43%; and the risk of birth of a sick child in this area was more than twofold compared with a control group: 66.4 ± 4.3% vs. 31.8 ± 2.8% (Lyaginskaya et al., 2002).
8. Children’s disability in all of Bryansk Province in 1998–1999 was twice that of three of the most contaminated districts: 352 vs. 174 per 1,000 (average for Russia, 161; Komogortseva, 2006).
9. The general morbidity of adults in 1995– 1998 in the districts with Cs-137 contamination
of more than 5 Ci/km2 was noticeably higher than in Bryansk Province as a whole (Fetysov, 1999; Kukishev et al., 2001).
10. The general morbidity of the Russian liquidators (3,882 surveyed) who were “under the age of 30” at the time of the catastrophe increased threefold over the next 15 years; in the group “31–40 years of age” the highest morbidity occurred 8 to 9 years after the catastrophe (Karamullin et al., 2004).
11.The morbidity of liquidators exceeds that of the rest of the Russian population (Byryukov et al., 2001).
12. In Bryansk Province there was a tendency toward increased general morbidity in liquidators
from 1995 to 1998 (from 1,506 to 2,140 per 1,000; Fetysov, 1999).
13. All the Russian liquidators, mostly young men, were initially healthy. Within 5 years after the catastrophe 30% of them were officially recognized as “sick”; 10 years after fewer than 9% of them were considered “healthy,” and after 16 years, only up to 2% were “healthy” (Table 3.11).
14. The total morbidity owing to all classes of illnesses for the Russian liquidators in 1993–1996 was about 1.5 times above that for corresponding groups in the population (Kudryashov, 2001; Ivanov et al., 2004).
15. The number of diseases diagnosed in each liquidator has increased: up until 1991 each liquidator had an average of 2.8 diseases; in 1995, 3.5 diseases; and in 1999, 5.0 diseases (Lyubchenko and Agal’tsov, 2001; Lyubchenko, 2001).
16. Invalidism among liquidators was apparent 2 years after the catastrophe and increased torrentially (Table 3.12).

 

 

 

17. In 1995 the level of disability among liquidators was triple that of corresponding groups (Russian Security Council, 2002), and in 1998 was four times higher (Romamenkova, 1998). Some 15 years after the catastrophe, 27% of the Russian liquidators became invalids at an average age of 48 to 49 (National Russian Report, 2001). By the year 2004 up to 64.7% of all the liquidators of working age were disabled (Zubovsky and Tararukhina, 2007).

3.4. Other Countries

1. FINLAND. There was an increase in the number of premature births just after the catastrophe (Harjulehto et al., 1989).
2. GREAT BRITAIN. In Wales, one of the regions most heavily contaminated by Chernobyl fallout, abnormally low birth weights (less than 1,500 g) were noted in 1986–1987 (Figure 3.6). Figure 3.6. Percent of newborns with birth weight less than 1,500 g from 1983 to 1992 (top curve) and a level of Sr-90 in soil (bottom curve) in Wales (Busby, 1995).

 

 

3. HUNGARY. Among infants born in May– June 1986 there was a significantly higher number of low-birth-weight newborns (Wals and Dolk, 1990).
4. LITHUANIA. Among liquidators (of whom 1,808 survived) morbidity was noticeably higher among those who were 45 to 54 years of age during their time in Chernobyl (Burokaite, 2002).
5. SWEDEN. The number of newborns with low birth weight was significantly higher in July 1986 (Ericson and Kallen, 1994).

******

It is clear that there is significantly increased general morbidity in territories heavily contaminated by the Chernobyl fallout and higher rates of disability among liquidators and others who were exposed to higher doses of radiation than the general population or corresponding non-radiated groups. Certainly, there is no direct proof of the influence of the Chernobyl catastrophe on these figures, but the question is: What else can account for the increased illness and disability that coincide precisely in time and with increased levels of radioactive contamination, if not Chernobyl?
The IAEA and WHO suggested (Chernobyl Forum, 2006) that the increased morbidity is partly due to social, economic, and psychological factors. Socioeconomic factors cannot be the reason because the compared groups are identical in social and economic position, natural surroundings, age composition, etc. and differ only in their exposure to Chernobyl contamination. Following scientific canons such as Occam’s Razor, Mills’s canons, and Bradford Hill criteria, we cannot discern any reason for this level of illness other than the radioactive contamination due to the Chernobyl catastrophe.

 


. . . Another landmark work worth special attention.

 

ECRR

Chernobyl: 20 Years On

Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident

European Committee on Radiation Risk
Documents of the ECRR 2006 No1

Edited by
C. C. Busby and A. V. Yablokov

[America First Books Editor's Note: ECRR Overview page here: 2006 Chernobyl 20 Years On: Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident European Committee on Radiation Risk (Overview Page), "Documents of the ECRR 2006 No. 1, Edited by C. C. Busby and A. V. Yablokov, Published on behalf of the European Committee on Radiation Risk Comité Européen sur le Risque de l’Irradiation, Brussels by Green Audit, 2006. "For further information on the content of the book click here (pdf, 4 pages)... The entire book is now a free download: a 4Mb pdf. click here (pdf, 259 pages).]

 

Contents

 

Chapter
Chapter Title/Author(s)
Ebook
Page
     
Introduction
1
By Dr. Chris Busby  
1
The Chernobyl Catastrophe - 20 Years After
5
By Alexey V. Yablokov
2
Is it Safe to Live in Territories Contaminated with
49
Radioactivity? Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident 20 Years Later
  By E. B. Burlakova and A. G. Nazarov  
3
Mental, Psychological and Central Nervous System Effects
61
of the Chernobyl Accident Exposures
  By Konstantin N. Loganovsky  
4
The Influence of the Chernobyl Accident on Wild Vertebrate
89
Animals
  By Eugene Yu. Krysanov  
5
Chromosome Aberrations in the Blood Lymphocytes of
95
People Exposed as a Result of the Chernobyl Accident
  By G. P. Snigiryova and V. A. Shevchenko  
6
Teratogenic Effects After Chernobyl
105
By Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake
7
Reflections of the Chernobyl Catastrophe on the Plant
117
World: Special and General Biological Aspects
  By D. M. Grodzinsky  
8
Infant Leukaemia in Europe After Chernobyl and its
135
Significance for Radioprotection; a Meta-Analysis of Three Countries Including New Data from the UK.
  By Chris Busby  
9
The Health of the Chernobyl Liquidators- a Meta-analysis
143
Alexey .V. Yablokov
10
Did Acute Radiation Syndrome Occur Among the Inhabitants
169
of the 30 km Zone?
  By Tetsuji Imanaka  
11
Combined Spatial-temporal Analysis of Malformation Rates
179
in Bavaria After the Chernobyl Accident
  By Helmut Küchenhoff, Astrid Engelhardt, Alfred Körblein  
12
Radioecological Effects in Belarus 20 Years After the
185
Chernobyl Catastrophe: The Need for Long-term Radiation Protection of the Population
  By V. B. Nesterenko and A. V. Nesterenko  
13
Studies of Pregnancy Outcome Following the Chernobyl
227
Accident
  By Alfred Koerblein  
14
The Death Toll of the Chernobyl Accident
245
By Rosalie Bertell

 

 

Introduction

by Dr. Chris Busby
2006

...It is now the 20th anniversary of the accident and in the West nothing has changed. It as if none of these events ever occurred. Children continue to die of cancer near nuclear polluted sites, which still continue to release fission-product radioisotopes under licenses based on the IRCP model. Court cases are still lost by the enraged and desperate parents because judges still believe that the doses to the children were too low. Scientists on government committees still talk about ‘absorbed dose’ as if it were a meaningful concept for internal irradiation. The Emperor still wears his new clothes.
The evidence from the Chernobyl affected territories, presented here in these chapters, reveals the real-world consequences of a simple and terrible new discovery: that the effects of low dose internal irradiation cause subtle changes in the genome that result in an increase in the general mutation rate. This genomic instability was first seen in cells in the laboratory. The Chernobyl evidence, presented here, shows that this seems to be true for all species, for plants and animals and humans. It has profound implications that go beyond radiation protection and risk models. In the review paper by Krysanov in this collection we find that mice living in the high irradiation zone, 22 generations after the initial exposure, are more radiosensitive than mice living in lower exposure areas. The same effect is reported for plants by Grodzhinsky who wryly points out that plants cannot exhibit the ‘radiophobia’ that many of the Chernobyl effects have been blamed on. This flies in the face of current ideas about genetic selection.
The effects of genomic instability are apparent in the evidence of massive harm to the organs and systems of living creatures at low doses of internal exposure, resulting in a kind of radiation ageing associated with random mutations in all cells. At the higher doses in the ‘liquidators’, after some years, their bodies seem to simply fall apart. In an astonishing statement we hear from Yablokov that in Moscow 100% of the liquidators are sick, in Leningrad 85%. These are men that ran like hares into the radiation fields with improvised lead waistcoats cut from roofs and who, by stabilising the situation at the reactor, saved Europe from a nuclear explosion equivalent to 50 Hiroshima Bombs - an outcome that would have made most of it uninhabitable. They are forgotten.
Whole biological systems collapse; at the cell level, at the tissue level and at the population level. Burlakova and Nazarov describe these subtle effects at lower doses of internal irradiation in laboratory cell systems and also people, Grodzhinsky shows the effects in plants, - higher for internal exposures than external, Krysanov shows the effects in wild animals and Yablokov and the Nesterenkos in the children and adults living and continuing to live in the contaminated territories. The effects clearly operate at what are presently thought to be vanishingly low doses. The increases in infant leukaemia in several countries in Europe flag up the extreme dissonance between the IRCP model and the true effects. This finding has been ignored by the WHO. The papers are not referenced in UNSCEAR or in the recent US BEIR VII report. The comparison between the expected and observed cases of infant leukaemia gives a clear indication of an error of upwards of 150-fold in the current model’s prediction. This is shocking. It means that the previous releases to the environment from accidents, from weapons tests or under licence have killed and will still kill millions. The effects of the 1960s atmospheric weapons tests are with us and our children forever and are clearly responsible for many of the current illnesses.
It is a scandal that UN agencies charged with protecting the public - e.g. the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) or the World Health Organisation (WHO) - can ignore the huge amount of evidence from the Chernobyl accident that shows these effects. This evidence has been presented to them again and again. Yet in the WHO conference on Chernobyl in Kiev in 2001 the representative of UNSCEAR, Norman Gentner stated clearly:
The risk of leukaemia doesn’t appear to be elevated even among the recovery workers. No scientific evidence for increases in cancer incidence or other nonmalignant disorders that could be related to the accident.
Science moves forward through experiment and through observation. The radiation risk model presently used to underpin legal constraints on public exposure is based mainly on the theory that the external acute radiation effects in the Japanese A-Bomb survivors can be used to predict and explain effects from exposure to internal novel fission-products that never existed on earth for the whole of evolution. The Chernobyl accident and its appalling outcomes have given the human race the empirical evidence to test this theory. The observations made or reviewed in these extraordinary chapters - many written by eminent scientists makes it fundamentally clear that the present radiation risk model is flawed.
The ECRR sub-committee on Chernobyl has worked hard under difficult conditions to assemble the contributions from these eminent scientists and to put them into reasonable English. This book represents a landmark on the road to understanding the effects of low-dose chronic irradiation. The committee believe that these lessons should be borne in mind by policy makers who are, even now, discussing new investments in nuclear energy and ways in which historic and future radionuclide waste can be disposed of into the environment. The committee recommends this book to scientists and policymakers and concerned members of the public in the hope that the huge amount of work carried out by scientists publishing their results in Russian language journals and others studying the effects of the Chernobyl accident will influence their decisions in this important area of public health...

 

CHAPTER 1

The Chernobyl Catastrophe - 20 Years After (a meta-review)

Alexey V. Yablokov
Russian Academy of Sciences, and Center for Russian Ecological Policy, Moscow


The first official forecasts regarding the consequences of the explosion of the reactor in the 4th block of the Chernobyl NPP on April 26th, 1986 concerning the health of the population of the USSR predicted only several additional cases of cancer over some tens of years. In 20 years it has become clear that not tens, hundreds or thousands, but millions of people in the Northern hemisphere have suffered and will suffer from the Chernobyl catastrophe. These people include (Grodzinsky, 1999 et al):

  1. More than 220,000 residents of highly contaminated areas who were evacuated in 1987 across Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.
  2. Those who received significant doses of irradiation during the first days and
    weeks, and/or living in territories with radioactive pollution more than 1 Ci/km2
    (in Ukraine - up to 3,2 millions, in Russia - up to 2,4 million, in Belarus - up to
    2,6 million persons, in Sweden, Norway, Bulgaria. Romania, Austria, Southern
    Germany and a number of other countries across Europe - 0,5 - 0,8 million
    persons).
  3. Liquidators (the persons who took part in operations to minimize the
    consequences of the catastrophe both at the NPP and in the polluted territories
    nearby): 740 thousand persons from Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, and 80 - 90
    thousand from Moldova, the Baltic’s states, the Caucasus, Middle and Central
    Asia;
  4. Children, whose parents belong to the first three groups: Up to 2,006 approx. 1 - 2 million.
  5. People living in territories where the Chernobyl fallout fell, basically, in the
    Northern hemisphere (including Europe, North America, Asia): A number
    difficult to define, but not less than 2,500 million persons;
  6. People who have consumed the Chernobyl fallouts’ radioactive-polluted
    foodstuffs (basically, in the countries of the former USSR, but also in Sweden,
    Norway, Scotland and a number of other European countries) – possibly in the
    order of several hundred thousands.

For the first of these four groups exposed to the consequence of the Chernobyl disaster additional irradiation is (or can be) substantially determined, for the fifth and sixth groups - stochastic.
Official secrecy (until May 23rd, 1989) and irreversible state falsification of
medical data during first three years after the catastrophe, as well as an absence of authentic medical statistics in the former USSR, highlights the inadequacy of material concerning primary epidemiological consequences of this catastrophe. There is also uncertainty in determining the quantity of radionuclides discharged from the reactor: from 50 million Ci (Soviet official data) up to 3,500 millions Ci (several independent estimations).
There are some principal difficulties in establishing a direct connection between levels of irradiation and health effects. These difficulties include:

  • extremely localized concentrations of fallout
  • difficulty establishing the dose of radiation exposure caused by short-lived
    radionuclides during the first hours, days and weeks after catastrophe (I-133, I-
    135, Te-132 and a number of others); the behaviour of "hot particles»;
  • too complex a picture of the radionuclides’ transformations, migration and bioconcentrations in ecosystems;
  • little known specific effect of each radionuclide (e.g. pollution by Sr-90 has
    consequences for the immune system, pollution by Cs-137 - others under identical
    density of radiation, Evetz et al., 1993);
  • different biological effects of internal and external irradiation (e.g. internal
    irradiation leads to a gradual auto-immune reaction, whereas external irradiation
    leads to a fast one. Lisianyi, Lubich, 2001).

The problems listed above make it difficult to reconstruct individual doses and dose rates, and cast doubt on any reports of a “strong correlation” between levels of the Chernobyl irradiation and specific health effects.
Further difficulties in understanding the real consequences of the Chernobyl
radioactive fallout include numerous, scientifically unproven statements made by
representatives of the nuclear industry, and experts connected with it, about the
insignificance of the catastrophe for public health (e.g., “Chernobyl Forum Report”,
September 2005).
In order to reveal the full consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe it is essential to discover its true influence on public health by comparing the same groups during the same periods after the catastrophe and comparing populations in territories, identical in geographical, social and economic conditions and differing only by the level of irradiation.

1. Mortality
Since 1986, in the USSR, life expectancy has noticeably decreased. On average, infant mortality has noticeably increased, as well as death rates for those of advanced ages. There is no proof of a direct connection between these parameters and the Chernobyl catastrophe, but there is proof of such connections for particular polluted territories.
After 1986, in the radioactively polluted areas of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia,
there is an increase in general mortality by comparison with neighboring areas (Grodzinsky, 1999; Omelianetz, et al., 2001; Kashirina, 2005; Sergeeva et al., 2005).
An increase in the number of stillbirths, correlating with the level of pollution, is
noted for of some areas of Ukraine (Kulakov et al., 1993) and Belarus (Golovko, Izhevsky, 1996). The number of spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) has noticeably increased in some polluted territories of Russia. By some estimates, the number of miscarriages and stillbirths as a result of radioactive pollution in Ukraine has reached 50,000 (Lipik, 2004).
In some European countries an increase in perinatal mortality connected with the
Chernobyl catastrophe has been revealed (see Korblein paper in this book). After 1987 an increase in infant and children's mortality is noted in the polluted areas of Ukraine (Omelianetz, Klement’eva, 2001) and Russia (Utka et al., 2005). Presented in Table 1 is one example of such mortality in one Russian area.

Table 1 Infant (per 1,000 live births) and general mortality (per 1,000) in three
radioactively polluted administrative districts of Bryansk area, Russia in 1995 - 1998 (the Condition …, 1999; Komogortseva, 2001).

 

 

Cancer mortality for 1986 - 1998 has increased by 18 - 22 % in radioactively polluted Ukrainian territories and among the evacuees, (compared with the whole of Ukraine - 12 %) (Omelianetz et al., 2001; Golubchikov et al., 2002). Mortality in men from prostate cancer has increased in the Ukrainian polluted territories by 1,5 - 2,2 times (in Ukraine as a whole - by 1,3 times) (Omelianetz et al., 2001). It has been revealed that in the radioactively polluted territories of Belarus the majority of sudden deaths correlated with the level of radionuclide incorporation (Bandajevsky, 1999).
These facts that establish a general increase in the level of child and infant mortality in the radioactively polluted territories (and to a greater degree on the more polluted territories) when compared with similar data in uncontaminated territories, leave
no doubt that absence of these data for the whole area of the Chernobyl fallout region has
hitherto been associated with incorrect statistical data.

2. Cancers
Belarus showed a 40 % increase in cancer between 1990 and 2000. Thus, in the territories most radioactively polluted (the Gomel area) the increase was maximal, and in the least polluted (the Brest and Mogyliov areas) - minimal (Okeanov et al., 2004). In 1987 - 1999 in Belarus about 26,000 radiogenic cancers (including leucosis) were noted; from these cases 11,000 have died (Mal’kov, 2001). Average value of excess absolute cancer risk was 434/104 person/years/Sv (relative risk - 3 - 13 x 10-1), which is above the limit accepted by UNSCEAR (Mal’kov, 2001).
Table 2 presents calculations of cancer rates based on a collective dose of all
generations for the entire period of additional Chernobyl Cs-137 irradiation.
For the general number of people in different countries who will have cancers
from the Chernobyl Cs-137 during their lifetime (about 951,000 persons, see Table 2), it is
necessary to add the number of cancer cases as a result of irradiation by I-133, I-135
(mostly thyroid cancers) and more than 25 other short-lived nuclides, including strontium,
plutonium and americium, uranium and hot particles.

Table 2 Calculated number of cancer cases (without leukaemia) for all generations *,
caused by Chernobyl Cs-137 (Goffmann, 1994)

 

 

Although other estimates of the number of fatal cancer cases induced by the Chernobyl irradiation claim "only" 22,000 – 28,000 deaths, J. Goffmann (1994) convincingly reveals a clear understatement on behalf of the authors, or the unreasonable understating of the collective dose, based on underestimates of emissions from the blown up reactor. Table 3 presents some examples of the research that has shown connections between occurrence of some cancers and the Chernobyl pollution.
Before the Chernobyl catastrophe cancer of the thyroid gland in children and
teenagers in territories in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia rarely occurred. In Belarus only 21
cases were registered between 1965-1985 (Demedchik et al., 1994), in Ukraine, before the
catastrophe, no more than 5 cases were registered annually, in nearby Russia - 100. In the
year 2000 the number of cases of this cancer in children and teenagers in the polluted
territories had increased by hundreds of times. 4,400 cases of radiation-induced thyroid
cancer have been recorded in Belarus (Malko, 2002) and about 12,000 cases of thyroid
cancer are considered to have already appeared in the affected three countries (Imanaka,
2002). This differs from the UNSCEAR 2000 estimation of about 1,800 thyroid cancers
observed during 1990 - 1998 in children 0 - 17 years old in 1986, and differs from the
Chernobyl Forum Report’s (2005) estimation of about 4,000 cases.
In Belarus the relative risk of radio-induced thyroid cancer (ERR) has exceeded
more than the risk factor of 8x 10-2 Gy-1 from ICRP-60 (Malko, 2004).
Based on the dynamics of radiogenic thyroid cancer growth and the character of
the pollution, it is possible to assume that during the following 40 - 50 years in Ukraine
there will be about 30,000 additional cancer cases, in Belarus – 50,000, and in Russia –
15,000. There are also reports of a rise in cases of thyroid cancer in the South of France,
Scotland and Poland.
Because the latent period for leucosis is between several months to several years,
many cases in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia have never been registered; this is also due to
official orders to falsify such data. In spite of this, there is a visible increase in the
frequency of leukemia in all polluted areas of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia (Prysyazhnyuk
et al., 1999; Ivanov et al., 1996; Sources and Effects …, 2000).

Table 3 Examples of occurrence of some solid cancers cases as a direct result of the
Chernobyl catastrophe

 

 

[America First Books Editor's Note: I am skipping major important portions of this article which contain numerous graphs to save space on this web page. Please refer to them in the free PDF download of this work. For the remainder of this extract, I am providing some text extracts from middle and last paragraphs of this article.]

...The typical consequence of infringement on the immune system in the radioactively polluted territories appears as an immuno-deficiency and, due to an increase in frequency and intensity of any acute and chronic diseases, is observed everywhere in the Chernobyl polluted territories. Sometimes the weakening of the immune system in these radioactively polluted territories is referred to as «Chernobyl AIDS».

9. Premature Ageing
There is accelerated ageing among the people in the Ukrainian radioactively polluted territories: their biological age exceeds their calendar one by 7 - 9 years (Mezhzherin, 1996). In territories polluted above 15 Ci/km2 on 137Cs in Belarus the mean age of men and women who died from heart attacks was 8 years younger than the average across Belarus (Antypova, Babichveskaya, 2001).
The array of diseases commonly considered exclusive to the elderly is typical for children in all of the heavily polluted territories. The immune system activity of these children is similar to the type of immune system activity experienced in old age. (Mezhzherin, 1996). The pathology of the digestive system epithelium in children from the polluted areas of Belarus also shows similarities with elderly people (Nesterenko, in litt.). Among 69 children and teenagers hospitalized in Belarus in 1991 - 1996 with alopecia, more than 70 % were from polluted territories (Morozevich et al., 1997)

10. Growing mutation rate
There are many studies showing a wide range of chromosomal aberrations in the Chernobyl radioactively polluted areas. A cytogenetic examination of inhabitants in the 30-km Zone shows that the frequency of aberrant cells and chromosomal aberrations for inhabitants in the Zone are significantly higher than those for the residents in the Kiev region, while the values of the latter group were found to be above the spontaneous and pre-Chernobyl levels (Table 13, Table 14)...

[Ed. Note: I now skip to the last portion of this article]

 

 

I have reviewed above only a small part of the existing data on public health after the Chernobyl catastrophe. Examining data concerning the consequences for public health following the Chernobyl catastrophe does not give cause for optimism: mortality and morbidity in the polluted territories will continue to grow. This conclusion is based (among other arguments) on:

  • A growing contribution to the collective dose in territories with a small density of
    radioactive pollution;
  • Increasing (instead of decreasing) radioactive impact (dose and dose rate) due to
    increasing internal irradiation;
  • The end of the latent period for several cancer diseases;
  • Intensification of many non-cancer illnesses as a result of damage to the immune
    system and deepening of genetic instability.

Each year it has become clearer that the real consequences of this catastrophe are much
more widespread and severe than has been predicted by the nuclear industry’s adepts. In
spite of this we, far from understanding the complete picture of the consequences of the
Chernobyl catastrophe, are justified in saying that this catastrophe really is on a global scale
and will continue to be so for many hundreds of years.
A better estimate is needed of the real health consequences of the catastrophe to
mitigate these consequences as best we can. But, at minimum, the following is urgently
required:

  • An intensification and a broadening (instead of a reduction – as has happened over
    recent years in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus) of medical, ecological and
    radiological investigations;
  • A strengthening and enrichment of the system of medical clinics and hospitals all
    over the polluted territories;
  • An assessment for each irradiated person of his/her real individual dose and, from
    this base, create a lifespan plan of medical support for each person.
  • Policy makers have to look the truth in eyes. Instead of the pro-Nuclear slogan
    “It’s time to forget Chernobyl” another one is needed: “It’s time to find ways to
    live with Chernobyl- forever”.

 


A dramatic illustration of the horrendous impact of low level radiation. Fig 1 from "Radiation exposure and heart attacks in children of Fukushima" (PDF), dated 9 Sept 2011, based upon Chernobyl research. Caption: "Number of children without ECG modifications as a function of Cs-137 concentration in the organism (Bandashevsky and Bandashevsky)." As noted in the 19 Sept 2011 video Prof. Chris Busby - help save children of Fukushima from radiation (9:58) above, when the level of ingested Cesium 137 gets up to the range of 12-26 Becquerels of radiation per kilogram of the child's weight, only 38% of children still have relatively healthy hearts. The remaining 62% have damaged hearts. In addition to causing cancer, ingested radiation can wreak considerable damage to heart function and also to the performance of most other organs throughout the body.

 


Fig 2 "The dynamics of cardiovascular diseases in the Republic of Belarus." from "Radiation exposure and heart attacks in children of Fukushima" (PDF). The effects of radiation are cumulative over time, and Belarus was one of the hardest hit countries with the Chernobyl radiation that first spread in April 1986.

 


Fig 3 "Structure of the causes of death in Belarus, 2008." In addition to causing a much higher incidence of cardiac problems, radiation also causes premature aging.

 


Fig 4 "Demographic index for the Republic of Belarus, 1950-2004 [Bandashevsky 2011]." A premonition for what is in store for Japan, parts of North America, and even Europe that have been particularly hard hit with fallout and other forms of contamination?

 


Published in April 2011, this perspective factors in the looming threat of Fukushima. Download the PDF here.

 

Health Effects of Chernobyl
25 years after the reactor catastrophe


April 2011

[Editor's Note: Please download the full version in PDF here]


German Affiliate of International Physicians
for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)

 

Authors:
Dr. rer. nat. Sebastian Pflugbeil, Society for Radiation Protection
Henrik Paulitz, IPPNW
Dr. med. Angelika Claussen, IPPNW
Prof. Dr. Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake, Society for Radiation Protection

With the support of Strahlentelex information service

[America First Books Editor's Note: I have corrected numerous typos that appear in the PDF version of the Table of Contents below]

Contents

 

Chapter
Sub-
Chapter Title
Page
 
Chapter
   
       
Executive Summary
5
Note on the unreliability of official data published by WHO and IAEA
9
What IPPNW and the Society for Radiation Protection are calling for
10
   
1.
Introduction
12
Excursus: Key data from the Chernobyl Catastrophe
14
 
2.
Liquidators
17
2.1
Premature aging process as a result of radiation exposure
19
2.2
Cancer and leukaemia
21
2.3
Damage to the nervous system
22
2.4
Psychological disorders
23
2.5
Heart and circulatory diseases
25
2.6
Other illnesses
25
2.7
Children of liquidators
26
 
3.
Infant mortality
28
3.1
The Chernobyl region
28
3.2
Germany
29
3.3
Other countries
30
Excursus: Miscarriages and pregnancy terminations
 
4.
Genetic and teratogenic damage (malformations)
34
4.1
The Chernobyl region
35
4.2
Germany
38
Excursus: Chernobyl effects on animals in Europe
41
4.3
Other countries
43
 
5.
Thyroid cancer and other thyroid diseases
45
5.1
The Chernobyl region
45
5.2
Germany
51
5.3
Other countries
51
 
6.
All cancers and leukaemia
52
6.1
The Chernobyl region
52
6.2
Germany
58
6.3
Other countries
59
 
7.
Other illnesses following Chernobyl
61
Excursus: Consequences of a super-GAU in Germany
64

 

 

Executive Summary

 

“The atomic industry could take a catastrophe
like Chernobyl every year.”

Hans Blix, 1986 in his capacity
as director of the IAEA


This paper evaluates studies that contain plausible indications of health damage caused by the Chernobyl catastrophe. The authors of this paper attach importance to the selection of methodically accurate and comprehensible analyses. Due to the already mentioned methodical difficulties, it is not our aim to present the “right” statistics in contrast to the obviously wrong ones given by the IAEA, since these can never be found. They can only supply us with indications as to the diversity and extent of the health effects we should be dealing with when we talk about the health effects of Chernobyl.

Populations which were particularly exposed to radiation by the Chernobyl catastrophe

a. Clean-up workers (liquidators):
    830,000 (Yablokov 2010)
     
  b. Evacuees from the 30 km zone and other highly contaminated zones:
    350,400 (Yablokov, 2010)
     
  c. The population of the heavily irradiated zones in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine:
    8,300,000 (Yablokov, 2010)
     
  d. European population in zones with minor exposure to radiation:
    600.000.000 (Fairlie, 2007)

Disease/health damage is to be expected as a result of additional exposure to radiation because of Chernobyl

a. Cancer. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the latency period for many types of
      cancer is 25 – 30 years. At present we are only just seeing cases of thyroid cancers,
breast cancers and brain tumours In the population. But liquidators have also
developed cancer in numerous other organs: the prostate gland, stomach, cancer of
the blood, thyroid cancer
       
  b.   Genetic changes: malformations, stillbirths, the lack of children
       
  c.   Non-cancerous diseases. Many organ systems could be affected; brain disorders;
      accelerated aging process; psychological disorders

Summary of findings

    1. The effects of low–level radiation (0 – 500 mSv) were systematically monitored and investigated. In particular, the genetic effects were unclear prior to Chernobyl. This research has been augmented by research on cells, as well as on the molecular structures inside the cells. Despite this, the ICRP continues to give a dose limit of 100 mSv for teratogenic damage. This claim has been invalidated by numerous studies.
    2. Non-targeted effects, such as genomic instability and the bystander effect have been found, i.e. change in the genomes of cells not directly affected by radiation.
    3. The lower the radiation level, the longer the latency period before the outbreak of cancer (established as early as 2000 by Pierce and Preston in the context of the RERF studies)
    4. The genomic instability is passed on in the genes and increases exponentially with each generation. Numerous research findings showing chromosome aberrations in the children of liquidators and mothers who were not exposed to radiation are available in the research centres of all three affected republics (Moscow, Minsk, Kiev). First signs of the cumulation effect could be cases of thyroid cancer among the children of irradiated parents. However, this is not yet certain.
    5. It was found that the incidence of non-cancerous disease had increased; mainly cardiovascular and stomach diseases, and cases of neurological-psychiatric illness were found to be a somatic effect of low-level radiation. The latter was observed mainly during research on liquidators and their children.
    6. According to figures given by the Russian authorities, more than 90% of the liquidators have become invalids; i.e. at least 740,000 severely ill liquidators. They are aging prematurely, and a higher than average number have developed various forms of cancer, leukaemia, somatic and neurological psychiatric illnesses. A very large number have cataracts. Due to long latency periods, a significant increase in cancers is to be expected in the coming years.
    7. Independent studies estimate that 112,000 to 125,000 liquidators will have died by 2005.
    8. Available studies estimated the number of fatalities amongst infants as a result of Chernobyl to be about 5000.
    9. Genetic and teratogenic damage (malformations) have also risen significantly not only in the three directly affected countries but also in many European countries. In Bavaria alone, between 1000 and 3000 additional birth deformities have been found since Chernobyl. We fear that in Europe more than 10,000 severe abnormalities could have been radiation induced. The estimated figure of unreported cases is high, given that even the IAEA came to the conclusion that there were between 100,000 and 200,000 abortions in Western Europe because of the Chernobyl catastrophe.
    10. According to UNSCEAR between 12,000 and 83,000 children were born with congenital deformations in the region of Chernobyl, and around 30,000 to 207,000 genetically damaged children worldwide. Only 10% of the overall expected damage can be seen in the first generation.
    11. In the aftermath of Chernobyl not only was there an increase in the incidence of stillbirths and malformations in Europe, but there was also a shift in the ratio of male and female embryos. Significantly fewer girls were born after 1986.
      A paper by Kristina Voigt, Hagen Scherb also showed that after 1968, in the aftermath of Chernobyl, around 800,000 fewer children were born in Europe than one might have expected. Scherb estimated that, as the paper did not cover all countries, the overall number of “missing” children after Chernobyl could be about one million. Similar effects were also observed following above-ground nuclear weapons tests.
    12. In Belarus alone, over 12,000 people have developed thyroid cancer since the catastrophe (Pavel Bespalchuk, 2007). According to a WHO prognosis, in the Belarus region of Gomel alone, more than 50,000 children will develop thyroid cancer during their lives. If one adds together all age groups then about 100,000 cases of thyroid cancer have to be reckoned with in the Gomel region.
    13. On the basis of observed cases of thyroid cancer in Belarus and Ukraine, Malko (2007) calculated the number of future cases that might be expected, and then added the radiation factor. He arrived at the figure of 92,627 cases of thyroid cancer between 1986 and 2056. This calculation does not include cases of thyroid cancer among liquidators.
    14. After Chernobyl, infant mortality rates in Sweden, Finland and Norway increased by a significant 15.8 percent compared to the trend for the period 1976 to 2006. Alfred Körblein calculated that for the period 1987 to 1992 an additional 1,209 (95 % confidence interval: 875 to 1,556) infants had died.
    15. In Germany, scientists found a significant increase in trisomy 21 in newly-born children in the nine months following Chernobyl. This trend was especially marked in West Berlin and South Germany.
    16. Orlov and Shaversky reported on a series of 188 brain tumours amongst children under three in Ukraine. Before Chernobyl (1981 to 1985) 9 cases were counted, not even two a year. In the period 1986-2002 the number rose to 179 children diagnosed with brain tumours – more than ten per year.
    17. In the more contaminated areas of South Germany a significant cluster of a very rare type of tumour was found in children, so-called neuroblastoma.
    18. A paper published by the Chernobyl Ministry in Ukraine registered a multiplication of the cases of disease of the endocrine system (25-fold from 1987 to 1992), the nervous system (6-fold), the circulatory system (44-fold), the digestive organs (60-fold), the cutaneous and subcutaneous tissue (50 times higher), the muscular-skeletal system and psychological dysfunctions (53-fold). The number of healthy people among evacuees sank from 1987 to 1996 from 59 % to 18%. Among the population of the contaminated areas from 52% to 21% and –particularly dramatic - among the children who were not directly affected themselves by Chernobyl fallout but their parents were exposed to high levels of radiation, the numbers of healthy children sank from 81% to 30% in 1996.
    19. It has been reported for several years that type I diabetes (insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus) has risen sharply amongst children and adolescents.
    20. Non-cancerous diseases greatly outnumber the more spectacular cases of leukaemia and cancer.

Up until today, there has unfortunately been no conclusive overview of the changes in the health condition of the whole of the affected population in the region of Chernobyl, not to mention the lack of an overview of the catastrophe for the people in the Northern hemisphere. The numbers referred to here may seem on the one hand to be terribly high, on the other hand rather low. But it has to be taken into account that nearly all of the collated studies dealt with relatively small sections of the population. Even supposedly slight changes in rates of sickness can signify serious health damage and a large extent of human suffering when they are extrapolated onto a larger population group.

Conclusion

Even though the lack of large-scale independent long-term studies does not permit a complete picture to be made of the current situation, a number of trends can be shown: a high mortality rate and an almost 100 % morbidity rate can be observed among people, such as liquidators, who were exposed to high radiation levels. 25 years after the reactor catastrophe cancer and other diseases have emerged on a scale that, owing to the long latency period, might have appeared inconceivable immediately following the catastrophe.
The number of non-cancerous diseases is far more dramatic than had ever before been imagined. “New” symptoms, such as the premature aging of liquidators, raise questions that research is still unable to answer.
By 2050 thousands more cases of illnesses will be diagnosed that will have been caused by the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe. The delay between cause and noticeable physical reaction is insidious. Chernobyl is far from over.
Particularly tragic is the fate of the thousands of children who were born dead or died in infancy, who were born with malformations and hereditary diseases, or who are forced to live with diseases they would not have developed under normal circumstances.
The genetic defects caused by Chernobyl will continue to trouble the world for a long time to come – most of the effects will not become apparent until the second or third generation.
Even if the extent of the health effects is not yet clear, it can still be predicted that the suffering brought about by the nuclear disaster in Fukushima is, and will be, of a similar magnitude.

 

1. Introduction


“Keep the public confused
on nuclear fission and fusion.”

US-Präsident [sic] Eisenhower


The Chernobyl catastrophe changed the world. Millions of people were made victims overnight. Huge stretches of land were made uninhabitable. The radioactive cloud spread all over the world. An understanding of the dangers of the use of nuclear energy grew in countless numbers of minds. Although in Western Europe we cannot forget how we were forced to think about what we ate and the sand our children played in, it was not until 1989 and “The Children of Chernobyl“ that a vague awareness of the far greater problems faced by Ukraine, Belarus and Russia began to grow. That solidarity and a willingness to help the victims of a catastrophe have now lasted for over 16 years, is a historically unique phenomenon.
This paper evaluates scientific studies that contain plausible indications of causal relationships between radiation following the Chernobyl catastrophe and greatly differing diseases and fatalities.
The authors of this paper attach importance to methodically accurate and comprehensible analyses. We have tried not to lose sight of the immense uncertainty inherent in every estimation in this field. We have taken published papers into consideration, but believe a general rejection of papers that have not been published in peer-reviewed journals is unjustified – Galileo Galilei and Albert Einstein would have had no chance of having their papers accepted by a peer-reviewed journal.
The loss of the Chernobyl nuclear power station meant first and foremost a huge direct economic loss. Radiation from Chernobyl fallout rendered large areas of land agriculturally unusable. Large and small businesses were given up, towns and villages abandoned, some were flattened by bulldozers. Millions of people were affected by radiation and lost all they had; apartments, houses, homes and social security. Many lost their jobs and were unable to find new ones, families split up because they could not tolerate being irradiated or ostracized because of their proximity to Chernobyl.
The quarrel about the number of victims of Chernobyl is as stupid as it is cynical. It is a well-known fact that the frequently quoted death toll of 31 is long past being valid. Even the number of ‘less than 50’ quoted in Vienna in September 2005 cannot possibly be true. It is an unacceptable sophistry only to recognize those who died of acute radiation disease, cancer or leukaemia as Chernobyl deaths. Following Chernobyl there was an obvious if not drastic increase of illness rates, but - typically - experts judging from a distance, without ever having treated any of the victims, do not generally accept these rates as having resulted from Chernobyl.
We refuse to haggle over whether a liquidator (clean-up worker) who received a high radiation dose, who has been an invalid for years, whose wife has left him, whose daughter is unable to find a boyfriend because of her father’s history, who suffers from diverse illnesses, the treatment of which has been given up by doctors, and who commits suicide, counts as a Chernobyl death or not.
In this way, the search for reliable data on the dead of Chernobyl has become an impossible task - in any case there are many, far too many. There is no comprehensive picture of the consequences of Chernobyl, not yet. The following overview aims at reminding you of all you already knew, aims at getting you to study carefully and critically the simplified and minimised accounts given by the large organizations and to be attentive to their large uncertainties and blank spaces.
The analysis of the effects of Chernobyl is impeded by a large number of very varying levels of facts:
In the first years after the catastrophe the Ministry of Health in the USSR and the KGB issued a large number of prohibitions that resulted in vital information necessary to assess the situation being either withheld, kept secret or falsified. As a result of this, irreplaceable knowledge and information has been lost and cannot today be replaced by theoretical calculations, no matter how complicated they may be.
Official accounts of the catastrophe were mainly dominated by structures operating at the ‘red table’-level in Moscow, far away from Chernobyl. These accounts determine and falsify parts of the discussion up to the present day.
Leading scientists from both East and West in the fields of radio medicine/radiation protection and reactor safety/nuclear technology were quick with appeasements. They were later not, or only partially, prepared to correct their earlier assessments in spite of the pressure of compelling facts.
The authorities responsible were overstretched by having to investigate into exposure to radiation suffered by liquidators and the population. Suitable equipment, specialists and time were not available. Uncertainties were amplified by deliberate falsification of documents. The effects on health were different than had been expected.
There was considerable migration from the heavily to the less contaminated areas that is difficult to reconstruct today. Comparisons between contaminated and uncontaminated areas thus become questionable.
There are numerous accounts of attempts at ‘compensatory justice’: contaminated food was distributed in clean areas and clean food was transported to contaminated areas, or clean and contaminated food was mixed – further shrouding the differences between clean and contaminated areas, and no longer retraceable, but certainly having a considerable effect upon the health of the population.
None of the governments in Russia, Belarus or Ukraine are interested in a comprehensive survey of the consequences of Chernobyl. They prefer to close the case, gradually re-cultivate and resettle lost territory and pay as little as possible to the victims. They are not interested in discussions about the mistakes that have been made. There is a tendency amongst the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations Scientific Committee for the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) to support this position. Independent scientific studies in this area are not being financed and are being obstructed or prevented.
Stochastic radiation damage is difficult to prove. Large epidemiological studies are expensive and reference to necessary data requires access that is only possible with state assistance.
Age patterns in the three mainly affected countries have changed drastically: a drop in birth rates, increases in death rates and reduction of male life expectancy by about 10 years. This is not an easy aspect to take into account when comparing cancer and disease statistics.
The Soviet system collapsed about the same time as Chernobyl. The entire health system deteriorated as a result. Medication supplies, hospital equipment and the entire social and economic structure collapsed. There are a very few very rich people and an increasing number of desperately poor people who can only feed themselves by growing their own food – regardless of whether the earth is contaminated or not. All this has a negative effect on the state of health. Definitively attributing specific health damage either to the change in the system or to Chernobyl is difficult, if not impossible.
A great many doctors are overworked and frustrated by their poorly functioning and badly equipped health service, under these conditions they have little energy or interest for scientific questions. They feel that experts on Western committees only perceive the Chernobyl region as an experimental laboratory, leaving the doctors alone to treat the patients. These doctors are accordingly hesitant about giving information to Western scientists.
The authorities responsible in European countries only carry out investigations into the consequences of Chernobyl reluctantly or not at all – they presume that nothing would come of them, in view of comparatively small amounts of Chernobyl radiation fallout. Were something to come of them, the entire academic world would be turned upside-down. History tells us that such scientific paradigm changes are often met with bitter resistance from those in office.
A considerable obstacle in the search for something approaching the real story of Chernobyl is the language barrier. There are a lot of serious analyses from scientists in Russia, Ukraine und Belarus, which have been published in Russian and discussed at congresses in Russian. They are almost completely ignored In the Western world because, in the West, Russian is not a commonly-understood language and good translations cannot be paid for.
In this overview we have compiled scientific studies, which clearly show that the radioactive gases and particles (isotopes) released from the destroyed reactor in Chernobyl gave, and still give, rise to numerous serious illnesses, causing many people to become sick and die. The papers evaluated here comply with scientific standards and most have been published in scientific journals.
The overview is unavoidably incomplete and inconclusive, we can only touch on the various issues – the overview would otherwise have become far too long and unreadable.
We hope that in this way we are able to reactivate that which is already known, impart new knowledge and persuade others to carry on working independently and reflect upon how to help the victims of the catastrophe

Excursus: Key data from the Chernobyl Catastrophe (1)

Directly affected:

Belarus
2,500,000
Ukraine
3,500,000
Russia
3,000,000

135,000 were evacuated,
400,000 lost their homes and had to move away

3,000,000 people live in an area with > 185,000 Bq/m2 (5 Ci/km2)
270,000 people live in an area with > 555,000 Bq/m2 (15 Ci/km2)

Contaminated areas:

Belarus
30%
400
km2  
Ukraine
7%
42,000
km2 and 40% of the forests
Russia (of the European part)
1.6%
57,600
km2  

21,000 km2 were contaminated with 185-555,000 Bq/m2 (5-15 Ci/km2) and
10,000 km2 were contaminated with more than 555,000 Bq/m2 (> 15 Ci/km2)



Areas in Europe that were contaminated with 37-185 kBq/m2 Cs137

Sweden
12,000
km2
Finland
11,500
km2
Austria
8,600
km2
Norway
5,200
km2
Bulgaria
4,800
km2
Switzerland
1,300
km2
Greece
1,200
km2
Slovenia
300
km2
Italy
300
km2
Moldavia
60
km2

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Soviet Union established two guidelines for long-term measures:

  • Inhabitants of areas with more than 1480 KBq/m2 contamination had to be relocated.
  • Areas with more than 185 KBq/m2 contamination were earmarked for dose-reduction
    measures, such as decontamination of the soil and substitution of the locally produced
    food with imported goods.

Number of liquidators:
800,000 (600,000 – 1,000,000) people
(compared with the size of the German army: approx. 275,000 persons)

We recommend the following background reading:

  • "Strahlentelex" information service archive: www.strahlentelex.de
  • Collection of Chernobyl Analyses, edited by T. Imanaka (Kyoto University, KURRI -KR-
    21 and KURRI-KR-79, English),
  • Russian/English “International Journal of Radiation Medicine” published in Kiev (Ed.
    Prof. Angelina Nyagu, Kiev, ISSN 1562-1154) (complete collection available in the
    archives of the Society for Radiation Protection)
  • Website «Physicians of Chernoby» www.physiciansofchernobyl.org.ua/eng/about.html
  • Issues 5 (1992) and 24 (2003) from the reports of the “Otto Hug Strahleninstitut” - Bonn
  • Edmund Lengfelder: “Strahlenwirkung Strahlenrisiko”, ecomed-V. 1990
  • Roland Scholz: “Bedrohung des Lebens durch radioaktive Strahlung“, IPPNW Studienreihe
    Band 4, 3rd edition, 1997
  • The “Society for Radiation Protection” website: www.gfstrahlenschutz.de [English]
  • The IPPNW websites: www.ippnw.de and www.tschernobyl-folgen.de

(1) UN-General Assembly A/50/418, 8.9.1995
(2) UN Chernobyl Forum (EGE): Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and Their Remediation: Twenty Years of Experience, Working Material, August 2005.

 


Thyroid cancer survivor scarred with the "Chernobyl necklace" depicted at METALS IN MEDICINE AND THE ENVIRONMENT: Metals Health Consequences of Chernobyl, by Sarah Kleinfeld, faculty.virginia.edu, 8 May 2009

 


"Fig. Incidence of thyroid cancer in Belarus 1985-2004" from Health Effects of Chernobyl 25 years after the reactor catastrophe (PDF), April 2011, page 50

 

 

 

Chernobyl Heart (41:10),
the Oscar-winning 2003 documentary


The Continuing Impact of Chernobyl from News Update Sources

Eastern Europe (Principally Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus)

2012-06-05 Reality in Fukushima 3, posted by Mochizuki, "25 years have passed, but in Kiev Hospital, 90% of babies die before they become 1 year old."
2012-05-02 Japan writers' group gets eye-opener in Chernobyl
, by Chiaki Yoshimura, ajw.asahi.com. (h/t Cleaning up radiation hopeless, says writer: “There is no end” — “We adults have to bear a responsibility for the future” — “Impossible to decontaminate vast forested areas, and Japan is a country of forests and mountains,” by ENENews, 2 May 2012 and “Eye-Opener”: Under 3% of children exposed to Chernobyl radiation while in womb were diagnosed as healthy at age 7 -Asahi, ENENews.com. 1 May 2012). [Ed. Note: Red boldface added by myself below]:
...Delegation members had to cross a checkpoint to enter a zone within a 30-kilometer radius of the Chernobyl plant. The radiation levels hovered around 5-6 microsieverts per hour when they visited the plant.
The visitors saw cracks in concrete members of a shelter that was designed to contain radioactive materials. About 3,000 people continue to work on the site to build a new shelter and to continue the decommissioning process.
According to reports, construction costs for the new shelter are estimated at 1.5 billion euros ($2 billion, or 162 billion yen). The process relies on funding by European nations, which--ironically enough--is creating jobs for the local communities...
...The names of more than 100 abandoned villages, which remain uninhabitable to this day, are engraved on a monument in a park 17 km from the nuclear plant.
"It has been demonstrated that it is impossible to decontaminate vast forested areas," Nakamura said. "And Japan is a country of forests and mountains."
At a hospital in Narodychi, 60 km from the Chernobyl nuclear plant, patients were taking radioactive iodine as a cancer treatment in an isolation ward with lead-embedded walls.
One man, who was 8 years old at the time of the disaster, developed cancer in his thyroid gland this year.
The Institute of Endocrinology and Metabolism in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev told the delegation that only 2.5 percent of children, who had been exposed to radiation prenatally, were diagnosed as healthy at the age of 7...
2012-05-02 Pediatrician: “Homes full of the most grossly deformed children we have ever seen in the history of pediatrics — all around Chernobyl” (VIDEO), enenews.com.
2012-04-27 Workers still at risk decades after Chernobyl blast, Euronews (h/t TV: No chance removing melted nuclear fuel from reactor at Chernobyl — 100s of times above airborne radiation limit while digging nearby (VIDEO), ENENews.com)
[...] “Because of the construction work they’ve dug down to the level where the nuclear fuel and graphite lay. As a result the level of radioactivity in the air has risen. While the work is going on the level of the radioactivity in the air exceeds the sanitary norm by hundreds, perhaps thousands of times,” warned construction expert Yuri Andreyev.
Once the digging is finished experts say there will be no danger from the dust at the site. But to reassure the builders and technicians there are regular health checks. Each person is monitored and his or her exposure to radiation is controlled.
Euronews reporter Angelina Kariakina said: “The experts believe the encasement doesn’t solve the main Chernobyl problem, that of the nuclear waste inside the demolished reactor. But there is currently no chance of moving it to a safer storage facility.”
Watch the report here

2012-04-26 The Legacy of Chernobyl by Laura Flanders, thenation.com. (h/t *Warning – Graphic* Photographer: “My first reaction was I was looking at a different race of people” — Brain outside of skull, kidneys outside of torso, legs resembling elephant — Some doctors feel strongly there will be no more Belarus people in future (VIDEO), ENENews.com.
2012-04-25 The Children Beyond Chernobyl Movie, agreenroad.blogspot.com.
....There are over 300 orphanages in Belarus, full of abandoned babies and children, affected by low level radiation.
"RTE's 2008 powerful and beautifully filmed documentary "Children Beyond Chernobyl" picks up where the Academy Award winning "Chernobyl Heart" left off.
The film examines the work of Chernobyl Children's Project International (CCPI) and uses moving, intimate stories to describe how the charity and its volunteers are making a difference in Chernobyl affected regions of Belarus.
In the first of 7 parts, meet the children of the Vesnova orphanage of Belarus, and learn about children who travel to Ireland for medical care.
CCPI director Ali Hewson says that "you can't argue with the economic impact" of Chernobyl, and describes why so many volunteers refuse to walk away...
2012-04-25 With clean-up around Chernobyl abandoned, what can Japan learn from 1986 disaster?, mainichi.jp (h/t Mainichi: Decontamination failed and abandoned after Chernobyl — Residents allowed back, then forced to leave again — Now no return for centuries says Zone official, ENENews.com)
...in the 14 years between the disaster and the year 2000 -- when the last operating reactor at the plant was finally shut down -- authorities apparently judged that there had been "little improvement" in soil conditions, and they decided to halt soil decontamination.
The only decontamination operations going on now are for workers doing safety work in and around the dead plant, including decommissioning the reactors and preventing forest fires. There are currently about 3,700 people who work inside the 30-kilometer radius no-go area around the plant -- referred to simply as "the Zone" -- and they must have their clothes decontaminated periodically. During seasons when humidity is low, vehicles are typically washed one or two times a week, and roads near the plant are also scrubbed.
More than 110,000 people once lived in the Zone, all of whom were evacuated right after the accident. The Soviet authorities apparently attempted to decontaminate the town of Prypiat -- where Chernobyl plant workers and their families had lived -- soon after, but with no success.
Mr. Zolotoverkh, 58, who is in charge of managing the Zone, says there is no chance that decontamination will be resumed, adding, "No one will be allowed to return, not after decades, not after centuries."
About 110 kilometers southwest of the plant is the city of Korostyshiv, which the former Soviet government labeled an "evacuation advisory area" -- one of 440 residential communities given the designation. The Soviet Union established four categories for irradiated areas: forced evacuation areas, forced migration areas, evacuation advisory areas, and radiation management areas. Serious decontamination work in the advisory areas such as Korostyshiv did not begin until 1990, four years after the accident.
The municipal government, meanwhile, replaced the local top soil as well as the roof of every home and school in its jurisdiction. The city also paved over land that had been exposed to the Chernobyl fallout, including the front yard of 53-year-old housewife Ms. Valentina.
The municipal official in charge of the project emphasizes that the efforts resulted in a 50 percent drop in radiation in the 20 years after the accident...
... Regarding decontamination of homes, Ukrainian government radiation expert Mr. Tabachnyi says, `I can't say it's had any effect but to calm the fears of the residents,' adding, `About $1 million was thrown into reducing radiation levels in Korostyshiv to 1 sievert or less per year. It was definitely not a cost-effective effort.'..."

2012-04-10 ‘The Simpsons’ Mural in Chernobyl — Street artist takes on nuclear industry one year after Fukushima (PHOTO & VIDEO), ENENews.com
2012-04-09 Thyroid cancer rate grew 10 times much in 20 years in Belarus, posted by Mochizuki, fukushima-diary.com, on April 9th, 2012
2012-03-17 Professor: Clear that low-level contamination is probably more dangerous than single dose — Grasshoppers with deformed wings, gray eyes not red — Birds with abnormal sperm, strange large tumors (VIDEO), enenews.com
2012-03-15 Fukushima After the Meltdown, PBS special report by Miles O’Brien, including segment Revisiting Chernobyl (11:45), pbs.org. (h/t Miles O’Brien: Big spike in birth defects after Chernobyl — Doctors convinced of direct link between radiation and whole assortment of deformities (VIDEO), ENENews.com, 17 March 2012).
Revisiting Chernobyl: A Nuclear Disaster Site of Epic Proportions
The nuclear crisis in Japan has renewed interest in the 1986 nuclear meltdown at Chernobyl in Ukraine. Science correspondent Miles O’Brien traveled to the site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster, shortly before its 25th anniversary.
MILES O’BRIEN: Milinevsky’s colleague, Tim Mousseau, believes animals are the key to settling the debate over the long-term health effects of Chernobyl. He and his team have spent more than a decade studying birds in the Chernobyl region and beyond.
TIMOTHY MOUSSEAU, University of South Carolina: But it’s clear that this low-level contamination is — is probably more dangerous in the long run than — than having a single hot spot.
MILES O’BRIEN: In contaminated areas, there are half as many species and one-third number of birds you would expect. Their brains are smaller. Forty percent of male barn swallows have abnormal sperm. One in five have strange colored plumage that makes it hard to attract mates.
There are unusual beak deformities and large tumors that scientists have never seen before. What, if anything, can we extrapolate between that bird population, that population of barn swallows, and humans?
TIMOTHY MOUSSEAU: I would argue that, you know, we’re all — we’re all animals, and birds are actually more similar to us than dissimilar to us. [...]
MILES O’BRIEN: Mousseau’s colleagues are also looking at Chernobyl’s grasshoppers. They frequently have asymmetrical wings, and fruit flies, which are easily impacted by radiation. Those found around Chernobyl have gray eyes, instead of red, and deformed wings...
...MILES O’BRIEN: [...] After the explosion, there was a big spike in birth defects and thyroid cancer, extremely rare among children. And researchers say there is also a significant drop in the intellect in the region.
At the dilapidated regional hospital closest to Chernobyl, the medical staff is convinced there is a direct link between chronic exposure to radiation and a whole assortment of diseases and deformities.
I asked Dr. Constantine Cheres if he is convinced people are more sick here because of the Chernobyl accident. “Of course,” he told me. “Of course they are more sick.”
But the Chernobyl Forum, a group of U.N. agencies focused on the accident, estimates only 4,000 people died as a result of the explosion and its aftermath. One of the four members, the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, issued a report contending: “There is no clearly demonstrated increase in the incidence of cancers or leukemia due to radiation in the exposed populations. Neither is there any proof of any non-malignant disorders that are related to ionizing radiation. However, there were widespread psychological reactions to the accident, which were due to fear of the radiation, not the actual radiation doses.”
But Ukrainian scientist Maryna Naboka begs to differ. She told me people here get sick more often and they become more seriously sick. They receive little doses of radiation, but they do it on a day-to-day basis, and the second generation continues getting the radiation...
2012-03-12 After 500 Years in Family, Rice Farmers Forced Off Land by Fukushima (VIDEO) (8:16) (h/t More from PBS on Chernobyl: “The radiation killed pine trees in a 30-square kilometer” area (VIDEO), March 15, 2012)
MILES O'BRIEN: ...Consider the so-called Red Forest near Chernobyl, so named because radiation from the meltdown there in 1986 killed large swathe of trees.
I walked through it with physicist Gennadi Milinevsky of the University of Kiev a year ago, and it remains highly contaminated to this day.
The ground is just hot, isn't it? It is hot.
GENNADI MILINEVSKY, University of Kiev: Yes.
MILES O'BRIEN: So this used to be pine trees as far as you can see.
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: Yes.
MILES O'BRIEN: And the cesium came through here after the explosion. And that's -- and to this day is. . .
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: Yes, still over there.
MILES O'BRIEN: Are there animals that can live here or not?
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: No, no.
MILES O'BRIEN: No animals here?
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: Not really, yes...
2012-03-01 Summary of Negative Health Effects Of Low Dose Radiation On Children Around Chernobyl, agreenroad.blogspot.com.
2012-02-02 Radiation Biologist: Tree leaves were gigantic after Chernobyl — “Witch’s Broom” effect (VIDEO), enenews.com
2012-02-02 Strange: Animals went mad and began attacking humans after exposure to high radiation levels, says Chernobyl scientist — Dogs, foxes, wolves, hogs (VIDEO) by ENENews
2011-12-05 Just Back from Chernobyl: Mutations not seen anywhere else in world — Much greater frequency in contaminated areas — “Directly proportional” to radiation levels (VIDEO) by ENENews.com
2011-12-05 Top Biology Professor: Incredibly high frequency of very, very large abdominal tumors observed on latest trip to Chernobyl (VIDEO) by ENENews
2011-11-29 Japan TV: “Truly terrible things emerged several years after the accident” at Chernobyl — 7,800 times more childhood thyroid cancer than average in town 70 km away — IAEA Exposed (VIDEO), Enenews Admin
2011-11-01 TV: Many Chernobyl scientists dead — Survivors with chromosome/DNA damage (VIDEO)
Title: PBS: Many Chernobyl scientists dead – Survivors have chromosome/DNA damage (Clip from NOVA – Inside Chernobyl’s Sarcophagus)
2011-08-22 ‘Scientists don’t know why’: Cesium-137 in soil near Chernobyl has half-life of 180 to 320 years, not 30 years as is typical, enenews.com
“Ecological Half Life” of Cesium-137 May Be 180 to 320 Years?, EX-SKF, August 22, 2011:
[...] From Wired Magazine (12/15/2009):
Re-inhabiting the large exclusion zone around the [Chernobyl] accident site may have to wait longer than expected. Radioactive cesium isn’t disappearing from the environment as quickly as predicted, according to new research presented here Monday at the meeting of the American Geophysical Union. Cesium 137’s half-life — the time it takes for half of a given amount of material to decay — is 30 years. In addition to that, cesium-137’s total ecological half-life — the time for half the cesium to disappear from the local environment through processes such as migration, weathering, and removal by organisms is also typically 30 years or less, but the amount of cesium in soil near Chernobyl isn’t decreasing nearly that fast. And scientists don’t know why.
It stands to reason that at some point the Ukrainian government would like to be able to use that land again, but the scientists have calculated that what they call cesium’s “ecological half-life” — the time for half the cesium to disappear from the local environment — is between 180 and 320 years.
“Normally you’d say that every 30 years, it’s half as bad as it was. But it’s not,” said Tim Jannik, nuclear scientist at Savannah River National Laboratory and a collaborator on the work. “It’s going to be longer before they repopulate the area.” [...]
2010-08-13 Chernobyl: The Gift That Never Stops Giving The threats to human health and the environment from Chernobyl fallout, scientists are now finding, will persist for a very long time by Robert Alvarez
It's been 24 years since the catastrophic explosion and fire occurred at Chernobyl in the Ukraine. The accident required nearly a million emergency responders and cleanup workers. According to a recent report published by the New York Academy of Medicine nearly one million people around the world have died from Chernobyl fallout.
Now we are finding that threats to human health and the environment from the radioactive fallout of this accident that blanketed Europe (and the rest of the world to a lesser extent) will persist for a very long time. There is an exclusionary zone near the reactor, roughly the size of Rhode Island (1000 sq kilometers), which because of high levels of contamination,people are not supposed to live there for centuries to come. There are also "hot spots" through out Russia, Poland Greece, Germany, Italy, UK, France, and Scandinavia where contaminated live stock and other foodstuff continue to be removed from human consumption.
My friends tell me that a growing number of Ukrainians are immigrating to Youngstown, OH ( where I grew up),Cleveland, Chicago, and other Ukrainian-American enclaves because of Chernobyl contamination threats.
Here are a few recent examples:

True to form, governments with major nuclear programs or ambitions are silent and are encouraging the view that it's time we forget about Chernobyl.
2011-08-01 The real impact of the disaster at ChNPP is yet to be seen, The Chernobyl Project blog
http://chernobylproject.blogspot.com/2011/08/real-impact-of-disaster-at-chnpp-are.html
According to professors Valeriy and Tatyana Glazko at the Agricultural University in Kiev, the biological effects on human beings will be available for analysis in 2025-2026. By then, the generation that was born under direct influence of fallout radiation, will have begun to form families and have children of their own. We will then be able to see what genetic consequences the Chernobyl disaster has had.
The scientists have noted, after tests on gophers and cows, that not only simpler life forms are affected, but also more advanced equivalents and this is confirmed by the results of experiments concerning the effect of radiation on different species of animals, including large mammals.
The testing on cows showed that on animals born before the disaster, each would have an average of 0,9 calves a year, whilst of their female offspring, exposed to alpha, beta and gamma radiation, 7 of 15 would not give birth. The fertility of cows of this second generation decreased with almost 50%.
Even worse results were shown when cows from the second generation were put in a testing farm in Polesie (area including northern Ukraine, southern Belarus and parts of Russia): Only 7 of 27 gave offspring and the rest either did not, or the calves dies shortly after being born. 
Observations of several generations of species, lead to the following conclusion: The effect of chronic exposure to low doses of ionizing radiation has a negative effect on the reproductive capacity. According to scientists, at least 30-35 generations are needed for a species to adapt to increased background radiation.
2010-07-30 Chernobyl zone shows decline in biodiversity by Victoria Gill Science reporter, BBC News
The largest wildlife census of its kind conducted in Chernobyl has revealed that mammals are declining in the exclusion zone surrounding the nuclear power plant.
The study aimed to establish the most reliable way to measure the impact on wildlife of contamination in the zone.
It was based on almost four years of counting and studying animals there.
The scientists say that birds provide the best "quantitative measure" of these impacts.
They report their findings in the journal Ecological Indicators...
...From 2006-09, they counted and examined wildlife including insects, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals.
Their previously published work revealed some of the negative impacts on birds and on insects of the low-level radiation that still contaminated the exclusion zone surrounding the power plant.
The new data on mammals and reptiles shows what Professor Moussaeu described as a "strong signal" of reduced biodiversity in these groups too.
The research team compared the abundance of species in the exclusion zone with similar types of habitats in the area, which were not contaminated.
"The truth is that these radiation contamination effects were so large as to be overwhelming," Professor Mousseau told BBC News.
During their census work, he and Dr Moller have also examined the effects of radiation contamination on the animals. They say that these impacts are particularly obvious in birds.
In their studies on barn swallows, the team observed birds with tumours on their feet, necks and around their eyes.
"We think they may be more susceptible, after their long migrations, to additional environmental stress," explained Professor Mousseau...
... "This is the first paper that provides quantitative, rigorous data that the mammals really are significantly affected by contamination," he told BBC News.
"That said - it's not a bad idea to set this place up as a wildlife haven - it's a natural laboratory where we can study the long-term consequences of this kind of an accident."
Dr Mousseau also criticised a recently made documentary film called Chernobyl, A Natural History, which has been promoted by a French production company as showing how nature has "recolonised" the exclusion zone in the absence of man.
Professor Mousseau said: "If society is ever to learn more about the long term environmental consequences of large scale accidents - and Chernobyl is just one of several - it is important that we all take our responsibilities seriously."
2011-06-12 6,000 Bq/kg of Cesium-137 found in mushrooms from Bulgaria — EU-wide food safety alert issued by ENENews
Radioactive mushrooms contaminated in Chernobyl disaster seized at British port, Daily Mail, June 11, 2011:

A ton of mushrooms containing ten times the safe level of a radioactive metal has been seized and destroyed by health chiefs.
The Bulgarian consignment of dried wild mushrooms is thought to have been irradiated by caesium 137 from the Chernobyl disaster [...]
The EU sets a maximum limit for caesium 137 in food of 600 becquerels per kilogram [...]
[T]he amount of radioactivity found in the mushrooms destined for British families was more than 6,000 becquerels.

UK Raises EU Alert over Radioactive Bulgarian Mushrooms, Sofia News Agency, June 11, 2011:

[...] Initially, it was thought the mushrooms have been irradiated by the Fukushima NPP disaster [...]
The UK Food Standards Agency has reported it has issued an EU-wide food safety alert relating to the case. [...]

2011-04-28 Report: Cesium levels around Chernobyl have not declined as anticipated (VIDEO) by ENENews.com
2011-03-28 Rain stimulating “reagents” used during Chernobyl to protect Moscow from fallout — Expert recommends same over Pacific for Fukushima by ENENews
2010-07-26 Twenty-five years on, Chernobyl still haunts affected areas as birth rates continue to dwindle by Andrei Ozharovsky, translated by Maria Kaminskaya, bellona.org, "KIEV – Ukrainian medical researchers have found the depressingly high male infertility rates in this former USSR republic can be directly linked to the lingering effects of the 1986 disaster at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. The same is likely true for the populations of other countries affected by the catastrophe – primarily, the neighbouring nations of Russia and Belarus – as well as those who helped in the immediate clean-up efforts and suffered from high radiation exposure levels as a result."


Photo caption from The world remembers Chernobyl "Activists hold portraits of the victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster during an anti-nuclear demonstration held on the 24th anniversary of the disaster outside the Indonesian Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources in Jakarta on April 26, 2010."

2010-04-27 The world remembers Chernobyl: A group of relatives of people killed in the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster gathered in Moscow on Monday to commemorate their dead and pay their respects, presstv.ir
"A protest rally called Chernobyl Way was also held in the Belarusian capital Minsk on Monday, which was the anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster.
The demonstrators said that the consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe must not be concealed at the state level and demanded that benefits and allowances be paid to liquidators and persons affected by the disaster as radiation spread across Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus.
Also on Monday, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich asked for more international assistance to keep the Chernobyl site safely sealed...
"...New research conducted by the American Geophysical Union indicates that it will take between 180 and 320 years for the Caesium 137 — a radioactive isotope — to disappear from the local environment, much longer than the 30 years that had been expected."
2009-12-15 Chernobyl Exclusion Zone Radioactive Longer Than Expected by Alexis Madrigal, wired.com, December 15, 2009

SAN FRANCISCO — Chernobyl, the worst nuclear accident in history, created an inadvertent laboratory to study the impacts of radiation — and more than twenty years later, the site still holds surprises.

Reinhabiting the large exclusion zone around the accident site may have to wait longer than expected. Radioactive cesium isn’t disappearing from the environment as quickly as predicted, according to new research presented here Monday at the meeting of the American Geophysical Union. Cesium 137's half-life — the time it takes for half of a given amount of material to decay — is 30 years. In addition to that, cesium-137’s total ecological half-life — the time for half the cesium to disappear from the local environment through processes such as migration, weathering, and removal by organisms is also typically 30 years or less, but the amount of cesium in soil near Chernobyl isn’t decreasing nearly that fast. And scientists don’t know why...


2009-11-19 Nuclear Payouts: Knowledge and Compensation in the Chernobyl Aftermath by Adriana Petryna
2006 Chernobyl: 20 Years, 20 Lives
“How long does an explosion last? Is it over when the final storm from the pressure wave has died down, or when the subsequent fire has been extinguished, or when the media no longer report on destruction - or does the explosion continue until the final remnants of human suffering are forgotten and genetic mutations have ceased.?" - EarthVision
Chernobyl – Twenty Years, Twenty Lives is EarthVision's photo journalistic journey through the countries of the Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Latvia, Sweden, France, and UK. It follows twenty people in their daily lives nowadays and reflects on how they changed after the events of April 1986. The goal of the project is to learn from the history and look at the accident from the present perspective at different levels, both locally and globally.
Almost 20 years after the Chernobyl disaster, controversy continues about the true effects of the disaster. Chernobyl Children's Project International believes that the story of Chernobyl can be best told through the eyes of the variety of people who have been affected by the disaster. That is why we are pleased to present this exhibit online – the views expressed are those of EarthVision and their subjects. The text and photographs are the property of EarthVision and are not to be used without permission.

- Meet Grigorij Sorikov, Pensioner, Belarus
- Meet Hanna Koslova, Wife and Mother, Ukraine
- Meet Valentina Smolnikowa, Buda-Koshelevo, Belarus
- Meet Alexander Filippov, Retired School Teacher, Babichi village, Belarus
- Meet Igor Komisarenko, Direktor of the Komisarenko Institute for Endochrinology and Metabolism, Kiev, Ukraine
- Meet Constantine Checherov, Nuclear Physicist, Kurchatov Institute, Moscow, Russia / Slavutich, Ukraine
- Meet Natalia Ivanovna Ivanova, Deputy Director, Vesnova Orphanage, Mogilev Oblast, Belarus
- Meet Danilo Vezhichanin, Mayor, the village of Yelno, Rivne Oblast, Ukraine

2006 ECRR Chernobyl 20 Years On: Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident
European Committee on Radiation Risk (Overview Page)
, Documents of the ECRR 2006 No1, Edited by C. C. Busby and A. V. Yablokov, Published on behalf of the European Committee on Radiation Risk Comité Européen sur le Risque de l’Irradiation, Brussels by Green Audit, 2006. "For further information on the content of the book click here (PDF, 4 pages)... The entire book is now a free download: a 4Mb PDF click here (PDF, 259 pages).
2004 Evidence of disease and birth defects in Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and other territories affected by the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, 100 studies summarized.
2000-12-15 Chernobyl nuclear plant shut down for last time by Sergei Shargorodsky, AP
2000-12-15 Chernobyl Zone: A World of Radiation and Death by Sergei Shargorodsky, AP "...At the time of the accident, about 7 million people lived in the contaminated territories, including 3 million children. About 350,400 people were resettled or left these areas. However, about 5.5 million people, including more than a million children, continue to live in the contaminated zones."
2000-10-05 Chernobyl wheat mutates quickly, Reuters

 

Scandinavia

2012-06-27 Isotope Course 2012, Hans Christian Ørsted Institute, University of Copenhagen, final exam (PDF):
"The Norwegian health authorities require that the radioactive concentration of Cs in commercially marketed sheep meat must not exceed 600 Bqkg-1. To comply with this requirement, it may be necessary to transfer the animals from the field some time before slaughtering, and in this period to feed them with fodder having with a low content of radioactive caesium."

In the spring of 2012 Norwegian news media ran stories about radioactivity due to 137Cs in the vegetation of Norwegian mountain areas, and in the meat from reindeer and sheep grazing in these areas. The activity could be traced back to the emission from the nuclear power station in Chernobyl in April 1986, which lead to an airborne radioactive contamination with 131I, 134Cs, 137Cs and other radionuclides…

"The fall of 2011 was a good year for mushrooms in Norway…. In some areas the radioactive 137Cs concentration in sheep meat was found to exceed 4000 Bq kg"

2012-02-21 “Unthinkable”: Reports surfacing of radioactive sheep in parts of Norway containing 4,000 Bq/kg, enenews.com
Title: Chernobyl still affects Norway; Source: The Foreigner; Author: Michael Sandelson
Date: Feb 21, 2012
Today, reports have surfaced that some sheep in certain parts of Norway contain 4,000 Becquerel per kilo of meat, almost six times higher than recommended by Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority (NRPA) officials.
The Norwegian Food Safety Authority’s Magnar Grudt tells NRK, “It’s way above the allowed limit for meat trading. 600 Becquerel per kilo is the maximum permitted for sheep.” [...]
” [...] we never thought we would still be measuring radioactivity in sheep today. It’s unthinkable.”
Read the report here
2011-12-30 ICRP underestimated the low dose symptom risk by 85% posted by Mochizuki, fukushima-diary.com
...In a area of Sweden ,where is affected by Chernobyl ,cancer rate is increasing but the annual dose is only 0.2 mSv ,which is one in fifth of ICRP standard.
Cancer risk increased by 34% annually...
2007-08-21 Mental impairment found in Swedish children born in wake of Chernobyl, bellona.org
...The report by researchers from Stockholm University and New York’s Columbia University found that children born in the eight municipalities experiencing the highest levels of radiation were 3.6 percent less likely than others to qualify for high school, the United Press International reported Thursday.
The researchers said it appears prenatal exposure to radiation levels previously considered safe was actually damaging to cognitive ability...
2004-12 Increase of regional total cancer incidence in north Sweden due to the Chernobyl accident? Martin Tondel, et al.
2004 Tondel M, Hjalmarsson P, Hardell L, Carisson G and Axelson A (2004) Increase in regional total cancer incidence in Northern Sweden. J Epidemiol. Community Health. 58 1011-10, See Yahoo comments "Increase in cancer in Sweden can be traced to Chernobyl," dated 2007-06-01 and "Re: Increase in Cancer in Sweden Can Be Traced to Chernobyl."
2004-01-03 Effect of low doses of ionising radiation in infancy on cognitive function in adulthood: Swedish population based cohort study, British Medical Journal 004;328:19, 3 Jan 04
1994-07-16 Fallout from Chernobyl and incidence of childhood leukaemia in Finland, 1976-92, Auvinen A, Hakama M, Arvela H, Hakulinen T, Rahola T, Suomela M, Söderman B, Rytömaa T. Source: Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety, Helsinki. "Population-weighted mean effective doses for first 2 years after the accident were 410 micro Sv for the whole country and 970 micro Sv for the population fifth with the highest dose. In all Finland, the incidence of childhood leukemia did not increase during 1976-1992..."

 

Britain, Scotland, and Ireland

2012-04-23 UK Established Animal Radiation 'Controls' Due To Cesium Contamination, agreenroad.blogspot.com.
"After the meltdown and melt through happened at Chernobyl, dangerous levels of radiation spread far and wide for thousands of square miles, including into areas such as UK, Scotland, Russia, Norway, Belarus and many other countries.
Some countries like the UK established controls on the eating of meat from animals that were in areas contaminated with Cesium radiation. They rules were put in place to protect the public from eating meat that contained over 1,000 Bq/kg of Cesium radiation.
The following article explains the animal controls in place inside the UK, since Chernobyl exploded. Affected and radioactively contaminated animals could not be exported, consumed or sold inside our outside of these 'hot' zones unless they were tested first, and found to be 'safe', with less than 1,000 Bq/kg of Cesium radiation.
"Post-Chernobyl monitoring and controls survey reports
The Food Standards Agency is responsible for ensuring food safety by preventing products with unacceptable levels of radioactivity from entering the food chain. Widespread monitoring in 1986 identified food safety concerns from meat from sheep grazing in the affected areas. The Agency manages restrictions on the movement of sheep in the affected areas to protect consumers.
The Agency's primary concern is to ensure food safety by maintaining these controls, but also remove controls where these are no longer necessary.
Of the 9,800 UK holdings, and more than 4 million sheep, originally placed under restriction following the accident, there are 334 farms that remain under some form of restriction in North Wales, and in Cumbria, only eight farms still remain under restriction. All Mark and Release controls were lifted in Northern Ireland in 2000 and in Scotland in 2010.
The Agency has reviewed the post-Chernobyl sheep controls to assess whether these protective measures are still required to maintain food safety. To inform this review, an assessment has been made of the levels of radiocaesium in sheep within the restricted areas during the summers of 2010 and 2011, and the potential consumer doses if control measures were to be lifted. The survey showed that the levels of radiocaesium rarely exceed the 1,000 Bq/kg limit during the summer months, when levels tend to be at their peak. An assessment of the radiation doses that more highly exposed consumers could receive from eating sheep meat from these farms, shows that the consumer risk is now very low. The assessment report can be accessed via the link below.
The Agency has launched a consultation to seek the views of a range of stakeholders on the removal of the existing post-Chernobyl sheep controls. Details of the consultation and how to respond can be accessed via the link below.
During the review consultation period, and until a final decision is made, the current restrictions on the movement of sheep will remain in place.
Background to the Chernobyl accident
In 1986, an accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the former USSR (now Ukraine) released large quantities of radioactivity into the atmosphere. Some of this radioactivity, predominantly radiocaesium-137, was deposited on certain upland areas of the UK, where sheep farming is the primary land-use.
Due to the particular chemical and physical properties of the peaty soil types present in these upland areas, the radiocaesium is still able to pass easily from soil to grass and so accumulates in sheep.
Food safety controls
A maximum limit of 1,000 becquerels per kilogram (Bq/kg) of radiocaesium is applied to sheep meat affected by the accident to protect consumers. This limit was introduced in the UK in 1986, based on advice from the European Commission's Article 31 group of experts.
Under powers provided in the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 (FEPA), which can be found on the Office of Public Sector Information website via the link below, emergency orders have been used since 1986 to impose restrictions on the movement and sale of sheep exceeding the limit in certain parts of Cumbria, North Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The emergency orders define geographical areas, often termed 'restricted areas', within which the controls must be followed. Under the FEPA orders, sheep with levels of contamination above the limit are not allowed to enter the food chain.
A management system known as the Mark and Release scheme operates in restricted areas. Under this scheme, a farmer wishing to move sheep out of a restricted area can have them monitored to determine the level of radiocaesium.
A live monitoring technique is used, where a radiation monitor is held against the sheep, giving a count rate (in counts per second), which is converted to a concentration (becquerels per kilogram or Bq/kg) using a derived conversion factor. To allow for inherent variability in live monitoring results, a pass mark is applied, which has been set so there is only a 1 in 40 chance of a sheep above the limit giving a monitor reading below.
Any sheep that exceed the monitoring pass mark are marked with a dye and are not released from restrictions. Those that pass are allowed to enter the food chain.
http://www.food.gov.uk/science/surveillance/radiosurv/chernobyl/
Today however, the government agency in charge of these 'hot spots' is has lifted ALL CONTAMINATED ANIMAL CONTROLS, (as of Feb, 2012) despite the fact that animals are still testing in the range of 1,000 Bq/kg of Cesium radiation, and will be for the next 300 years (the half life of cesium, times 10)"
http://www.food.gov.uk/news/consultations/ukwideconsults/2011/removalpostchernobylsheepcontrol
[See Schmallenberg Virus or Fukushima Radiation? (YouTube) (2:15) March 4, 2012]
One of the well known effects of radiation coming out of nuclear plant accidents is to knock down the immune system, making an animal or human more subject to catching all kinds of diseases, including viruses.
The UK has recently reported an outbreak of Schmallenberg virus. There are numerous reports of deformities and deaths of lambs in the UK and Scotland, which would be expected with these doses of Cesium radiation, as well as from other radioactive substances.
From a 1996 report; "This month several deformed lambs have been born on the farm. One had no lower jaw, another was missing bones. A third delivered by Mr Roberts' son, Emlyn, seemed like a solid mass of gristle. We've not seen anything like that before," said Mr Roberts.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/nuclear-cloud-hangs-over-the-hills-1306191.html
This matches very well with what happens to animals after a nuclear accident, (as well as human beings). Now let's fast forward to 2012.
[See Schmallenberg virus hits UK farms (YouTube) (2:11)]
Feb 1, 2012 - The effects of this 'virus' affect about 10% (video above) to 50% (video below) of all of the lambs. The limb and body defects look remarkably like the effects of low level radiation damage.
[See Schmallenberg virus 'caught UK by surprise' (YouTube) (1:40)]
Even if this virus is truly causing all of these deaths and deformities, it would be also be a 'normal' and expected effect of low level nuclear radiation reducing the immune strength.
Our closing question is; are any of these sheep and their offspring that have these deformities and worse, being tested for radiation exposure? Is the virus being found primarily in areas that are also 'hot' zones?
Is anyone testing for things like cesium, strontium, plutonium, uranium in the bodies of these dead lambs?
So far at least, the interest of the farmers and government authorities seems to be to get rid of any traces or evidence that low level radiation is impacting animals in any way, rather then exploring in depth the effects of low level radiation on animal health.
UK Established Animal Radiation 'Controls' Due To Cesium Contamination
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/uk-established-animal-radiation.html
2003-05-03 Chernobyl accident still haunts UK by Zackary Moss, bellona.org "Nearly seventeen years after the world?s worst nuclear power accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant, some 400 British farms are still being monitored for radioactive contamination."
2001-05 Thyroid cancer in children and young adults in the North of England. Is increasing incidence related to the Chernobyl accident? by Cotterill S. J., Pearce M. S., Parker L.

 


Caption in German via Translate.google.com to English: "Time course of radiation exposure by incorporated (ingested into the body) of cesium-137 in mSv per year. Average for a reference group of 30 male subjects measured their incorporation in the whole body counter of the BfS [Federal Office for Radiation Protection] in Neuherberg and the resulting radiation dose was calculated (from BfS web page).

 

 

Northern and Central European Countries (South of the Baltic and English Channel, North of Italian Alps)

2012-04-23 Radioactive Boars And Deer Unfit To Eat 950 Miles From Chernobyl, agreenroad.blogspot.com
It turns out that generations after the Chernobyl disaster, boar (wild pigs), deer and potentially other creatures are still unfit to eat, despite living more than 950 miles away from the disaster.
It turns out that depending on what the pigs and deer are eating, anywhere from 20% to 80% of the animals are contaminated with radioactive Cesium 137, making them unfit to eat due to high radiation levels. After measuring, the government reimburses the hunters for game that is thrown in the garbage, as explained in the following video by AP.
[See Wild Boars Contaminated With Chernobyl Radiation, (1:24) August 19, 2010]
"We still feel the consequences of Chernobyl's fallout here," said Christian Kueppers, a radiation expert at Germany's Institute for Applied Ecology in Freiburg. The problem is so common that now all wild boars bagged by hunters in the affected regions have to be checked for radiation. Government compensation to hunters whose quarry has to be destroyed has added up to €460,000 ($650,000) over the past 12 months, Hagbeck said."
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2011/0401/Radioactive-boars-in-Germany-a-legacy-of-Chernobyl
The number of animals that have to be disposed of numbers in the thousands each year. The unsafe radiation trigger in Germany is 600 Bq per kilogram or more.
In the UK the level of unsafe radiation was triggered at 1,000 Bq per kilogram Cesium 137 in sheep and other animals consumed for their meat. However, that testing and contaminated meat exclusion program has recently been dropped completely, so people in the UK can now eat radioactively contaminated sheep or other meat, with no radiation measurement or warning labels at all. This also means that this meat can be exported abroad.
The average level of Cesium radiation found in meat before Chernobyl was less than .5 Bq per kilogram . A total amount of Cesium consumed per year would total around 100 Bq from both plant, milk and animal sources, (all of it coming from the nuclear bomb testing era)
Austria also has a problem with radioactive Cesium at levels much higher than normal in mushrooms, deer and wild pigs.
In July of 2010, Spiegel reported that; "according to the Environment Ministry in Berlin, almost €425,000 ($555,000) was paid out to hunters in 2009 in compensation for wild boar meat that was too contaminated by radiation to be sold for consumption. That total is more than four times higher than compensation payments made in 2007.
www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,709345,00.html
The German Environment Ministry reports that the average level of radioactive Cesium is 7,000 Bq per kg in wild pigs that live in the southern parts of Germany including Bavaria, near the Czech Republic. So far, Germany alone has paid out over €238 million to pay hunters for damages related to Chernobyl radiation, ever since Chernobyl Reactor IV exploded on April 26, 1986.
Why are hunters being paid for wild pigs that test high in radioactivity? Germany has an Atomic Energy Law which forces the government to compensate people for harm done by radiation. It not only regulates nuclear energy, but it also requires that the government pay compensation to anyone who harvests a radioactively contaminated animal.
Since many hunters prefer to take home a wild boar rather than cash, Bavarian hunters have been searching for ways to reduce the radiation in wild pigs. It seems that a chemical called Giese salt (AFCF) speeds up the excretion of cesium in wild pigs. This chemical binds itself to cesium, and is then taken out of the body. This same chemical is also being used in farm animals to reduce their radioactive burden.
Radioactive Boars And Deer Unfit To Eat 950 Miles From Chernobyl; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/radioactive-boars-and-deer-unfit-to-eat.html
2010-07-30 A Quarter Century after Chernobyl Radioactive Boar on the Rise in Germany by Charles Hawley, spiegel.de
...Many of the boar that are killed land on the plates of diners across Germany, but it is forbidden to sell meat containing high levels of radioactive caesium-137 -- any animals showing contamination levels higher than 600 becquerel per kilogram must be disposed of. But in some areas of Germany, particularly in the south, wild boar routinely show much higher levels of contamination. According to the Environment Ministry, the average contamination for boar shot in Bayerischer Wald, a forested region on the Bavarian border with the Czech Republic, was 7,000 becquerel per kilogram. Other regions in southern Germany aren't much better.
Germany's Atomic Energy Law, which regulates the use of nuclear energy in the country, mandates that the government in Berlin pay compensation to hunters who harvest contaminated animals.
Contaminated Wild Pig
Wild boar are particularly susceptible to radioactive contamination due to their predilection for chomping on mushrooms and truffles, which are particularly efficient at absorbing radioactivity. Indeed, whereas radioactivity in some vegetation is expected to continue declining, the contamination of some types of mushrooms and truffles will likely remain the same, and may even rise slightly -- even a quarter century after the Chernobyl accident.
"In the regions where it is particularly problematic, all boar that are shot are checked for radiation," reports Andreas Leppmann, from the German Hunting Federation. There are 70 measuring stations in Bavaria alone.
In addition, for the last year and a half, Bavarian hunters have been testing ways to reduce the amount of caesium-137 absorbed by wild boar. A chemical mixture known as Giese salt, when ingested, has been shown to accelerate the excretion of the radioactive substance. Giese salt, also known as AFCF, is a caesium binder and has been used successfully to reduce radiation in farm animals after Chernobyl. According to Joachim Reddemann, an expert on radioactivity in wild boar with the Bavarian Hunting Federation, a pilot program in Bavaria that started a year and a half ago has managed to significantly reduce the number of contaminated animals...

 

Southern European Countries (Italy, Balkans, Greece)

1990-04-16 Reduction of births in Italy after the Chernobyl accident (PDF) by Bertollini R, Di Lallo D, Mastroiacovo P, Perucci CA originally appeared in the Scandinavian Journal of Work and Environmental Health 1990;16(2):96-101, also available at PubMed and in Google.com viewer. [Ed. Note: It is well worth covering Italy's response for several reasons. First, the Italian government took more prompt and effective action than many other governments by restricting food sources -- a primary source of dangerous bioaccumulation of radionuclides -- a type of action sadly neglected by most European governments during the Fukushima catastrophe. To its credit, major Italian media also alerted the public to the dangers. Secondly, Italy -- like most other European countries -- experienced serious contamination in a matter of just two weeks, whose effects continue to persist in certain areas even to this day. Third, it is well documented that radiation increases sterility, miscarriages, and birth defects, therefore the significant reduction in the Italian birthrate due to Chernobyl was probably a combination of both radiation effects and voluntary abortions motivated by a fear of potential radiation effects -- which are very real].
Abstract
After the Chernobyl accident serious concern spread throughout Italy about the possible effects of the consequent exposure to radioactivity on fetuses. A reduction of births in the first three months of 1987, and particularly in February (7.2% reduction in the birth rate), was observed throughout Italy. In April-June 1987 a 4.8% increase in the number of births was observed. The magnitude of both phenomena varied in different areas of the country. The total number of births in the first six months of 1987 was very similar to the expected (264,241 versus 263,659). Induced abortions increased in Lombardia (northern Italy) in June (+1.6%) and July of 1986 (+3.4%) and in Campania (southern Italy) in June (+12.7%) and August (+4.3%). No increase in legal abortions was detected in Lazio (central Italy). Italian data suggest a voluntary decrease in the number of planned pregnancies and the termination of some of them in the first weeks after the accident as a consequence of post-disaster stress.
[First paragraphs of main article:]
After the Chernobyl accident the radioactive cloud produced by the explosion of the Soviet nuclear plant spread over Europe and virtually the whole northern hemisphere from the end of April to the beginning of May 1986.
The cloud reached Italy on April 30th. An increase in environmental radioactivity was detected through- out the country, the highest observed levels occurring in northern Italy. The Italian government introduced countermeasures to limit exposure to radiation; these measures included a prohibition of the marketing and consumption of fresh milk, milk products, and leafy vegetables. The ban was introduced on the third of May and lasted until May 12th for leafy vegetables, and until May 24th for milk and milk products.
The additional radioactivity was low throughout the country. Estimates of the radioactive exposure of individuals in the following months showed that the average effective dose of adults in Italy in the first year after the accident was 0.6 mSv (60 mRem); exposure was higher in the north (0.7 mSv = 70 mRem) than in central (0.6 mSv = 60 mRem) and in southern (0.5 mSv = 50 mRem) Italy (1). In comparison, the average natural background radiation is about 2 mSv/ year (200 mRem) (1). Therefore the additional exposure due to the accident was between 25 and 35 0/0 of the yearly dose of the natural background.
The consequences of the accident on the environment and on health were extensively covered by the media...
1989-10-12 Radiocaesium contents of meat in Italy after the Chernobyl accident and their changes during the cooking process by M. Lofti, M. Nataro, S. Piermattei, L. Tommasino, D. Azimi-Garakani, Journal of Environmental Radioactivity
Abstract
Levels of radioactive contamination in meat have been studied, along with ways of decreasing them. Specifically, radiocaesium concentrations in a range of samples of different types of meat collected throughout Italy since April 1986 are presented here. The samples are of beef, lamb, pork, chicken, turkey and rabbit. It was found that the radiocaesium content of lamb is higher than that in any of the other meat types considered here. Studies of the decrease in the radiocaesium content of meat during cooking showed that, when the meat is cooked in salt water (1%), the activity decreases by as much as 80% relative to uncooked samples.
1987-10-31 The victims of chernobyl in Greece: induced abortions after the accident by D Trichopoulos, X Zavitsanos, C Koutis, P Drogari, C Proukakis, and E Petridou, Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Athens Medical School, ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. (PDF of page view here)
We estimated that in Greece during the period of concern after the Chernobyl accident-that is, during most of May 1986-23% of early pregnancies at perceived risk were artificially terminated (((9103-7032)/ 9103)x 100) and that during the whole of 1986 about 2500 otherwise wanted pregnancies (2-5% of the total) were interrupted because of perceived radiation risk (since there was only a small deficit of live births during March 1987 it is unlikely that there will be an important Chernobyl related deficit of live births in the subsequent months). This empirical estimate is not incompatible with the speculative figure of the International Atomic Energy Agency of 100, 000 to 200,000 Chernobyl related induced abortions in the whole of Western Europe.

 

North America and Elsewhere

2011-06-15 Huge spike in US infant mortality in the four months after Chernobyl vs. Is dramatic increase in US baby deaths a result of Fukushima Fallout? (VIDEO) by ENENews.com
2011-03-18 Detoxify or Die: Natural Radiation Protection Therapies for Coping With the Fallout of the Fukushima Nuclear Meltdown by Gabriela Segura, M.D.
" ...I set out to review the available literature about accessible and alternative therapies in case of nuclear disasters as well as data about the Chernobyl catastrophe. What I found was shocking enough but know that there is also well-documented essential knowledge that can protect you and your loved ones."
"This article includes an overview of the publication Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment which appeared in Annals of the New York Academy (2009)..."
...the percentage of food products with radioactive contamination in excess of official permissible levels did not decrease for 14 years after the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe. On the contrary, this percentage began to increase in 1996. In spite of official secrecy, the full picture of Chernobyl food contamination in countries as far away as the United States has finally begun to emerge:

"Many people suffer from continuing chronic low-dose radiation 23 years after the catastrophe, owing primarily to consumption of radioactively contaminated food. An important consideration is the fact that given an identical diet, a child's radiation exposure is three- to fivefold higher than that of an adult. Since more than 90% of the radiation burden nowadays is due to Caesium-137, which has a half-life of about 30 years, contaminated areas will continue to be dangerously radioactive for roughly the next three centuries.
"When children have the same menu as adults, they get up to five times higher dose burdens from locally produced foodstuffs because of their lower weight and more active processes of metabolism. Children living in rural villages have a dose burden five to six times higher than city children of the same age.
"Daily exposure to small amounts of radionuclides (mostly Cs-137) is virtually unavoidable as they get into the body with food (up to 94%), with drinking water (up to 5%), and through the air (about 1%). Accumulation of radionuclides in the body is dangerous, primarily for children, and for those living in the contaminated territories where there are high levels of Cs-137 in local foodstuffs. The incorporation of radionuclides is now the primary cause of the deterioration of public health in the contaminated territories.
"Experience has shown that existing official radioactive monitoring systems are inadequate (not only in the countries of the Former Soviet Union). Generally, the systems cover territories selectively, do not measure each person, and often conceal important facts when releasing information. The common factor among all governments is to minimize spending for which they are not directly responsible, such as the Chernobyl meltdown, which occurred 23 years ago. Thus officials are not eager to obtain objective data of radioactive contamination of communities, individuals, or food.
"We have to take responsibility not only for our own health, but for the health of future generations of humans, plants, and animals, which can be harmed by mutations resulting from exposure to even the smallest amount of radioactive contamination. [Nesterenko, A. V., Nesterenko, V. B. and Yablokov]

2009-05-08 METALS IN MEDICINE AND THE ENVIRONMENT: Metals Health Consequences of Chernobyl, by Sarah Kleinfeld, faculty.virginia.edu. "Effective dose is measured in millisieverts (mSv) and the WHO report states that the average annual dose of radiation worldwide due to background radiation is along the lines of 2.4 mSv. It is believed that in the period from 1986 to 2005, the average effective dose that people received in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia from Chernobyl was 10-30 mSv. Those who were exposed to highly contaminated areas had an average effective dose of 50 mSv. Though this amount appears high, the WHO report states that inhabitants of India, Iran, Brazil, and China received effective doses of 100-200 mSv over a twenty year period due to high levels of background radiation in areas of these countries. The average annual dose that most people received due to Chernobyl was around 1 mSv, lower than the world wide average of 2.4 mSv."
1995-08-19
Thyroid cancer in the United States since accident at Chernobyl (.pdf), by Iujam Reid and Joseph Mangano, BMJ,
"...There is an apparent five year lag between exposure to radioactive fallout from Chernobyl and rising rates of thyroid cancer. In contrast, lag times have been reported to be up to 40 years for iatrogenic thyroid cancer due to irradiation. Continued tracking of rates may show a progressive rise in thyroid cancer attributable to fallout of a variety of (iodine and other) high energy nucleotides from Chernobyl. It seems prudent to examine further the long term effects, in particular thyroid cancer, on populations distant from Chernobyl."
1986 (For this time period) Radiation Sickness, by Toni Reita, natural-health-home-remedies.com.
Dr Ernest Sternglass of University of Pittsburgh presented the following infant mortality rate for the Pacific states, following chernobyl fallout in May 1986, just one month after Chernobyl:

* May 1986 54% increase infant mortality in Washington state
* May 1986 48% increase infant mortality in California compared to previous June
* June 1986 245% increase deaths per thousand live births in Washington state
* June 1986 900% increase infant mortality rate per live births in Massachusetts

 

Comparisons of Chernobyl with Fukushima

2012-04-23 TV: Nuclear scientists concerned about structural safety of Fukushima fuel pools — 85 times more long-lived radioactivity than Chernobyl (VIDEO), by ENENews.com.
2012-04-22 Chernobyl expert takes a look at Tohoku's trees by Winifred Bird, Special Special to The Japan Times, japantimes.co.jp. (h/t Japan Times on Plant Mutations: “Trees died and others grew in abnormal shapes” says ecologist visiting Japan from Chernobyl by ENENews.com, April 22, 2012).
...the situation around Chernobyl was complicated by the wide range of radionuclides emitted during the disaster.
Whereas in the long term Japan faces mostly radiocesium contamination, Ukraine also has to deal with contaminants including radiostrontium and, near the plant, plutonium. Soon after the accident these contaminants began moving from the surface of plants into the leaf litter and the soil below. From there some of them were taken up by plants, returned to the soil via fallen leaves, and taken up again in a continuous cycle.
Where the contamination was highest, some trees died and others grew in abnormal shapes. Starting about 5 to 10 km from the plant, however, Zibtsev says the forests appear normal — if unusually rich in wildlife, due to the absence of humans. Nevertheless, the contamination remains.
Zibtsev explains that as long as trees and leaf litter are healthy, forest ecosystems trap radionuclides and prevent them from seeping down into the groundwater, or being carried into streams by erosion — or blowing away as dust in the wind.
Ukraine's management policy has aimed to maximize the role of forests as holding tanks for contamination rather than attempt decontamination.
"The approach has been to let the ecosystem work. Fungi is much more effective than millions of people (at containing contamination)," Zibtsev said. He is skeptical of proposals in Japan to decontaminate parts of the forest by removing leaf litter, undergrowth and tree branches, because such measures could undermine forest health.
"It's like if your body is functioning, and you decide, why don't I remove my liver to clean it? And then you realize you can't live without it," he says, with characteristic black humor. "People in Japan want the forest to be clean. They want to rewind before 3/11. (But) we're living in a new reality."
In Ukraine, that new reality persists 26 years after the disaster. The Chernobyl exclusion zone remains off-limits for living, its forests untouched except for experiments and minimal management aimed at preventing fires, tree disease, and insect infestation (which, by weakening the forest, weakens its role as buffer).
Outside the exclusion zone, the government regulates forest use according to contamination levels, which scientists have carefully monitored.
Residents receive maps showing where to avoid harvesting mushrooms, hunting wildlife and grazing their livestock. Because food now accounts for 70 to 90 percent of exposure, Zibtsev says, this greatly reduces health risks...
2012-02-23 Stringent? Radiation Safety Standards for Food: Chernobyl vs Fukushima (4:46)
"This video is a combination of two different video segments to show a contrast in attitudes toward the radiation safety standards for food between Belarus and Japan.
The first one is from a Swiss TSI TV program entitled "Ten Years after the Chernobyl Accident" (1998), broadcasted on Japan's NHK BS1 in an unidentified year. A scientist speaking in the segment is late Dr. Vassilli Nesterenko, a physicist from Belarus, who made tremendous efforts on the consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe (See wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vassili_Nesterenko).
Please also note that even children who lived more than 200km away from the Chernobyl plant suffered from terrible health problems.
The second segment is from a NHK Fukushima's local news program called "HamaNaka Aizu Today" aired on February 16, 2012, reporting the new radiation safety standards for food that will become effective in April.
The original video: http://youtu.be/JyBrDLq7A8o"
agreenroad.blogspot.com (which has embedded this video at its site) comments:
"In the following short video, you will see how Chernobyl area food supplies are regulated and what they do to test children easily, quickly and accurately for INTERNAL radiation exposure to Cesium.
You will see a child sitting on a metal type of chair, which is actually a Cesium detector hooked up to a computer. The internal radiation dose accumulated per kilogram is displayed on the computer monitor in front of the parents and health investigator.
The computer screen shows the radiation load to the parent, and they talk to the parent about how to reduce the radiation load in the child. (Certain foods are known to concentrate radiation much more than others, so it is fairly easy to avoid these)
The radiation safety authorities around Chernobyl have set food safety standards that allow only a maximum of 30 Bq per Kg of food for consumption by children.
The areas in Japan that are contaminated have no such radiation testing program, (doctors and hospitals in Japan actively discourage internal radiation testing, or post signs saying no testing is available.)
No such internal radiation testing devices as the one shown above in the video exist in Japan (to our knowledge). These devices make it easy and fast to determine the total Cesium load of a child exposed to radiation.
The only way to get tested by the government in Japan is to go to special clinics where you only get a report sent to you some time later, not instantly. And the testing device does not actually measure internal radiation, so no one has been found with any unsafe internal radiation yet. These government sponsored clinics measure 'energy' fields, not radiation.
The video also explains the 'new' lower safety standards, but fails to mention that these previous higher limits are actually VERY HIGH, and the original radiation food and water safety limits were MUCH LOWER than the new proposed limits. Basically, they are lying about what they are doing..."
2012-02-08 U.S. University: Low-level radiation appears to have had immediate effects on bird populations in Fukushima Pref. — Areas surveyed are mostly still open to human occupation — Worse than expected — More pronounced than Chernobyl by ENENews.com
2012-02-02 Study finds Fukushima worse than Chernobyl on bird population — “Dramatically” elevated DNA mutation rates and extinctions — Insect life significantly reduced — Shows immediate consequence of radiation by ENENews.com
2012-01-30 Mainichi: Abnormalities in offspring of mammals to get particular attention in Fukushima study by gov’t — Shrinking brain capacity, drop in population seen in Chernobyl wildlife by ENENews.com
Title: Gov’t starts study of radiation effects on wildlife near Fukushima plant
Source: The Mainichi Daily News, Date: Jan 30, 2012

The Ministry of the Environment has started a study to examine the effects of radiation from the disaster-struck Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant on nearby plant and wildlife, particularly their reproductive functions. [...]
The specimens will be checked for radioactive cesium levels, and also for anomalies in their appearance or DNA. The study will pay particular attention to the reproductive faculties of amphibians and mammals and checks for abnormalities in their offspring [...]
After the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident, abnormalities in the local swallow population were reported, such as low white blood cell counts, shrinking brain capacities and a drop in bird numbers. Even 26 years later, radiation is said to be affecting the area. [...]

2012-01-20 Mainichi: Japan now looking to Chernobyl info for help dealing with human health effects of nuclear meltdown — Will enable gov’t to implement “effective measures”, enenews.com
2012-01-09 Japan Journalist: I feel people’s brain damage from radiation is happening faster than we ever expected, enenews.com
Jan. 6 tweet by Kinosita Kouta, a Japanese Journalist (Translation via Fukushima Diary)
At my lecture at Shirahama, I talked about my concern about the organic damage to the brain by radionuclides in Tokyo area for the first time. I feel like it’s going faster than we ever expected. The bad points of the personality are becoming more obvious, not answering the question directly and stick to different topics, forgetting about contents of the conversations. I often feel like, this person was not like this.
In the following interview broadcast within the last few weeks, a Chernobyl researcher reveals recent findings showing impaired neurological development in birds from radiation-contaminated areas that was influencing their ability to survive (e.g. escaping predators, finding food):
Top Biology Professor: Incredibly high frequency of very, very large abdominal tumors observed on latest trip to Chernobyl -- Also high percentage of smaller brains (VIDEO)
2011-12-21 Canada Medical Journal: Experts calling for wider Japan evacuations — Officials would have to evacuate 1,800 km² using Chernobyl standard by ENENews.com
The Atomic Reactor Explosions of Fukushima and Chernobyl – updated, November 12, 2011 by Mikkai
The possibility of an atomic explosion in an atomic reactor is well hidden and ignored by common science, mostly servants and getting direct feed from the atomic industry.
Dear Readers: There is a mightier power than an earthquake. It’s called “nuclear explosion”. And it can happen in each reactor. No reactor withstands this. If the burst protection of a reactor can not include an explosion in a reactor, then this contradicts the construction specifications. No reactor should not have been built. So, every operating license is an illusion and illegal. Therefore, the nuclear explosion in a reactor is denied by the nuclear industry, so that the reactors be allowed to continue and can be built.
From the book “History of the British nuclear industry” by Margaret Gowing, “Britain and Atomic Energy”, on page 382 the former U.S. water-cooled graphite reactor at Hanford is described:
“To be built in view of the risks of an accident, the reactor is at an isolated location. Because water absorbs neutrons, and when the water flow is interrupted and the control rods do not occur immediately in action, the water evaporates in the cooling system and can no longer absorb the neutrons . These neutrons were therefore available to increase the fission rate in the reactor, which is super critical with power. The temperature rises, the fuel evaporated and the radioactivity is spreading widely. “
On page 385 we find the position:
“The gas cooling is to avoid the risk of severe supercritical state …”
So the knowledge of the danger of a atomic explosion that can occur in a water-cooled graphite-gas reactor, is as old as the principle of the reactor itself.
# Would the people be aware that the Chernobyl explosion was an atomic explosion, it would attract the public to make a link between civilian and military atomic energy, which credibility and image of the nuclear industry would put an irreparable blow
# An atomic explosion in a reactor can rule out the provisions contrary to nuclear safety. Consequently, reactors should be shut down.
Once the atomic bomb explodes, it is gone. Once an atomic reactor explodes, it’s emitting radiation for eternity.
Forgotten: The 1975 version of Fukushima and Chernobyl in Leningrad: Meltdown and 1.5 million Curie of activity got into the environment. Tons of liquid radioactive waste were discharged into the Baltic Sea by the Leningrad Nuclear Power Plant (RBMK type like CHERNOBYL): http://www.greenworld.org.ru/?q=ang_lnpp1_main – two RBMK 1000 Chernobyl reactors are still running! Planned Shutdown: 2018 & 2020. by Sergej Mirnyi, (http://www.mirnyi.arwis.com/) Engineer, chemist, liquidator at IPPNW congress Vienna 1996: http://wilpfinternational.org/publications/Tchernobyl_consequences.pdf – page 23: The picture of the contamination by nuclear tests over Nevada looked like an octopus. The image of the radiation on the reactor at Chernobyl Unit IV looked like a Radioactive Mount Everest, the top of the concentrated area around the reactor was around, from its center was a long, thin trace, a second was wide and covered the entire eastern Belarus.
Nuclear explosions caused the Chernobyl disaster – page 22: http://www.scribd.com/doc/33726185/Peace-Researcher-Vol2-Issue09-June-1996
From Fukushima-Diary.com: Yellow light was seen when reactor 3 exploded: http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/11/yellow-light-was-seen-when-reactor-3-exploded/#comment-28709
Arnie Gundersen, C. Busby are not alone. The knowledge about the atomic explosion in an atomic reactor is as old as the principle of the atomic reactor itself.
Chernobyl and Fukushima were atomic explosions:
Cobalt 60 was detected in Kashiwashi of Chiba. It proves reactor 3 had an atomic explosion, and it proves gov / tepco are still hiding most important facts.It’s very natural to think there may be way more things concealed: http://10401.blog.fc2.com/blog?-entry-88.htm (now taken offline). But they also found Cobalt 60 in seafood: http://www.scribd.com/doc/65128490/GreenPeace-Fukushima-Seafood-Results
Chernobyl too, but this is IGNORED by today’s science:
http://tekknorg.wordpress.?com/2011/03/16/fukushima-c?hernobyl-unofficial-data/
Dr. Chris Busby Believes Fukushima Was A Nuclear Explosion:
http://www.rense.com/general93/chrisbsy.htm (link now correct)
AND: University of Innsbruck says Chernobyl was primarily caused by a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION – Page 1, left: translation: “… the one Nuclear explosion, and finally a meltdown followed by “: http://physik.uibk.ac.at/p?hysik4/tschernobyl/2-Der_U?nfall.pdf AND: “Some specialists are sure that after the steam explosion a nuclear explosion similar to an atomic bomb explosion occurred in the core of the 4th Unit .
It’s power had to be much higher than power of the steam explosion. The conclusion of the authors is based on experimental findings established by studying of activities of isotopes 133Xe and 133Xem in the air that existed in the first days after the Chernobyl accident. Their study was carried out in the city Cherepovets that is about 1,000 km in north direction from the Chernobyl NPP.
The authors could find that the ratio of activities of these isotopes is the same as in the case of nuclear explosion.” SOURCE: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.?jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/kr79p?df/Malko1.pdf — ...[more to this article -- very good!]
2011-12-01 Chernobyl Consultant: Fukushima decommissioning more complex since more melted fuel — Level of devastation remains unknown by ENENews
2011-10-27 Physician: Does Fukushima fallout explain rise in blood clots? — Circulatory diseases one of most widespread consequences after Chernobyl by ENENews.com
Oct. 26 — This week, The Daily Yomiuri published an article that revealing an “alarming development” — Evacuees living in temporary housing units are developing blood clots in their legs.
Yomiuri says, “The incidence of the problem, known as deep vein thrombosis, was high in the shelters where evacuees remain inactive in limited spaces for long periods.”
Though according to a report by physician Janette D. Sherman, M.D. appearing in yesterday’s San Francisco Bay View, “There may be an alternative explanation for the increase in blood clots, in addition to inactivity.”
“Unless the biological properties of radiation are canceled, the adverse effects observed in the Chernobyl population will certainly occur in those exposed to the fallout from Fukushima,” notes Sherman.
“For both children and adults, diseases of the blood and circulatory and lymphatic systems are among the most widespread consequences of the Chernobyl contamination, and especially among evacuees and those who worked on cleanup.”
“Data from Chernobyl confirmed elevated Cs-137 levels and adverse effects upon the blood, blood vessels and heart.”
Read More: Blood clots found in the legs of Fukushima evacuees
2011-10-20 Japan allows triple amount of cesium in food than Chernobyl did — Over 50% of store-bought seafood samples contaminated with radiation by ENENews
2011-10-17 Blackout: Japan media yet to mention radioactive baseball field in Tokyo — 4 times Chernobyl ‘contaminated’ levels — Parents, kids clueless by ENENews
2011-09-14 Where Could Fukushima's Corium Be? (YouTube) (2:19) [Editor's Note: This makes a comparison with the way corium flowed at Chernobyl], uploaded 14 Sept 2011
2011-08-29 Why the Fukushima disaster is worse than Chernobyl: Japan has been slow to admit the scale of the meltdown. But now the truth is coming out, .independent.co.uk, "...But many experts warn that the crisis is just beginning. Professor Tim Mousseau, a biological scientist who has spent more than a decade researching the genetic impact of radiation around Chernobyl, says he worries that many people in Fukushima are "burying their heads in the sand." His Chernobyl research concluded that biodiversity and the numbers of insects and spiders had shrunk inside the irradiated zone, and the bird population showed evidence of genetic defects, including smaller brain sizes." (h/t Independent: Why Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl; “Now the truth is coming out” — 72,000 times worse than Hiroshima & 1 million+ cancer deaths, says professor by ENENews.com, 29 Aug 2011)
2011-08-17 Researcher: Tokyo sample had radioactivity levels higher than in Chernobyl exclusion zone — “There’s a very, very high level of contamination even as far south as Tokyo” (VIDEO) by ENENews
2011-07-14 Radiation Causing Unusual Changes: What's Happening to Children Now? (Video) (July 14, 2011) (25:11) (h/t Chernobyl Expert says of Japan: “Everywhere I go, I hear stories similar to the Chernobyl cases” (VIDEO) 31 Oct 2011).
...HOST:
An Increasing number of people are worried about their health…
We asked the viewers to report any unusual changes in their health…
These are the reports from the viewers. This many. (holds up two massive binders).
GUEST, Mika Noro, President of NPO ‘The Bridge to Chernobyl’ which has helped to bring Chernobyl survivors to Japan:
Symptoms similar to the Chernobyl children are being reported…
So I came to suspect there might be more health damages than had been reported on TV…
I started investigating the situation and felt it was really dangerous… around the end of March…
Everywhere I go I hear stories similar to the Chernobyl cases…
I strongly feel similar symptoms are occurring in our Children…
HOST: The health damages we are seeing haven’t been reported in the mainstream media yet…
2011-04-26 Unlearned lessons from Chernobyl by Aleksandr Nikitin, translated by Charles Digges, bellona.org, "For over a month the whole world has followed the nuclear nightmare in Japan. The Japanese disaster has furnished apparent proof of how little was really learned from the accident at Chernobyl."
2011-04-03 Episode 180 – The Chernobyl Question, by The Corbett Report. "Fukushima is not Chernobyl. The plants have different designs, were effected in different ways and are behaving differently. Nevertheless, there are still things that we can learn about the Chernobyl disaster that might teach us about our current situation. Join us this week as we uncover some of the secrets of Chernobyl and ask what this can tell us about Fukushima."
2011-10-31 Chernobyl Expert says of Japan: “Everywhere I go, I hear stories similar to the Chernobyl cases” (VIDEO), by Enenews Admin
... GUEST, Mika Noro, President of NPO ‘The Bridge to Chernobyl’ which has helped to bring Chernobyl survivors to Japan:

  • Symptoms similar to the Chernobyl children are being reported…
  • So I came to suspect there might be more health damages than had been reported on TV…
  • I started investigating the situation and felt it was really dangerous… around the end of March…
  • Everywhere I go I hear stories similar to the Chernobyl cases…
  • I strongly feel similar symptoms are occurring in our Children…

HOST: The health damages we are seeing haven’t been reported in the mainstream media yet…
…More to come about this informative program…"
2011-04-20 Pneumonia cases “surge” in Japan’s Tohoku region — Frequency of pneumonia also increased after Chernobyl by ENENews
2011-04-08 CHERNOBYL to FUKUSHIMA - Part 1 - Planetary Context (16:08); Part 2 - Lessons Ignored (28:49); Part 3 - A Radiation Biologists' Story, (23:51); Part 4 - Role of Social Movements (21:52); Part 5 - Q&A (44:26)
"In the first of five parts of a seminar held at San Francisco State University
April 8, 2011, Philip Klasky, Lecturer in American Indian Studies and Dr. Carlos Davidson, Director of the SFSU Environmental Studies Program, lay out the cultural, environmental and historical context of nuclear technology." [Ed. Note: Please see additional descriptions in the video section below].
2011-03-25 Russian Chernobyl Expert Warns of Dire Consequences for Health Around Fukushima; Dense populations and risk of plutonium releases could mean Fukushima accident worse than Chernobyl, prominent Russian scientists says, commondreams.org, "Dr. Yablokov’s book calculated that as many as one million people had likely died as a result of the Chernobyl accident, figures far higher than other “official” reports. He said the book had been met “mostly with silence” from bodies like the World Health Organization who have “avoided discussion” about the findings."
2011-03-22 Scientists: Chernobyl resulted in 985,000 deaths worldwide as of 2004 — 500 percent more cancer fatalities when using MOX by ENENews
...Warning signals, Frontline Magazine (India), March 26, 2011 issue: [Ed.Note: I have added comments in brackets].

Reactor 3 [at Fukushima] uses mixed uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX) fuel in the core. According to Edwin Lyman of the UCS, “the use of MOX generally increases the consequences of severe accidents in which large amounts of radioactive gas and aerosol are released compared to the same accident in a reactor using non-MOX fuel…. Because of this, the number of latent cancer fatalities resulting from an accident could increase by as much as a factor of five for a full core of MOX fuel compared to the same accident with no MOX [such as at Chernobyl].”




Natalia Manzurova in the Pripyat dead zone while serving as a 1988 Chernobyl "liquidator." (Photo from the 23 March 2011 article Chernobyl cleanup survivor’s message for Japan: ‘Run away as quickly as possible’). In April 2011 this scientist and activist heroine traveled to the U.S. to help warn Americans about the Fukushima dangers ahead. The article Chernobyl Impact Felt 25 Year Later by Konstantin Vergerowsky captioned the photo below: "Nataliya Manzurova, a lead engineer in charge of cleaning up in the aftermath of Chernobyl, says she experienced headaches and nosebleeds from her work there." (Photo by H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY)


 

2011-03-22 Chernobyl cleanup survivor’s message for Japan: ‘Run away as quickly as possible’ by Dana Kennedy, aolnews.com, Mar 22, 2011 – 1:23 PM
Natalia Manzurova, one of the few survivors among those directly involved in the long cleanup of Chernobyl, was a 35-year-old engineer at a nuclear plant in Ozersk, Russia, in April 1986 when she and 13 other scientists were told to report to the wrecked, burning plant in the northern Ukraine.
It was just four days after the world's biggest nuclear disaster spewed enormous amounts of radiation into the atmosphere and forced the evacuation of 100,000 people.
Manzurova and her colleagues were among the roughly 800,000 "cleaners" or "liquidators" in charge of the removal and burial of all the contamination in what's still called the dead zone.
She spent 4 1/2 years helping clean the abandoned town of Pripyat, which was less than two miles from the Chernobyl reactors. The plant workers lived there before they were abruptly evacuated.
Manzurova, now 59 and an advocate for radiation victims worldwide, has the "Chernobyl necklace" -- a scar on her throat from the removal of her thyroid -- and myriad health problems. But unlike the rest of her team members, who she said have all died from the results of radiation poisoning, and many other liquidators, she's alive.
AOL News spoke with Manzurova about the nuclear disaster in Japan with the help of a translator on the telephone Monday from Vermont. Manzurova, who still lives in Ozersk, was beginning a one-week informational tour of the U.S. organized by the Beyond Nuclear watchdog group.
AOL News: What was your first reaction when you heard about Fukushima?
Manzurova: It felt like déjà vu. I felt so worried for the people of Japan and the children especially. I know the experience that awaits them.
But experts say Fukushima is not as bad as Chernobyl.
Every nuclear accident is different, and the impact cannot be truly measured for years. The government does not always tell the truth. Many will never return to their homes. Their lives will be divided into two parts: before and after Fukushima. They'll worry about their health and their children's health. The government will probably say there was not that much radiation and that it didn't harm them. And the government will probably not compensate them for all that they've lost. What they lost can't be calculated.
What message do you have for Japan?
Run away as quickly as possible. Don't wait. Save yourself and don't rely on the government because the government lies. They don't want you to know the truth because the nuclear industry is so powerful. …
2010-10-13 Belarus Expert: Radiation limits too high after Fukushima — Japan allows 20 times more cesium in drinking water than near Chernobyl by ENENews
TOKYO, Japan — Vladimir Babenko is deputy director of the Belrad Institute of Radiation Safety in the former Soviet republic of Belarus. Babneko advised local residents after the meltdown at Chernobyl, just across the Belarus border in Ukraine.
During a press conference in Tokyo he urged Japan to lower food radiation limits to “realistic” levels.
Babenko “cannot understand the thresholds designated by the Japanese government for food and beverage products, saying they are much higher than Belarusian standards.”
He noted that the allowable limit of 200 becquerels per kilogram of cesium in Japan drinking water is 20 times as high as the maximum allowable level in Belarus.
SOURCE: Japan’s food radiation limits set too high: Belarusian scientist, Kyodo, October 13, 2011
[undated] Energy News search: Chernobyl comparisons. (Ed. Note: click on this link and it will pull up Chernobyl-related articles at Energy News at:
http://enenews.com/category/japan/fukushima-reactors/chernobyl-comparisons


Conflicting Theories Regarding the

Real Cause(s) of the Chernobyl Explosion(s)

 

     
A hypothetical Chernobyl reactor accident sequence offered by the article Chernobyl: 20 Years On, news.bbc.co.uk, 2006, which includes an accident explanation section.



An alternative conceptualization of the damage at the Chernobyl Accident 1986 World Nuclear Association web page



An alternative explanation for the cause of a possible Chernobyl "atomic explosion" compared to Dimitri Khalezov's man-made mini-nuke hypothesis: The above illustration is found in The Non-Battle of Fukushima … by "Steve From Virginia," economic-undertow.com, November 7, 2011. "Figure 5: Super-criticality is an issue of time: as nuclei split energetically, the tendency is for the atoms to fly away from each other. The material separates and the reactions cease. The problem emerges when there is no place for the atoms to go. Chain reactions can then propagate for generation after generation with an accompanying energy buildup until the bonds of mass and inertia represented by the ground … are overcome."


 

Fukushima Crisis in the Spotlight As Chernobyl Tragedy Turns 25 (RT Video), uploaded April 25, 2011 to YouTube as "Busby: Can't seal Fukushima like Chernobyl - it all goes into sea." Dr. Busby explains why physicists at a recent conference in Germany concluded that it was very likely that both the Chernobyl blast and the March 14, 2011 explosion at Fukushima Reactor 3 were nuclear in nature. Please see the transcript excerpt below.

 


When the Devil Gets Old..., The Chernobyl Project blog entry dated 27 Sept 2011, photo caption: "V. Bryukhanov and N. Fomin during trial in 1986." The article states "Generally Bryukhanov's original points of view haven't changed much over the years but he carefully avoids making definite statements, but still claims that the real truth about Chernobyl will never be learnt because `they are still concealing it' and he doesn't believe that the disaster has taught anyone anything." [Ed. Note: Bryukhanov was the Director of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. According to the article, he got ten years in prison for gross violation of safety regulations. An important source of evidence regarding the actual cause of the Chernobyl catastrophe are the trial testimonies. According to various sources, many trial testimonies and results of investigations remain classified.]

 


Explosion damage to the Chernobyl reactor building (from Wikipedia)

 

Conflicting Accounts Regarding the Cause of the Chernobyl Catastrophe and Stakes involved

[Editor's Note: In reviewing all of the major videos on YouTube that explain the cause of the Chernobyl catastrophe, I observe that they generally tend to offer significantly different explanations for what really happened -- which I find suspicious. Please see my "Criminal and Other Subversive Analysis" section below where I quote from Russian scientists and a Swedish blogger who also voice concern about inconsistencies.]

2012-01-21 Syracuse Professor: “Chernobyl had an exemplary operating record prior to the accident” — Claims new reactors “inherently safe” — No increased childhood cancer near NPPs — US gov’t spends “hundreds of billions” on renewable energy by ENENews
2011-11-12 The Atomic Reactor Explosions of Fukushima and Chernobyl – updated, blog by Jan Hemmer, tekknorg.wordpress.com

The possibility of an atomic explosion in an atomic reactor is well hidden and ignored by common science, mostly servants and getting direct feed from the atomic industry.
Dear Readers: There is a mightier power than an earthquake. It’s called “nuclear explosion”. And it can happen in each reactor. No reactor withstands this. If the burst protection of a reactor can not include an explosion in a reactor, then this contradicts the construction specifications. No reactor should not have been built. So, every operating license is an illusion and illegal. Therefore, the nuclear explosion in a reactor  is denied by the nuclear industry, so that the reactors be allowed to continue and can be built.
From the book “History of the British nuclear industry” by Margaret Gowing, “Britain and Atomic Energy”, on page 382 the former  U.S. water-cooled graphite reactor at Hanford is described:
“To be built in view of the risks of an accident, the reactor is at an isolated location. Because water absorbs neutrons, and when the water flow is interrupted and the control rods do not occur immediately in action, the water evaporates in the cooling system and can no longer absorb the neutrons . These neutrons were therefore available to increase the fission rate in the reactor, which is super critical with power. The temperature rises, the fuel evaporated and the radioactivity is spreading widely. “
On page 385 we find the position:
“The gas cooling is to avoid the risk of severe supercritical state …”
So the knowledge of the danger of a atomic explosion that can occur in a water-cooled graphite-gas reactor, is as old as the principle of the reactor itself.
Safety Assessment Principle 152 requires ‘The containment should adequately contain such radioactive matter as may be released into it as a result of any fault in the reactor.’ Clearly if nuclear explosions are possible a licence should not be granted. LAST PAGE: http://www.spokesmanbooks.com/Spokesman/PDF/91Gifford.pdf
# Would the people be aware that the Chernobyl explosion was an atomic explosion, it would attract the public to make a link between civilian and military atomic energy, which credibility and image of the nuclear industry would put an irreparable blow
# An atomic explosion in a reactor can rule out the provisions contrary to nuclear safety. Consequently, reactors should be shut down.
Once the atomic bomb explodes, it is gone. Once an atomic reactor explodes, it’s emitting radiation for eternity.
Forgotten: The 1975 version of Fukushima and Chernobyl in Leningrad: Meltdown and 1.5 million Curie of activity got into the environment. Tons of liquid radioactive waste were discharged into the Baltic Sea by the Leningrad Nuclear Power Plant (RBMK type like CHERNOBYL):
http://www.greenworld.org.ru/?q=ang_lnpp1_main – two RBMK 1000 Chernobyl reactors are still running! Planned Shutdown: 2018 & 2020.
by Sergej Mirnyi, (http://www.mirnyi.arwis.com/) Engineer, chemist, liquidator at IPPNW congress Vienna 1996: http://wilpfinternational.org/publications/Tchernobyl_consequences.pdf – page 23: The picture of the contamination by nuclear tests over Nevada looked like an octopus. The image of the radiation on the reactor at Chernobyl Unit IV looked like a Radioactive Mount Everest, the top of the concentrated area around the reactor was around, from its center was a long, thin trace, a second was wide and covered the entire eastern Belarus.
Nuclear explosions caused the Chernobyl disaster – page 22:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33726185/Peace-Researcher-Vol2-Issue09-June-1996

From Fukushima-Diary.com: Yellow light was seen when reactor 3 exploded:
http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/11/yellow-light-was-
seen-when-reactor-3-exploded/#comment-28709

and: http://enenews.com/breaking-officials-investigating-meltdowns-
question-whether-nuclear-explosions-destroyed-fukushima-reactors
-tepco-not-in-a-position-to-comment

7 reports of nuclear fuel rod pieces being ejected from Fukushima reactors and/or spent fuel pools http://enenews.com/pieces-nuclear-fuel-ejected
Japanese Engineer: “There Was a Nuclear Explosion in Reactor 3 in Addition to a Hydrogen Explosion”.
Arnie Gundersen, C.Busby are not alone. The knowledge about the atomic explosion in an atomic reactor is as old as the principle of the atomic reactor itself.
Nearly no fuel left in Chernobyl 4 reactor – footage, interviews, starting at 07:55:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgCydo5Y2sA&feature=related
IAEA lies to us since 1986.
Chernobyl and Fukushima were atomic explosions:
Cobalt 60 was detected in Kashiwa shi of Chiba. It proves reactor 3 had an atomic explosion, and it proves gov / tepco are still hiding most important facts.It’s very natural to think there may be way more things concealed: http://10401.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-88.htm (now taken offline). But they also found Cobalt 60 in seafood:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/65128490/GreenPeace-Fukushima-Seafood-Results

Chernobyl too, but this is IGNORED by today’s science:
http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/03/16/fukushima-chernobyl-unofficial-data/

Dr. Chris Busby Believes Fukushima Was A Nuclear Explosion :
http://www.rense.com/general93/chrisbsy.htm
(link now correct)
AND: University of Innsbruck says Chernobyl was primarily caused by a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION – Page 1, left: translation: “… the one Nuclear explosion, and finally a meltdown followed by “: http://physik.uibk.ac.at/physik4/tschernobyl/2-Der_Unfall.pdf AND: “Some specialists are sure that after the steam explosion a nuclear explosion similar to an atomic bomb explosion occurred in the core of the 4th Unit .
It’s power had to be much higher than power of the steam explosion. The conclusion of the authors is based on experimental findings established by studying of activities of isotopes 133Xe and 133Xem in the air that existed in the first days after the Chernobyl accident. Their study was carried out in the city Cherepovets that is about 1,000 km in north direction from the Chernobyl NPP.
The authors could find that the ratio of activities of these isotopes is the same as in the case of nuclear explosion.” SOURCE: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/kr79pdf/Malko1.pdf
I suspect nearly every analysis on the Chernobyl explosions to be downplayed. nearly every analysis talks about: 2,000°C temperature increase of the fuel. why? because if they stay at 2,000°c then they can remain their false statement of a “hydrogen-and / or steam-explosion”. the experts and scientist learned all their life, that 2,000°C is the maximum of fuel / melting / temperature increase during a reactor accident. But it is not true: reactors like the NERVA (Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application) – a NASA / NRC joint venture, can develop more than that: quote “Continuously measured the in-pile thermal Fuel Compounds conductivity of high-density UO2 fuel at temperatures up to 2,200 degrees Celsius.” from: http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4533/Plum%20Brook%20Complete.pdf this sounds like this russian analysis that described the chernobyl reactor core as a rocket: “Two different models of the nuclear explosions are known. According to, the core of the Chernobyl reactor transformed to a turbo-jet solid-phase engine after a very short initial overheating of fuel. It flied like a missile from the reactor vault to the central reactor hall by the hydrodynamic forces of gas-phase streams flushing down from the fuel channels. Then it exploded as an atomic bomb in the spaceof the central hall.” source: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/kr79pdf/Malko1.pdf leading to: http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/mikhail-
malko-national-academy-of-sciences-of-belarus-nuke-explosion-at-chernobyl/

Normal reactor inventory: http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/inventory-reactor-beznau2.jpg
By Prof. Pflugbeil (http://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/the-money
-machine-atomic-power-67-e-per-kwh
/) about CHERNOBYL:
“I want now to the second Sarcophagus come to speak, because it does not serve to disguise a dangerous ruin, but for the concealment of dangerous lies. Since there are a lot of inconsistencies. Worldwide, for example, the version that 95 percent of the nuclear fuel still in there, and it posed a threat for Ukraine and for the whole of Western Europe. Tschetscherow has refuted this claim and it clearly goes from less than 10 percent that are still in there. He was commissioned in 2001 by the Kurchatov Institute, a research report related to the second Sarcophagus. He has investigated room by room, measured, photographed, core samples taken and has made its research report. He got a high distinction for it and the report ended up in a drawer forever! It interferes with the business.”
“Checherow and I went inside the destroyed reactor in Unit IV, as he is there crowled everywhere, even on the bottom of the reactor – accompanied by a small film crew.”
Footage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zP5neBujiFU&feature=related
“And that he has worked in the surveying of the lower part there for five hours. He said there were only 200 tons, 20 tons, perhaps, but realistically is 10 tons. In the other case they would have been so dead as a doornail. When we were in there, that was an uneasy feeling for me. The sound of the instruments, no light, you had to watch where you step on this climb and you never knew whether or not the same as a concrete chunk falls down from above. There are a thousand different rooms accessible in these ruins, heavily damaged. At the bottom of the reactor pot, I’d say of them that some debris that have fallen down from the upper chamber. We climbed over it since. Under it’s even different rooms in which at some points even these elephants ‘feet’ to see the molten material. Checherow has shown us all and the movie people have taken it.”
“In the reactor pot was nothing. It’s all been thrown out with tremendous force into a short and violent explosion, which was so strong that it has lifted the 2,000-ton concrete lid. So the energy source is nuclear energy have been clearly and the explosion was a nuclear explosion! The Western world – where is yes, nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons which are completely different – wants to admit it, because otherwise would clarify that a nuclear power plant with a nuclear explosion can destroy itself. But in the textbook, there is a nuclear power plant can not. But it can.”
Checherov said there is no radioactive fuel left in the reactor and that a nuclear explosion took place at the reactor, which vaporized the fuel at a temperature of 40000°C (72032°F) Source: http://www.springerlink.com/content/5tr8g6u3v5acxa4r/
Chernobyl was like a W-54Warhead: http://books.google.de/books?id=I3_oaypyh
B8C&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&dq=US+warhead+W54&source=bl&ots=7NtOL
9qyMA&sig=p0dXQQuITX9ltmYMsyXqwEmWGi8&hl=de&ei=9q3QTrq8OO
Tk4QS3-c1T&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CG4Q6A
EwCQ#v=onepage&q=US%20warhead%20W54&f=false
/
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/W54falcon.jpg

http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/ReactorNuclearExplosion.pdf
More in: “Martinez Val, Jose M., Aragones, Jose M., Mingues, Emilio, Perlado, Jose M., Velarade, Guillermio. An Analysis of the Physical Causes of the Chernobyl Accident. Nuclear Technology. Vol. 90, June 1990, pp.371 – 378.”: http://life-upgrade.com/DATA/Artikel%20zu%20Tschernobyl
%20in%20Nuclear%20Technology%20Vol%2090.pdf
PLUS: on PAGE 6 it reads : 2,6 g of Pu239 / Kg reactor fuel – makes 494 Kg of Plutonium 239 in the Chernobyl core, which was ejected during 2nd explosion. Compare Hiroshima bomb: little bit more than 6 Kg Plutonium 239.
SAME SITUATION AS IN CHERNOBYL IN EVERY FAST BREEDER!
http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/fast-breeder.pdf
Excerpt: Chernobyl explosion released 1,200 Gigajoules:
http://books.google.de/books?id=pAsAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA61&dq=1200+
gigajoules&hl=de&ei=oiLMTsfSNJGyhAfXh5ivDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&
ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=1200%20gigajoules&f=false
<- ATOMIC EXPLOSION. Steam explosion: Maxium -> 50 Gigajoules.
More: http://books.google.de/books?id=vgwAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA65#v
=onepage&q&f=false

Also mentioned in the 1987 released paper by NRC “NUREG 1250?:
http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0716/ML071690245.pdf

H. van Dam. says: “900 Gigajoules”: http://iopscience.iop.org/0034-4885/55/11/003
Chernobyl: NO HYDROGEN NO CHEMICAL EXPLOSION – it was too Hot!: http://books.google.de/books?id=QGlMb5wXs5sC&
pg=PA174#v=onepage&q=arnott&f=false

4000 – 5000 ° K: http://books.google.de/books?id=oEqd0IeAhccC&pg=PA6&hl=de&
source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=3#v=snippet&q=4000&f=false

Explosion yield of Chernobyl 0,2 – 0,3 KiloTons. Model of the Destruction of the Reactor in the No. 4 Unit of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant – by Kiselev, A. N. | Checherov, K. P.: http://discover-decouvrir.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/dcvr/ctrl?action=shwart&aix=8&aid=2485630
Jack Harris Central Electricity Generating Board nuclear metallurgist acceptsof his colleague Ross Hesketh’s view of nuclear explosion in Chernobyl: Page7  http://www.spokesmanbooks.com/Spokesman/PDF/91Gifford.pdf More about Ross Hesketh: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/ross-hesketh-549777.html
Commander Robert Green, at IPPNW Chernobyl congress 1996 in Vienna (from Hinkley Point hearing report 1990): starting at page 29:
http://wilpfinternational.org/publications/Tchernobyl_consequences.pdf
Robert Green’s aunt was murdered: http://www.hildamurrell.org While she was on her way preparing to present her paper  An Ordinary Citizen’s View of Radioactive Waste Management 
She was advised by Don Arnott: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/2000/jan/13/guardianobituaries – a nuclear physicist who refused on principle to join Britain’s atom bomb programme. He said, Chernobyl was a nuclear explosion of the reactor type!
What a connection! Why was she murdered?
The same today in Japan: Anti nuclear town councilor died in undetermined manner
The atomic industrial-military complex fears the TRUTH!
How to Cover Up a loss of reactor fuel or any other dangerous material: The atomic industry uses the term “MUF (Material Unaccounted For)” – JAEA says, that 0,7 kg of Plutonium are legally missing in 2010 – page 6:
http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/iinkai/teirei/siryo2011/siryo36/110920e.pdf
Chernobyl was a nuclear explosion in the yield of about 0.3 kilotons (there are nuclear weapons which are below this yield). Nothing, no architecture in the world could stand up to this. That the nuclear industry can not rule out a nuclear explosion in a reactor contradicts the regulations for nuclear safety. Consequently, all reactors should be shut down.
“Safety Assessment Principle 152 requires ‘The containment should adequately contain such radioactive matter as may be released into it as a result of any fault in the reactor.’ Clearly if nuclear explosions are possible a licence should not be granted.” LAST PAGE: http://www.spokesmanbooks.com/Spokesman/PDF/91Gifford.pdf
The knowledge of the danger of a nuclear explosion in a water-cooled reactor type is so old as the principle of the reactor itself
“Valery A. Legasov” – who was the first russian official who spoke about Chernobyl to the IAEA in 1986, and committed suicide. Before his death he made an audiotape, with untold facts about the Chernobyl explosion. Here are the abstracts of his tapes: “About the accident at Chernobyl” by Academician VA Legasov (text from the 4 cassettes) – in russian:
http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/Legasov_V._Ob_Avarii_Na_Chernobiylsk.pdf

His 5 hours long speech at the IAEA 1996 meeting about Cherbobyl was ignored:
http://books.google.de/books?id=S-SsDtZG5WgC&pg=PA51&dq=
new+scientist+valery+legasov&hl=de&ei=Lx_MTuu-
BMaEOqb9uKYP&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved
=0CDMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

The RBMK reactor at Chernobyl has prevented that the explosion was bigger, which would have made western reactors, because the total closure under pressure, the force of the explosion would have increased. The weight of the lid which was blown up was 2000 tons (was not welded). In England, at least one scenario exists for a nuclear explosion in a gas-cooled Reactor. Would be known in the public that the Chernobyl explosion was a nuclear explosion, the public would draw a connection between civilian and military nuclear energy, which would damage irreparable the credibility and image of the nuclear industry.
Continue reading until PDF page 33, where liquidator and physicist Youli Andreev speaks, he has seen the Fuel , which was destroyed from the inside out. This is the evidence for an atomic explosion in Chernobyl. Starting at page 33
http://wilpfinternational.org/publications/Tchernobyl_consequences.pdf

Here is what he has to say about the IAEA: “IAEA is a FAKE organisation”: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/us-japan
-nuclear-chernobyl-idUSTRE72E5MV20110315
This is him: http://books.google.de/books?id=xAwAAAAAMBAJ&pg=
PA48&dq=Yuri+Andreev&hl=de&ei=y7nKToPJM8mM4gSMp-
Rl&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDkQ6
AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Yuri%20Andreev&f=false
-
and Page 33, by Ross Hesketh and Jury Andrejev: Unit IV reactor had a design flaw that was already known in 1983: When lifting the control rods one would risk an extremely dangerous situation: the reactor could explode due to the emergency protection. Before the accident, the staff of Unit IV had sent a letter to the leadership of the Soviet nuclear industry: The potential accident was described. But the management told the personnel is not the possibility of a nuclear explosion in the reactor, although the Designers were aware exactly. This situation exists in every large Industrial plant in the world.
On December 1984 (2 years before the explosions), Chernobyl reactor IV went critical. Reactor IV went into operation in 1983. http://guacfund.org/nss-folder/sharedpublications/NM724.pdf
[More from this web page here].

2011-11-07 The Non-Battle of Fukushima … by Steve From Virginia, economic-undertow.com
"...– There have been numerous criticality incidents since the beginning of the nuclear era and many share the characteristics of fuel configured inadvertently or the presence of neutron reflectors.
– A low energy reaction would cause a fuel geyser that would blow core material and the plug through the roof of the reactor building, much like the explosion in [Fukushima] reactor 3. This would require only a few generations of chain reactions in the super-critical core.
– A high energy reaction of many generations would cause a substantial nuclear explosion. Critical components would be: material of sufficient mass, this material confined by incompressible material (sandy soil), weight of the core and the plug above it pressing the core against the neutron reflector. More than fifty generations of chain reactions would cause a multi-kiloton explosion beneath the reactor.
– A powerful explosion would propagate a shock wave that would travel through the ground and compress other cores that might have burnt their way into the ground. This compression would cause even more powerful nuclear explosions. This was how a modest amount of fuel under Chernobyl would cause a shock wave capable of bringing the rest of the nuclear material into a super-critical state.
Remember, there were three other reactors at Chernobyl with each containing 195 tons of highly-energized nuclear fuel!
– The low enrichment ratio of fissile material within the cores is compensated by the cores’ mass. The fission of even a tiny percentage of a core would represent an immense amount of energy release.
– The relative lack of explosive energy is compensated by the amount of radioactive material at the site. Anything other than the most modest excursion would be exceptionally destructive due to radioactive fallout..."
2011-10-11 The Chernobyl Trials, chernobylproject.blogspot.com, by a Swedish blogger
The previous post, entitled When the devil gets old deals with the former director of the ChNPP, Viktor Bryukhanovs contemplations and views on the disaster over 20 years after it happened. Especially this year, 25 years after the Chernobyl accident, the now 75 years old Bryukhanov has been giving several interviews for Ukrainian media, trying to once again tell the story of what according to him really happened on that Chernobyl morning in April 1986.
Bryukhanov has been trying to tell it all before. 10:00 am, on the 13th of August 1986 Bryukhanov stood before Ukraine's director of public prosecution answering questions until 13:00 that afternoon. After that the prosecutor went to lunch and upon his return he announced that Bryukhanov was under arrest. Bryukhanov had asked why and received the answer "It's better for you" after which he was taken into custody by the KGB to wait for the trial.
The trial was supposed to be held on the 24th of March 1987 but was postponed due to the also arrested chief engineer Nikolai Fomin's suicide attempt. In his cell, Fomin had broken his glasses and cut his wrists but his attempt to take his own life was discovered and his life was saved.
Instead the trial began on the 7th of July that year, inside an improvised courtroom in the Chernobyl House of Culture, where Viktor Bryukhanov along with five other men would be held accountable for their actions at the 4th block during the critical hours. These were Nikolai Fomin; his deputy Anatoly Dyatlov; the shift chief Boris Rogozhkin; senior engineer Yuri Laushkin and overall reactor chief Aleksandr Kovalenko were charged with accusations of various levels of negligence and misconduct. The trial would proceed for three weeks.
During the final day of the trial, Fomin showed obvious signs of great stress, but after a 90 minutes session he, Viktor Bryukhanov and Anatoly Dyatlov would receive their sentences, each receiving (as been mentioned here before) 10 years of imprisonment in labour camp for gross violation of safety regulations that created the conditions that led to the explosion of the 4th reactor, or rather "serious errors and shortcomings in the work that lead to the accident with severe consequences". The three accepted professional responsibility of the accident but denied criminal liability. 
Aleksandr Kovalenko, Boris Rogozhkin and Yuri Laushkin pleaded not guilty, but the six were convicted on all charges except Mr. Fomin, who had also been charged with abuse of power. Kovalenko was sentenced to three years in labour camp for safety regulations; Rogozhkin was convicted to five years for the same reasons and Laushkin received two years for negligence and unfaithful execution of duty. 
Being interviewed after the trial, the judge said - based on witness' confessions -  that there was also an atmosphere of "lack of control and lack of responsibility" on the plant - the workers were playing cards and writing letters on the night of the accident.
We already know that Viktor Bryukhanov and Anatoly Dyatlov were released early due to bad health, but neither did Nikolai Fomin serve his full time at the labour camp: In 1988, the former chief engineer was transferred to a neuropsychiatric hospital for prisoners. Two years later he was declared insane and thus released early, being transferred to a civilian psychiatric hospital. 
After recovery, Fomin was employed at the Kalinin nuclear power plant and five years later he retired. Nikolai Fomin does not like to speak about the 25 years old disaster but states that:
"I was largely blamed. Don't believe everything that is said about me. I only blame myself for one thing: I always thought that the most important of all was the enterprise - the technology but it turned out that I underestimated the most important thing - the value of people."
2011-09-27 When the Devil Gets Old..., The Chernobyl Project blog, by Swedish blogger
Like Anatoly Dyatlov, Viktor Petrovich Bryukanov - the former director of the Chernobyl NPP was persecuted and convicted due to actions and decisions made during the preceding hours as well as the critical period of the disaster.  On the 3rd of July in 1986, the Politburo decided to sentence Bryukhanov to 10 years of imprisonment for "serious errors and shortcomings in the work that lead to the accident with severe consequences." Bryukhanov was also expelled from the communist party as to further underline the degree of seriousness. This as an alternative to the threatening death sentence.
Having received large doses of radiation (approximately 250 REM), Viktor Bryukhanov was suffering from radiation sickness and due to bad health, he was released in 1991, having served five years of his sentence. While Anatoly Dyatlov consistently blamed the accident on the reactors, Bryukhanov never doubted the safety of the reactors and Soviet Nuclear Power Plants, and would keep on insisting that the plant remained open, even 14 years after the disaster [The last of the ChNPP reactors were taken out of operation in 2000].
In 1992, Bryukhanov was, ironically enough, hired as a consultant by the Ukrainian energy company Ukrinterenergo where he appears to have remained until retirement. 
Today, at the age of 75, Viktor Bryukhanov [who along with with Anatoly Dyatlov, Aleksandr Akimov and Leonid Toptunov remains one of the four most rumored Chernobyl scapegoats] still claims that there was nothing wrong with the reactors - the error according to Bryukhanov was simply in the forth block. However he does no longer  believe that the personnel at the 4th reactor block was responsible for  what happened on the morning of the 26th of April 1986. Instead, in an interview with the Kiev Weekly [April 2011] he praises the courage of the employees by the following words:
"There were no cowards or dodgers. All were dedicated to the plant, loved it and defended it. Moreover, they knew how to conduct themselves and where not to go... Of course, there were heroic moments. I recall how the assistant manager of the electrical workshop Oleksandr Lelechenko, understanding it was dangerous to leave the hydrogen generator, performed the necessary work to displace it and spent long hours in conditions of high levels of radiation. As a result, he took in a huge dose of radiation and ended up dying in a hospital in Moscow."
Generally Bryukhanov's original points of view haven't changed much over the years but he carefully avoids making definite statements, but still claims that the real truth about Chernobyl will never be learnt because "they are still concealing it" and he doesn't believe that the disaster has taught anyone anything. 
2011-09-15 Valery Alekseevich Legasov: About the Disaster at the Chernobyl NPP, The Chernobyl Project blogspot, by a Swedish blogger
Valery A. Legasov, born in 1936, became an academic at the age of 36. At the time of the Chernobyl accident, he was the chairman of the Department of Chemical Technology at the Chemistry Department of Moscow State University. Legasov was the man sent to the Chernobyl NPP to aid, try to gain control over the problem and to investigate the disaster; what caused it, what the consequences could be and how it at all could happen. 
It may seem funny that a professor in chemistry was sent to the site of a nuclear disaster, but the truth is that Legasov was the only man present in Moscow at the time who was at all qualified to attend the emergency. Legasov,  by his wife being referred to as a strong and honest individual who wasn't afraid to speak his mind was the very person insisting on the evacuation of Pripyat, and obviously his voice was heard in this matter. Apparently this was not the case concerning some following issues - The Soviet regime allegedly forbade him to speak the truth, during the IAEA conference in Vienna (August 1986, where of course also Hans Blix attended), concerning the RBMK reactors and previous accidents and problems with said reactors throughout the Soviet Union.
After the immediate threats of the ChNPP's 4th reactor had settled and the Sarcophagus was built, Legasov would experience that his career had been damaged due to the being forced to hide the truth. For this he'd try to make up by writing several papers which were either censored nor not at all published. Eventually, the sense of failure became overwhelming for Valery Legasov, who committed suicide in 1988. On April 26th,  the 2nd anniversary of the disaster, Legasov's hanged body was found by his son returning from school. By then Legasov had been dead for approximately four hours. Valery Legasov became 51 years old.
The suicide of Legasov wasn't mentioned in any Soviet media.
Anatoly Dyatlov, the vice deputy chief engineer at the ChNPP, in charge of the experiment at reactor block 4 at the morning of the accident, was (as I've mentioned before) persecuted and sent to prison for criminal mismanagement of potentially explosive enterprises. This man wrote a book entitled "Chernobyl - As it was", where he told the story from his own point of view, blaming the construction of the RBMK reactors for what had happened. Dyatlov also wrote a letter to Hans Blix where he tried to explain the cause of the disaster, but not much more is currently know about this letter.
Valery Legasov didn't write any books, but (supposedly) the hours before his death, he made voice recordings covering five cassettes where he told about the Chernobyl affair. These tapes were found and eventually transcripted to written text. Some time ago, I found these documents. In spite of a long habit concerning the modern technology involving computers and so on, I still am not comfortable with reading from a screen so today I printed the 123 pages of Legasov's text set recordings. Leaving the copying service office, I started looking over the papers and found that it's actually understandable to me. I think that it will be possible for me to translate this. I am going to give it a try. As a matter of fact, I will start right away. 
2011-06-15 Radioactive lava hitting pool of underground water at Chernobyl could have caused 2nd explosion like a “gigantic atomic bomb” — Major city 320 km away would have been destroyed (VIDEO) by ENENews
The Battle of Chernobyl, 2006:
At 3:15 in; 2nd Chernobyl explosion “would have wiped out half of Europe” – Governments kept secret for decades
At 32:55 in; Minsk, 320 km away, would have been razed and Europe uninhabitable.
2011-04-25 Fukushima Crisis in the Spotlight As Chernobyl Tragedy Turns 25 (RT Video), uploaded April 25, 2011. [Ed. Note: I have added the boldface below].

RT Narrator: [at 22 seconds in] ...There have been reports, not widely covered by the media, that one of the explosions at Fukushima was not actually a gas blast, as originally thought, but a nuclear reaction in one of the reactor vessels. Now surely if that was the case, the plant's operator TEPCO, they wouldn't conceal such a catastrophic development, would they?
Dr. Chris Busby: I think it is possible that they would conceal this development. The nuclear industry has a history of duplicity and cover-up wherever you look. They will always try and shift the information in some way that makes them come out on top. I believe actually it probably was a nuclear explosion, but not in the reactor, but in the tanks that contain the spent fuel. I think that seems to be almost certain now, that there was some kind of nuclear explosion in that tank. The one that contained the plutonium MOX fuel rods. I mean, anyone who saw that on the video and who saw that enormous explosion would not have believed it was a hydrogen explosion.
RT Narrator: Would would the consequences be if that is the case, that it was indeed a nuclear explosion and not hydrogen.
Dr. Busby: Well, not a lot different, actually. The problem is that the fuel rods, an enormous number of radioactive fuel rods have blasted into the air and have vaporized, so there is a great deal of radioactivity around there. And also there has been a meltdown, and as we understand it, there is still fissioning taking place, maybe there, but also maybe also as a result of cracks in the vessels themselves. So we have got fissioning taking place in those reactors. And I believe there aoubt 10 to the 14th, that is one and 14 zeroes of becquerels of radioactivity coming out every day. Now this is a very serious matter. I have to say that there is evidence that the Chernobyl nuclear accident was also a nuclear explosion. We heard details a couple of weeks ago in Berlin of isotopic measurements that were made of Xenon isotopes that showed it was a nuclear explosion and not a hydrogen explosion. So that also was a nuclear explosion.

2006 Chernobyl: 20 Years On, news.bbc.co.uk, includes accident explanation section.
2004-09-03 The Chernobyl Disaster
, h2g2.com [Ed. Note: This account seems to be fairly representative of "official" or "establishment" explanations of the cause of the "accident"]
"...The RBMK Reactor
The RBMK5 design is unlike any other fission reactor, as it was based on a design intended to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons. The RBMK itself is also designed to manufacture plutonium, albeit as a by-product of power generation. It is powered by slightly enriched (2% U-235) uranium dioxide fuel pellets, stacked into a 3.65m tube clad with zirconium-alloy. 18 fuel rods are arranged cylindrically to form a fuel assembly, and two fuel assemblies are stacked on top of each other and placed in their own individual pressure tube, about 7m high. This arrangement allows individual fuel assemblies to be removed separately, thus enabling the reactor to be refueled while running. Graphite (carbon) blocks between pressure tubes act as a moderator, and 211 boron carbide control rods - 179 of which can be inserted or removed from above - control the reaction. Water is pumped directly through each pressure tube and allowed to boil, driving the turbine directly. Although there is no secondary cooling circuit, there are two separate primary circuits with a further back-up. The core is concrete-lined and topped with a steel pile cap which also supports the fuel assemblies. There is no secure containment building as such. The features that make the RBMK unique, and flawed, are:

  • High availability due to ability to refuel without shutting down the reactor.
  • The combination of graphite moderator and water coolant is found in no other power reactors. This type of fuel would be unsuitable for a water-moderated reactor.
  • Low power density, allowing the core to survive without damage following loss of electrical power for up to an hour.
  • Lack of a proper containment building.
  • Inadequate accident mitigation and fire suppression systems, poor separation and redundancy of safety and electrical systems, complicated pipe work.
  • Positive void coefficient.

This last feature is probably the most significant contributor to the accident. In the event of coolant loss, water in the pressure tubes turns to steam and steam pockets, or voids, are formed. Steam is less dense than water and has less cooling power, so the fuel gets hotter. However, where the water also provides the moderating function, the neutrons will speed up due to the lack of moderation and the reaction will slow down. This is known as a negative void coefficient, and ensures that any uncontrolled increase in core temperature will slow down and ultimately stop the reaction. Most reactors are built this way and are thus inherently 'safe.' Conversely, in the RBMK at lower power levels (less than 20% of maximum) the graphite moderator allowed the reaction to proceed in spite of the loss of coolant. The number of free neutrons would increase, as there is no water to absorb them. This positive void coefficient meant that an uncontrolled temperature increase could, in the right circumstances, lead to a runaway reaction.
The Accident
On 25 April, 1986, reactor four was to be shut down for routine maintenance, so it was decided to take advantage of this to run a test. Ironically, the test was designed to improve safety. The reactor's cooling pumps relied on electrical power, so the operators wanted to see how long the turbines could produce sufficient energy to keep the pumps running in the event of a loss of power. The reactor's emergency cooling system was deliberately disabled, as they didn’t want it cutting in when the main pumps slowed. To reduce cooling requirements, the reactor was to be run at low power, despite the fact that these reactors were known to be unstable at low power settings. The test had been attempted on two previous occasions but never completed.
There were two main cooling systems excluding the back-up, each with four main pumps. Four of these pumps were powered by the generator that was to 'fail.' Prior to the experiment, with reactor power reduced and all eight pumps operating, water flow exceeded permitted levels. The amount of water in the steam-raising circuit reduced steam production. Additionally, the extra water was absorbing neutrons and causing power to fall. Power fell to less than 1% of capacity, so the operators manually removed control rods to compensate, switched off automatic regulators and eventually stabilised the reactor at the planned test power level. At one point only six-eight control rods were being used. According to procedure, at least 30 are required to maintain control, and if there are any less the reactor should have been shut down. They allowed the test to continue, despite knowing that about 20 seconds would be required to lower all the rods and shut down the reactor in the event of a power surge.
Then both generators were shut down to start the test. The cooling pumps slowed, reducing water flow in the core and producing more steam. The excess water had up until then been absorbing neutrons, so the formation of steam pockets caused neutron flux to increase (the positive void coefficient). At 01:23 hours on 26 April, reactor power increased exponentially, up to an estimated 100 times nominal. The control rods could not be re-inserted in time; the fuel overheated and some of the rods ruptured.
The resulting explosion, thought to be caused mainly by steam pressure and chemical reaction with the exposed fuel, blew the 1000-tonne lid clear of the core. A second explosion threw out fragments of burning fuel and graphite from the core and allowed air to rush in, causing the graphite moderator to burst into flames. The exact cause of the second explosion remains unknown, but it is thought that hydrogen may have played a part.
The Immediate Aftermath
With the core now fully exposed, a plume of smoke, radioactive fission products and debris rose up to about 1km into the air...
....While it may be obvious to most, it must also be pointed out that at no time was there a risk of a nuclear explosion. The spectre of a reactor accident leading to an explosion is one of the more disturbing and pointless Hollywood myths10. Reactor fuel is enriched to only 2% - 5% pure uranium; weapons grade uranium is enriched to levels as high as 90%. Reactor fuel is simply not explosive...[Ed. Note: This is contradicted by Russian leaders portrayed in the Battle of Chernobyl documentary:

“We were afraid, because it could have caused another explosion. it was terrifying. Scientists came and took readings. They were very worried. They were afraid the critical temperature would be reached and it would set off a second explosion that would have been a terrible tragedy,” Gen. Nikolai Antochkin USSR Air Force.

The cement slab below the reactor core is heating up and in danger of cracking. The magma is threatening to seep through. The water the firemen poured during the first hours of the disaster has pooled below the slab. If the radioactive magma makes contact with the water it could set off a second explosion even more devastating than the first.
The country’s top experts are called into action. Vassili Nesterenko was one of them, At the time, he was working on improving the Soviet Union’s intercontinental nuclear missiles.
“If the heat managed to crack the cement slab only fourteen hundred kilograms of uranium and graphite mixture would have needed to hit the water to set off a new explosion.”
The ensuing chain-reaction would set off an explosion comparable to a gigantic atomic bomb.
“Our experts studied the possibility and concluded that the explosion would have had the force from three- to five megatons …” said Nesterenko.
The Battle of Chernobyl @ 32’35

1990 Chapter 7 The Chernobyl accident — can it happen here? section "The Chernobyl Accident — Blow-by-Blow" from The Nuclear Energy Option by Professor Emeritus Bernard L. Cohen University of Pittsburgh, Published by Plenum Press, 1990
1986-07 [For this year] Trial at Chernobyl Disaster (PDF) by Karpan N.V., [Editor's Note: I have added the boldface below. The following preface raises an important point, namely that we are greatly disadvantaged in piecing together what actually happened until all witness testimonies at the trial proceedings are released to the public, as well as investigation reports created by police and security services].
Chernobyl town was chosen as a place for trial of people accused in Chernobyl disaster because according to Soviet Law, which was in force those days, the trial must be held close to the scene of crime. The town is located 12 kilometers from the nuclear power plant, so all of its citizens were evacuated at the beginning of the May of 1986. It was no trouble to declare hearing of the case public, whereas entrance to the zone was possible only through special permission.
After the disaster this town was decontaminated on repeated occasions. The center of the town was refurbished, new paint laid on renovated paving and by the July of 1987 the administrative centre of accident area was quite ready to hold demonstrative "Chernobyl trial".
The Cultural center chosen for trial was refurbished exemplarily. The perfect view was spoiled only by grates hanged on windows and a small courtyard annexed to the building in which a car with defendants entered.
There were guests at hearing — 60 people, soviet and foreign journalists. Rest seats were occupied by Chernobyl NPP personnel, 30-km zone personnel and participants.
The first trial session was set on the July 7, 1987. Only the first and the last sessions were opened for journalists, so they could hear an indictment (on the first day) and a verdict. Details and circumstances of the disaster were discussed at work sessions, access to which was restricted.
The trial was held during 18 days, excluding days off. Sessions began at 11 o'clock in the morning and ended at 19 o'clock. During the sessions 40 witnesses, 9 complainants and 2 victims were heard. Many people expected that records of court would become public so everyone who wanted to know the truth about the disaster would be given this opportunity. But the press and television supplied the community only with short messages about hot weather in Chernobyl and progress in battle for harvest. In this way one more informational gap was created in a judicial part of history of the Chernobyl disaster.
Those days I was on my duty at the Chernobyl NPP so I missed some of the sessions. That is why not all of the sessions were recorded and included in my report.

 

Eastern European Government and Mainstream Media (MSM) Questionable Behavior Patterns Regarding Chernobyl During the Soviet Era

2012-04-26 Chernobyl tragedy: the last "gift" from the Soviet regime by Dmitry Konchalovsky, english.ruvr.ru (h/t Russian Gov’t Radio: “The number of victims has reached one million people today” — Consequences of Chernobyl meltdown are endless and uncontrollable, April 26, 2012)
Exactly 26 years ago there was an explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Whole regions in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus have become unfit for life, and the number of victims has reached one million people today. And experts are still disputing about long-term consequences of the disaster.
During the seventy years of its existence the Soviet regime "presented" the rest of the mankind with a lot of problems namely the spread of the "red plague" throughout the world, including China, Vietnam and some countries of Africa and Latin America; and occupation of half of Europe alongside with planting socialist principles on these territories with the help of bayonets and tanks; and the invasion of Afghanistan for the purpose of promoting its "dogma" in the southern direction.
All these movements have cost the world enormous human, financial and moral losses.
And yet all these "gifts" were of an archaic nature, as if from the depths of centuries, when the defeat of an enemy was achieved through the seizure of his territory, or through the victory of your ideology (or religion). Therefore, the consequences of such actions were, first of all, finite, and, secondly, reparable. Meanwhile the Chernobyl catastrophe is an event of a different kind, if we regard it as a "gift" to the mankind from a decrepit regime.
First of all, two seemingly incompatible factors have joined each other: scientific-technical progress and intellectual helplessness. That is, the Chernobyl NPP (like dozens of others) was successfully built, but its safe operation turned out to be a daunting task for the sluggish Soviet bureaucratic system.
Secondly, it turned out that the habit of classifying the whole lot as secret for the sake of the country’s prestige can cause irreparable damage even without malicious intent.
I would like to remind you that the Soviet party leadership was concealing the information about the explosion throughout the whole week. As a result tens of thousands of unsuspecting people came out on May-Day demonstrations in Kiev, Minsk, Bryansk, and many other cities, exposing themselves to the risk of getting a serious dose of radiation.
In the absence of truthful information vague rumors caused an unprecedented panic; salt and matches were sold out in a flash, and the South-Western direction railway line came in a state of collapse because of the enormous number of refugees.
And, finally, the third distinguishing feature of the last "gift" of the Soviet regime is the fact that its consequences are endless and uncontrollable, and it is impossible to count the exact number of victims. Scientists are still arguing if the number of one million deaths is valid, but when such big numbers are taken into account, the one thing is absolutely clear - things are in a bad way. Besides, no one can count how many babies could not be born, and on the lives of how many subsequent generations this disaster will tell in the form of cancer.
It is also worth mentioning that, if on April 26, 26 years ago the wind in the Chernobyl area was a little stronger, then, depending on its direction, today either Moscow, or Scandinavia, or the Western Europe would be a desert...
2012-04-08 Chernobyl disaster gave football star Stiliyan Petrov cancer, claims Bulgarian doctor by Ian Garland, dailymail.co.uk

  • Petrov grew up 650 miles from doomed power station
  • Toxic cloud passed over his hometown
  • Communist leaders in Bulgaria 'hid threat to kids'

Aston Villa captain Stiliyan Petrov's cancer was caused by radiation from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster more than 25 years ago, according to his national team's doctor.
The 32-year-old was diagnosed with acute leukaemia last month.
Dr Mihail Iliev, who has treated Petrov for 14 years in his capacity as Bulgarian national team medic, is blaming a toxic radiation cloud the star was exposed to when he was just six years old...
...Dr Iliev, 61, claimed radiation levels in the north of Bulgaria were 1,000 to 1,300 times normal levels in late April, early May 1986.
He said a number of youngsters at the time, or born in the aftermath of the disaster, developed cancer - because Bulgaria's communist regime failed to tell people about the threat.
Dr. Iliev told The Sun 'It was in the late spring, the population was eating fresh radioactive vegetables and other foods. Many people who were kids back then suffered cancer because of this...
...Dr Iliev is even more convinced Petrov's cancer is related, because there is no history of cancer in his family.
Dr. Iliev added, 'There are no other cases of such illness in this family, that is why I think Stiliyan is a victim of the old communist regime’s lack of information when the nuclear reactor at Chernobyl exploded, and the radioactive cloud came to our country.'...
2012-03-22 The Chernobyl Sacrifice; 1 MILLION Liquidators, agreenroad.blogspot.com.
Watch the YouTube Movie, 'The Sacrifice' -- by Emanuela Andreoli and Wladimir Tchertkoff. It was made in Switzerland, 2003, and is 26 minutes long.
This documentary was awarded by the Île-de-France council as being the Best Scientific And Environment Documentary in November 2004. It also was called the best Documentary at Festival of Scientific Movies of Oullins, in France.
This movie is made by and for the liquidators that worked on cleaning up and covering the Chernobyl Reactor after it exploded and burned.
1 MILLION people were pressed into service to clean up the mess. Then these liquidators were largely forgotten and ignored. Radiation exposures were either not taken, minimized or lost. The whole mess was called 'Top Secret' so that everything involved could be covered up, denied or minimized.
This is the same pattern that seems to emerge after 2,400 nuclear bomb tests, as well as all other nuclear accidents whether civilian or military. Fukushima is no exception to this rule.
2012-02-16 READERS IN COUNCIL: Health threat from cesium-137 by Steven Starr, Senior Scientist, Physicians for Social Responsibility, University of Missouri, japantimes.co.jp; h/t Senior Scientist: Irreversible heart damage for children with 50 Bq/kg of Cs-137, enenews, 15 April 2012
"Regarding the Feb. 14 article reprinted from Sentaku magazine, "Put children before politics": Thank you for endorsing this idea. I would like to comment on one aspect of the article regarding cesium-137, which makes up 40 percent of the long-lived radionuclides created by nuclear power plants.
Because cesium-137 has a 30-year half-life, the land seriously contaminated by the Fukushima disaster will remain dangerously radioactive for up to 300 years. There is a great deal of experience with cesium-137 in the seriously contaminated regions of Belarus and Ukraine. Once radioactive cesium makes its way into the soils, it will bioconcentrate and biomagnify in foodstuffs, particularly mushrooms, berries and wild game.
Food grown in these regions is contaminated with cesium-137, and sadly most of the children living there who eat this food have become unhealthy. The Belrad Institute, after nine years of research and hundreds of autopsies, found that cesium-137 concentrates in the vital organs, particularly the heart and endocrine system. Professor Yuri Bandazhevsky discovered that children contaminated with cesium-137 that produced 50 atomic disintegrations per second (becquerels) per kilogram of body weight caused irreversible heart damage in a child.
Because the Belarusian government did not want his work accepted or known, he was put into prison.

2011-03-02 Who is Gorbachev to you? On Mikhail Gorbachev's 80th birthday, leading Russians give their opinion of the Soviet Union's first and last president, Vlast magazine, rbth.ru [Ed. Note: Gorbachev was the official head of the Soviet Union during Chernobyl. In trying to assess Gorbachev myself, I am reminded of my favorite saying from Socrates "If I know anything, it is that I know nothing." I have been left with a subliminal impression from mainstream media (not worth much) that he helped reduce tensions and navigate the Russia through the very difficult transition away from communism towards "capitalism" (actually "kleptocracy" by Rothschild-backed oligarchs in the 1990s), but there are still too many unanswered questions to judge his real character. For example, if Chernobyl was a false flag run by Mossad-CIA-MI6, what involvement might he have had with them? What kind of involvement might he have had with the Zionists kleptocrats? The diverse viewpoints presented in this article probably contain some good leads to help find the truth.]
2006-08-20 Chernobyl: 20 years after, russianamericanbusiness.org
...Secret CPSU Central Committee documents
The causes for the Chernobyl accident are not entirely understood, as even the court proceedings against the allegedly guilty soon turned into a farce that was designed to hide the truth. The government tried to conceal the truth from the first day of the tragedy. On Labor Day May 1, 1986, the citizens of Kiev marched through the city with large socialist banners, holding their children in their hands. The people walked, danced, and shouted communist slogans as the winds carried radiation to the city. In Kiev, radiation levels rose from 50 micro roentgens per hour to 30 thousand.
It was not until several days later that all official establishments in the city received instructions to keep their doors and windows tightly closed at all times and to wash the floor every hour. Even these simple measures offered considerable protection against radiation.
“There were only speculations – no one knew anything. In those first days after the accident, I aged 10 years,” complains Vasiliy Gorbetskiy, a driver of the Chernobyl transportation union, who helped in the rescue work. “We decided to remain here and respond to the disaster. We should not be lied to.”
The most intensive radiation contamination took place in the first 15 days. Mikhail Gorbachev did not address the country with the news of the Chernobyl explosion until May 13. In his speech, Gorbachev essentially recognized the country’s impotence in helping people.
“In the Soviet Union, we were always preparing to defend our motherland. We were always preparing for a nuclear war,” afflicted citizens remember.
When the nuclear reactor blew, civil defense preparation proved futile. Dosimeters were not working. There were no potassium iodine pills. Special army detachments for preventing large-scale contamination were formed only after the catastrophe.
Scientists concealed the truth.
Scientists partially concealed the truth about reactor construction deficiencies that lead to the most horrifying nuclear accident in the world. Former director of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant Victor Bruhanov talked about that recently.
Bruhanov, who was incarcerated for negligence after the accident, did his recent interview at a time when nuclear power is gaining popularity around the world. Unlike the fossil fuels, nuclear power allows to produce electricity without emitting carbon dioxide.
In his interview that appeared in a Russian publication Profile around the 20th anniversary of Chernobyl, Bruhanov said that it is important to understand the causes of the catastrophe in order to decide how to develop alternative energy sources. Bruhanov regrets that Chernobyl’s lesson is still not understood in that regard.
Reactor no. 4 of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded during a test on April 26, 1986. Many scientists agree that the accident was the result of fateful circumstances, the combination of problematic reactor design and the neglectfulness of the personnel in adhering to safety rules.
Bruhanov recognizes that his subordinates made mistakes. In his view, however, the investigation fell short of revealing the true causes of the disaster in order to save the atomic power industry. Reactors with similar construction models as the one in Chernobyl operate in Eastern Europe to this day. They were somewhat modernized after the accident.
Bruhanov is convinced that not only the Russian government hides the truth about the risks associated with nuclear power. The Americans, the French, the English, and the Japanese do the same, he believes.
At the time of the explosion, Bruhanov was at home, not far away from the power plant. After serving 5 years of his 10-year-jail term, Bruhanov was released. He now lives in Kiev...
2006-05-10 Reflections of a Chernobyl liquidator – the way it was and the way it will be by Charles Digges, bellona.org "When the fourth reactor block at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) exploded in April of 1986, Sergii Mirnyi was a 27-year-old chemist and was one of the hundreds of thousands of scientists, soldiers and even ordinary citizens summoned to the site to help quell what remained of the world’s worst nuclear disaster...
...At the time Chernobyl’s fourth reactor blew up, releasing a radioactive cloud over Eastern Europe that reached as far as Scandinavia, Mirnyi was coming up on a vacation and preparing for the relaxation and revelry of the May 1st holidays.
But as a Soviet Army reserve officer – like his colleagues at Kharkov universities and institutes – he was called to Chernobyl when the explosion occurred. But the order was taken with a grain of salt. Knowing little of what to expect when they got there, the mobilised officers and soldiers brought the air of the May 1st celebrations with them.
‘Even the pros didn’t know what to do’
Only when they arrived did they begin to comprehend what all the commotion was about.
“Even we professionals didn’t know what to do after the explosion and could not understand its ramifications,” Mirnyi said. “Here we were, experts in our fields and in radiation, and we didn’t know where to begin or even recognise the scale of the disaster.”
As former Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev recently acknowledged, even the top decision-makers in the USSR “could not make sense of what happened at the Chernobyl NPP”...
....Scale of disaster slowly becomes apparent
The government mouthpiece newspaper Pravda had devoted four centimetres of column space to a vague notification about the explosion, and it was actually Sergii's mother who was the first one to connect the two-sentence piece of information about an explosion at some nuclear power plant in Chernobyl with the unexpected mobilization of Sergii and his fellow reserve officers, who were all low-ranking commanders in radiation and chemical surveillance and defence.
“That’s the way it went in those days with any kind of industrial, nuclear or other kinds of disaster,” said Mirnyi. “A plane would crash killing everyone, and Pravda would print a sentence about it and that is all you ever heard.”
More reinforcements were summoned. They lived in tent camps - some of which were several thousand men strong - that were located all over the 30-kilometer zone that surrounded the area affected by the exploded reactor. Each day, the liquidators would line up in front of the plant by the thousands to wait for work assignments.
Sometimes, liquidators would wait several hours before being handed a task for the day, if they got one at all, said Mirnyi.
"The government over-flowed the number of liquidators into the zone," he said.
The Politburo, meanwhile, was doing its best to keep a tight lid on what had happened, denying Scandinavian reports of rising radiation levels...
1986-07 [For this time period] Trial at Chernobyl Disaster (PDF) by Karpan N.V., Kiev, 2001 [Editor's Note: I have added the boldface below]
"Chernobyl town was chosen as a place for trial of people accused in Chernobyl disaster because according to Soviet Law, which was in force those days, the trial must be held close to the scene of crime. The town is located 12 kilometers from the nuclear power plant, so all of its citizens were evacuated at the beginning of the May of 1986. It was no trouble to declare hearing of the case public, whereas entrance to the zone was possible only through special permission.
After the disaster this town was decontaminated on repeated occasions. The center of the town was refurbished, new paint laid on renovated paving and by the July of 1987 the administrative centre of accident area was quite ready to hold demonstrative "Chernobyl trial"...
...There were guests at hearing — 60 people, soviet and foreign journalists. Rest seats were occupied by Chernobyl NPP personnel, 30-km zone personnel and participants.
The first trial session was set on the July 7, 1987. Only the first and the last sessions were opened for journalists, so they could hear an indictment (on the first day) and a verdict. Details and circumstances of the disaster were discussed at work sessions, access to which was restricted.
The trial was held during 18 days, excluding days off. Sessions began at 11 o'clock in the morning and ended at 19 o'clock. During the sessions 40 witnesses, 9 complainants and 2 victims were heard. Many people expected that records of court would become public so everyone who wanted to know the truth about the disaster would be given this opportunity. But the press and television supplied the community only with short messages about hot weather in Chernobyl and progress in battle for harvest. In this way one more informational gap was created in a judicial part of history of the Chernobyl disaster.

 

Post-Soviet Era Eastern European Questionable Behavior Patterns

2012-04-24 Chernobyl; Animal Studies Show Radiation Is Still Harming Our Wild Companions
, agreenroad.blogspot.com
It seems that many countries, including the Russians, are not interested in knowing radiation levels in animals. They also do not seem to be interested in knowing what effects low level radiation has on animals, insects and birds in areas such as the 'exclusion zones' around Chernobyl. It seems that the only studies being done around Chernobyl have been performed by 'foreign' researchers coming in from other countries. This is curious in and of itself.
Why does the media seem to be promoting the Chernobyl exclusion zone as a 'Nature Reserve', full of a rebounding population of apparently 'happy and healthy' animals? Why are they not disclosing that these animals all have high levels of toxic radiation inside of them?
Why are there no studies around these larger animals? Why are there no radiation measuring studies exploring what types of radiation are in these LARGE animals? What effect is the radiation having on their health?
[See Chernobyl Reclaimed: An Animal Takeover (1 of 5) (9:58) June 30, 2010]
The movie above shows lots of healthy and happy animals, thus giving the impression that radiation is healthy both for animals and humans. However; "a three-year consensus on wildlife found a reduction in biodiversity and significant effects of contamination, including migratory birds with tumors on their feet, necks and around their eyes."
http://www.greenfudge.org/2010/08/03/study-shows-chernobyl-animals-still-suffer-from-radiation/
Discovery News – Chernobyl Radiation Still Harming Animals
According to Discovery News, "the Chernobyl disaster, a nuclear reactor explosion and subsequent fire on April 26, 1986, which spewed highly radioactive fallout into the atmosphere, continues to harm animal populations in the Ukraine, according to a new study. The study, published in the latest Royal Society Biology Letters, presents the most extensive data set ever compiled on the abundance of animals at and around the Chernobyl site. "Abundance" is relative in this case, however, since scientists Anders Moller and Timothy Mousseau determined that insect, bird and other animal populations have dramatically diminished there in the two decades following the disaster."
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/03/18/chernobyl-animals.html
Reuters – Chernobyl animals worse affected than thought: study
""We were amazed to see that there had been no studies on this subject," Anders Moller, a researcher at the National Center for Scientific Research in France, who led the study, said in telephone interview....Radiation has affected animals living near the site of Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear disaster far more than was previously thought, a study showed Wednesday, challenging beliefs that local wildlife was on the rebound...."We wanted to ask the question: Are there more or fewer animals in the contaminated areas? Clearly there were fewer," said Moller, who has worked on Chernobyl since 1991." http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/18/us-chernobyl-radiation-idUSTRE52H09020090318
The Chernobyl accident happened in 1986, but the researchers studying the area around Chernobyl found that the numbers of insects, such as bumble bees, spiders grasshoppers and other animals were lower in the radiation soaked areas, when compared to other areas without such radiation contamination.
Some highly radioactive 'hot spot' areas were completely depleted of animal life, while other areas that were not so severely affected. Comparing the two types of areas and the number of living specimens showed results of less than 1 specimen per square yard in 'hot' areas, compared to 100 per square yard in less radioactive areas.
This same dynamic applies to all species of animals. They also noticed that animals had a high percentage of stunted limbs and discoloration compared to non radiated animal populations.
On the one hand, large animals seem to be moving back into the area because humans are totally excluded from it, but NO studies seem to have been done on these larger animals, to see what their true state of health is. No one seems to be measuring the radiation in the larger fish and mammals in the region.. Either that, or they ARE measuring the radiation and do not report it, for fear of causing a panic.
The fallout from Chernobyl covered many thousands of square miles and contaminated areas as far away as Germany, the UK, Russia, Scotland, Ukraine, Belarus and more. Few or no animal or human low level radiation effect studies seem to have been done around insects, birds, animals or fish in those countries either.
However, in a few countries such as the UK and Germany, laws were implemented limiting the sale or consumption of animals that contained high levels of Cesium. The UK just dropped all of their efforts to prevent contaminated meat from reaching the market after doing a short survey to see if there was interest in continuing the program. At last count, some percentage of sheep were registering radioactive Cesium in the neighborhood of 1,000 Bq per kilogram of meat.
Germany is approximately 1,000 miles from Chernobyl, but they are still finding that 20% to 80% of the animals measured are contaminated with radioactive Cesium 137, making them unfit to eat due to high radiation levels.
Germany is still actively measuring radiation in such animals as wild pigs or deer brought in by hunters and compensating hunters for the loss of radiation contaminated animals.
There also does not seem to be any international agreement or standard about what is considered a 'safe' amount of radiation in wild game, or retail food and drinking water. In Germany, unsafe radiation is considered to be any Cesium found at 600 Bq per kilogram or more.
In the UK the level of unsafe radiation is almost double that amount; at 1,000 Bq per kilogram Cesium 137. Until February of 2012, they authorities were testing all sheep and other animals consumed for their meat or exported out of 'control areas' found to have elevated Cesium levels due to Chernobyl.
However, that testing and contaminated meat exclusion program has recently been dropped completely, so people in the UK can now eat radioactively contaminated sheep or other meat, with no radiation measurement or warning labels at all. This lack of testing also means that this contaminated meat can be exported abroad.
The average level of Cesium radiation found in meat before Chernobyl was less than .5 Bq per kilogram of meat or fish. A total amount of Cesium consumed by an average adult would total around 100 Bq PER YEAR from all plant, milk and animal sources. All of this radiation originates from the nuclear bomb testing era.
Radioactive Cesium does not exist 'naturally' and is totally a man made radioactive substance. It seems that as levels of toxic radiation rise in food, wild game and water that authorities just raise the 'safe' limits and allow the food and drink to be sold. This happened both in Japan and in many other countries.
The problems with testing and measuring for radiation in food and drink are huge. But it would seem to be common sense that selling radioactive food or drink should be something that is either banned or regulated internationally.
There should be agreed upon international standards. The current hodgepodge of conflicting, loose and missing regulations is not good for our generation's health or for the future health of seven generations to come.
Since it is impossible to decontaminate radioactive food, and very difficult or expensive to decontaminate drinks/water, it would seem that much more attention and study around this subject would be prudent and wise, in all countries.
After all, how hard is it to set up and measure the radiation in things like deer antlers, or animal droppings, or the total body radiation burden of children and adults?
[See Deer antlers shed near Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (2:25) July 30, 2011]
"An interesting example of the chemical behavior of fission products is provided by a pair of deer antlers on the premises of the former Ivankov Fish Combine, about one mile from the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant.
First, we place a sodium iodide (NaI:Tl) scintillation detector near the antlers. It registers no discernable activity above local background (although it should be noted that background near ChNPP is somewhat elevated). The NaI:Tl detector is predominately sensitive to gamma rays.
Next, we swap out the scintillator for a Geiger-Muller tube having a window that admits beta particles. The Geiger tube is an American-made CDV-700 probe. It is very sensitive to beta particles and much less sensitive to gamma rays. The antlers register many times local background on the Geiger tube, although they appeared unremarkable on the scintillator.
I submit that the explanation for this effect is the preferential concentration of strontium-90 (Sr-90), a pure beta emitter, in the bone of the antlers.
Strontium's chemical behavior resembles that of the calcium that largely comprises hard bone, and so it is absorbed and retained strongly in bone (i.e. it is a "bone seeker")." Source: from video description: Chernobyl; Animal Studies Show Radiation Is Still Harming Our Wild Companions; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/chernobyl-radioactive-deer-antlers.html
2006-04-23 Truth still radioactive 20 years after Chernobyl by Mike Sigov, toledoblade.com.
2005 Meet Galina Bandazhevskaya, Pediatrician, Minsk, Belarus [wife of Professor Yury Bandashevky and medical doctor] by Mads Ekesen, Chernobyl: 20 Years, 20 Lives.
..."Right into the 1990s they observed an alarming number of children with heart problems and a dramatic increase in the number of congenital heart disorders. Often children as young as six had arrhythmia. Therefore they began to keep statistics on their patients and discovered that there were 2½ times as many cases of heart disorders in children after Chernobyl as there had been before the disaster. When one is the first to research a subject there will always be much uncertainty connected with the results. Yury would have to do controlled research for many years in order to conclude that it was the radioactivity that was the single reason for the increased number of heart disorders..."


"Professor Yury Bandazhevsky was put in jail for revealing information about Chernobyl consequences."

2003-05-22 Belarusian Professor Studying Chernobyl Consequences Remains

In Prison by Rashid Alimov, bellona.no
"The European Union, or EU, representatives, who are part of the EU's Minsk diplomatic mission, are visiting regions of Gomel and Mogilev — the Belarusian districts most severely contaminated by the 1986 Chernobyl explosion — from May 21 to 23, Bandazhevsky, the founder and chancellor of the Gomel State Medical Institute published in 1999 the results of years worth of research on the clinical consequences of cesium-137 — one of the most radioactive elements released by the disaster — impacts on human organism. His results showed that it leads to heart disease, cataract, early ageing and other maladies.
But his research jeopardized the Belarusian authorities' intention to recommence farming lands contaminated by Chernobyl. Just before his arrest in 1999, Bandazhevsky had harshly criticized official researches, sponsored by the Belarusian government, which allocated only 1bn roubles for `scientifically and practically useful research,' and said the remaining scientific budget of 17bn was wasted. Bandazhevsky also argued that Belarus was engaged in a hidden scam of selling and exporting radioactive vegetables along with non-contaminated products — a practice he viewed as sheer folly.
Bandazhevsky's Research
Bandazhevsky and his wife Galina examined cardiograms of children and carried out series of autopsies in the forensic morgue in Gomel. The scientific results proved that, after the Chernobyl accident, cardiovascular system sickness rate increased by four times.
Prior to Bandazhevsky studies, increases of cesium-137 concentrations from 10 to 30 times in vital human organs were considered insignificant. He proved, however, that such concentrations lead to pathological abnormalities. For instance, a pathology can be seen when cesium is accumulated in a human organism at the rate of only 30-50 Bq/kg. Autopsies of one-year-old children in Gomel showed high levels of radiocesium in their organs — up to 6000 Bq/kg, which indicates a severe radioactive toxic syndrome, both among foetuses and newborn babies..."
"....With 10m total population, Belarus's approximately 2m people, including 500 thousand children, live on land contaminated by Chernobyl, which made more than 25 percent of Belarus's forest and farming areas radioactive. Official data say about 1.2m hectares of land that is still used for farming purposes is contaminated with cesium-137 at the rate of 37 kBq/m2.
In Bandazhevsky's opinion, the contamination is widening — cesium and other isotopes are spread by forest fires and dust. Different forecasts predict a peak of various diseases caused by Chernobyl between 2005 and 2010.
Bandazhevsky's Arrest
"Bandazhevsky was arrested soon after his report was published under a presidential decree N21 ?On Urgent Measures for the Combat of Terrorism,'" Bandazhevsky's lawyer Garry Pogonyaylo, who is also co-chairman of the Belarusian Helsinki Committee, told Bellona Web.
"For a month nobody knew, where he was, until we found him at a detention centre in Mogilev, 140 kilometres from his home in Gomel," said Pogonyaylo.
In Mogilev, Bandazhevsky was put under tremendous psychological pressure: He was questioned at night, made to sleep on the cold floor of a detention cell, wrapping himself with newspapers for some warmth. On the 23rd day of this systematic humiliation, Bandazhevsky, whose lawyer hadn't been permitted by authorities to see him, was charged, not with terrorism, but rather with taking bribes from students that were seeking admission to the his Gomel State Medical Institute.
"Bribery doesn't relate to the decree N21, under which Bandazhevsky was arrested. That shows again, how groundless and illegal Belarusian authorities may act," said Pogonyaylo.
Though Bandazhevsky had no relation to the army, his case was thrown to the Military Courts because one of the people accused with Bandazhevsky was a military reservist. The court sentenced Bandazhevsky to eight years in prison. The independent experts present at the court case registered eight violations of the Belarusian Procedural Criminal Code, and the main witness for the prosecution recanted his testimony. In spite of that, Bandazhevsky has been serving a hard labour sentence since June, 2001.
"We think, Bandazhevsky's conviction was organized by Lukashenka's government in order to eliminate a researcher whose results harshly conflicted with governmental policies, ignoring the real harm of Chernobyl," Belarusian Helsinki Committee representatives said in a telephone interview.
Other Pressures at the Belrad Institute
Bandazhevsky conviction isn't the only attempt by Belarusian authorities to silence an alternative view on Chernobyl's consequences. Health ministry pressure to close the non-governmental radioactive safety Belrad Institute in Minsk continues to this day.
Like Bandazhevsky, the researchers of Belrad, under the direction of nuclear physicist Vasily Nesterenko, argue that authorities underestimate radiation doses Belarusian citizens are currently subjected to, especially children. The institute carries out monitoring of contaminated areas and works hard to produce pectin-based medication for the eradication of cesium from children's bodies...

 

U.S. and Canadian Government and Mainstream Media (MSM) Questionable Behavior Patterns

2012-01-26 Science with a Skew: The Nuclear Power Industry After Chernobyl and Fukushima by Gayle Greene
It is one of the marvels of our time that the nuclear industry managed to resurrect itself from its ruins at the end of the last century, when it crumbled under its costs, inefficiencies, and mega-accidents. Chernobyl released hundreds of times the radioactivity of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs combined, contaminating more than 40% of Europe and the entire Northern Hemisphere.1 But along came the nuclear lobby to breathe new life into the industry, passing off as “clean” this energy source that polluted half the globe. The “fresh look at nuclear”—in the words of a New York Times makeover piece (May 13, 2006)2—paved the way to a “nuclear Renaissance” in the United States that Fukushima has by no means brought to a halt.
That mainstream media have been powerful advocates for nuclear power comes as no surprise. “The media are saturated with a skilled, intensive, and effective advocacy campaign by the nuclear industry, resulting in disinformation” and “wholly counterfactual accounts…widely believed by otherwise sensible people,” states the 2010-2011 World Nuclear Industry Status Report by Worldwatch Institute.3 What is less well understood is the nature of the “evidence” that gives the nuclear industry its mandate, Cold War science which, with its reassurances about low-dose radiation risk, is being used to quiet alarms about Fukushima and to stonewall new evidence that would call a halt to the industry...
2011-08-17 Bad Facts, The Chernobyl Project blog
Knowledge is power. -Especially in the sense that it prevents you from being fooled by errors and mistakes made by others. However, knowledge is not always the essential, say rather that an even more important key lies within critical  thinking which have learnt you not to trust everything you see or hear. With this quality added, you're not as likely to be deceived as without it.
Starting about 2 years ago, I periodically engage in searching for literature and documentaries concerning Chernobyl and by now I can say that I've seen a large amount of documentaries and docudramas. What ties these together, is following a common story - the same story that we all now know was what happened at the Chernobyl NPP and what became the consequences. I have been surprised to find most of these documentaries almost perfectly neutral, as a director would have all the chances in the world to hand out backbites in such a subject, but most of them have chosen a direct approach to tell the story "as it is". 
For some reason the American documentaries are different. I'm not going to speculate in why, but one example is the documentary "Chernobyl: Nuclear Meltdown" where the narrator seems more interested in criticising the Soviet Union than telling about the disaster and circumstances around it. This was for me no big business; having shaked it off as a typical example of bad, sensationalist journalism, I was more shocked to find that even National Geographic had failed to make a proper documentary. 
This film by NE, an episode of their documentary series "Seconds from Disaster" was produced and aired in August 2004 and is angled to such a degree that you, watching it, will doubtlessly start to wonder whether they just want to point out a scapegoat, in this case Leonid Toptunov [Toptunov was a young engineer and the operator responsible for amongst other things, the movement of the control rods of reactor 4 on the night of the accident] who is pictured as an ignorant commander of the safety tests run in the 4th reactor block that night, and his superiors, Aleksandr Akimov and Anatoliy Dyatlov - two important persons on location as well as in the aftermaths, aren't even mentioned. 
For a long time, Akimov and Toptunov (who both died from irradiation three weeks after the accident) were the popular men to blame the disaster on, and the later imprisoned Dyatlov (being found guilty for criminal mismanagement of potentially explosive enterprises) even more so, but you cannot interview dead men, so instead National Geographic chose to enhance the role of Boris Stolyarchuk, the senior control engineer of reactor 4 that night, who is still alive. (Also Stolyarchuk was accused for being responsible for the accident, but was later freed from all charges). We can here clearly see an example of  changing the angle of a story due to convenience. The parts of the operating personnel of the 4th reactor on April 26th, 1986 have simply been altered. 

The above is probably the largest error of this documentary, but there are many more. For example, NE promise to "reveal" how the Soviet nuclear power plant and its reactors functioned, but that doesn't happen. They might as well be describing the basics of how any nuclear reactor works.
Also, according to NE, a Pyotr Khmel was a firefighter chief, but really - his name was Grigory Khmel and he was one of the fire engine drivers. It's highly annoying to see how NE obviously have spent a greater effort on digital effects and heavy metal guitars than bothered to check up sources of proper information, even for such a small detail. Had it only been this, they may have been able to get away with it all, but there is simply too much negligence and carelessness involved in this film to make it acceptable, and the following quoting of the narrator is really pushing it all over the edge of the roof and into the reactor core along with the graphite:
"After 10 days the toxic cloud has reached the United States and Asia, and there's a threat to other countries as well."
It is true that the US, nine days after the Chernobyl disaster measured radioactive particles in the atmosphere, but the amount was so small that it hardly opposed a threat to anyone. In spite of normally trying to write in a sensible and objective way, I must make an exception this time as I can't refrain from commenting on how utterly stupid this is. As this documentary is 45 hastily produced minutes of too much faulty information, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but if you're curious and still want to watch it, you may find it here: 
2011-04-09 Chernobyl cover-up in Canada revealed by local BC official — “My hair stood straight up” when told not to worry about radiation from Fukushima by ENENews

 

UK Government and Mainstream Media (MSM) Questionable Behavior Patterns

2011-06-03 BBC Bias: Christopher Busby Reaction to: "Fallout The Legacy of Chernobyl" by BBC Radio 4, 26 April 2011
Transcript with LLRC commentary
We don't know how many complaints about bias and inaccuracy the BBC received. The programme's producer, Brian King, of Above the Title sent stereotyped answers to many people claiming that it

was scrupulously researched with the objective of identifying the scientific truth about the health impact of the Chernobyl radiation leak, and to dispel some of the widespread myth and distortion surrounding the accident.

Since Brian King hasn't answered specific criticisms the second stage of the complaints process has begun. The next stage is to refer your complaint to the BBC's Editorial Complaints Unit. (We note that Brian King's early responses included advice about the ECU stage and even gave the addresses. Later he stopped being so helpful, which suggests he's feeling the heat.)
If you have received a response make sure you quote the reference number when writing to ECU. Also include your postal address, as ECU only sends written replies.
The Editorial Complaints Unit's address is: Room 5170, White City, BBC Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7TS
The programme in fact added to the myths and distortion. It expressed the view of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organisation. IAEA's primary purpose is to promote nuclear power; WHO is subject to an IAEA veto on research. They claim that Chernobyl has had no observable impact on health except for thyroid cancers caused by a failure to distribute stable iodine, and a few deaths and illness among highly irradiated firemen.
It featured "experts" who made factually incorrect statements all of which diminished the true scale of the effects. Here are some examples.

  • The presenter, Nick Ross of "Crimewatch" fame, said the area contaminated by Chernobyl fallout was 400 times smaller than it actually is.
  • He said the Chernobyl accident and the explosion at Fukushima reactor 3 were hydrogen explosions, whereas some experts contend that they were both prompt criticality detonations.
  • Professor Gerry Thomas of Imperial College, London. Through the Fukushima emergency she has been the BBC's favourite expert on radiation and health. She said the UK wasn't exposed to the radiation from Chernobyl, although data from many official sources proves her wrong.
  • Vadim Chumak, a Ukrainian radiation dosimetry expert, tried to compare exposure to Chernobyl fallout with high natural background areas of India where, he claimed (wrongly), no-one has health problems associated with radiation. He gave Nick Ross a plausible measurement for natural background in Kiev but every other factual statement he made was wrong - by a factor of 1000 where he confused milliSieverts with microSieverts, and by 8760 in the case where he gave a dose per hour which (when you look into it) is really a dose per year. The detail is in the LLRC commentary, together with literature sources to prove who's right. Mr. Chumak didn't seem to realise that if people in parts of Kerala really were getting a dose of 50 milliSieverts an hour (which is what he said) then they'd be getting 21,900 times as much dose as the internationally recognised dose limit for adult workers in the nuclear industry. In fact, the actual mean doses in the high background parts of Kerala are 6.5 milliSieverts a year - not 50. Frighteningly, LLRC has found out that Chumak is a member of a new World Health Organisation "expert group" on radiation and health research priorities.
  • Britain's former chief scientific officer, Professor Sir David King, tried to down-play radiation exposures in Japan since Fukushima by comparing the doses with cosmic rays on a flight from London to New York. He said the 8-hour flight would give you "many, many times" as much as walking around Fukushima. Fallout in Japan is very uneven but in many places you'd be likely to get many times more dose, even if we overlook the hard-to-detect alpha emitters.

The largest collection of Chernobyl data so far published anywhere - Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and Nature - was ignored. This is a compendium of evidence including the challenging total of 985,000 deaths between 1986 and 2005 attributable to Chernobyl. Published in 2009 by the New York Academy of Sciences it is now, fortunately, a free download. ( Help with downloading it is here. )
LLRC has submitted a detailed complaint about Fallout: The Legacy of Chernobyl to the BBC.
Transcript with LLRC commentary
The programme failed to meet BBC editorial standards on accuracy and impartiality.
The BBC claims to aim to achieve accuracy by:

  • "the accurate gathering of material using first hand sources wherever possible.
  • checking and cross checking the facts.
  • validating the authenticity of documentary evidence and digital material.
  • corroborating claims and allegations made by contributors wherever possible."

"In practice, the BBC's commitment to impartiality means:

  • we strive to reflect a wide range of opinion and explore a range and conflict of views so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or under represented.
  • we exercise our editorial freedom to produce content about any subject, at any point on the spectrum of debate as long as there are good editorial reasons for doing so.
  • we can explore or report on a specific aspect of an issue or provide an opportunity for a single view to be expressed, but in doing so we do not misrepresent opposing views. They may also require a right of reply.
  • we must ensure we avoid bias or an imbalance of views on controversial subjects."

 

U.N. and Other International Organizations Questionable Behavior Patterns

2011-09-30 Future of Chernobyl health studies in doubt: European Commission unlikely to fund lifetime studies of those affected by fallout by Declan Butler
How much radiation is 'unsafe' for humans? For those exposed to fallout from the disaster at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, the question is all too real. But there is still no good answer: the accident has highlighted the enormous difficulties in estimating the long-term health risks of relatively low doses of radiation.
A group of leading researchers in Europe had hoped that a fresh round of studies on people exposed to radiation after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 would finally begin to help fill this yawning science gap (see 'Lessons from the past'). But their proposal is now looking increasingly unlikely to proceed.
The Chernobyl lifespan cohort study was one of the main components of the Agenda for Research on Chernobyl Health (ARCH), which was proposed last year by an international panel of experts who had been charged by the European Commission to advise it on future research needs (see 'Chernobyl's legacy'). The study would track the lifetime health of more than half a million 'liquidators' sent in to clean up the area around Chernobyl, as well as of the general population of the region who were children at the time of the accident. The power of the study would lie in its size, offering more than ten times as many people as the lifetime cohort study set up in Japan after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs, which remains the gold standard for studies on the impact of radiation on a population...
2011-04 Note on the unreliability of official data published by WHO and IAEA, Health Effects of Chernobyl, PPNW and GFS Report PDF.
At the “Chernobyl Forum of the United Nations” organised in September 2005 by the
International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organisation, the presentation of
the results of work on the effects of Chernobyl showed serious inconsistencies. For example:
the press release of the WHO and IAEA stated that in the future, at most, 4000 surplus
fatalities due to cancer and leukaemia amongst the most severely affected groups of people
might be expected. In the WHO report on which this was based however, the actual number of
deaths is given as 8,930. These deaths were not mentioned in any newspaper articles. When
one examines the source quoted in the WHO report, one arrives at a number between 10,000
and 25,000 additional fatalities due to cancer and leukaemia.
Given this it can be rationally concluded that the official statements of the IAEA and the WHO
have manipulated their own data. Their representation of the effects of Chernobyl has little to
do with reality.
The Chernobyl Forum also does not take into account that even UNSCEAR has estimated that
the collective dose (the usual measurement for radiation damage) for Europe outside the
region of the former Soviet Union is higher than the corresponding data for the Chernobyl
region. The collective dose from the catastrophe was distributed to 53% throughout Europe,
36% throughout the affected regions in the Soviet Union, 8% in Asia, 2 % in Africa and
0.3% in America.
S. Pflugbeil pointed out already in 2005 that there were discrepancies between press
releases, the WHO report and the source quoted in it (Cardis et al.). Up until now neither the
Chernobyl Forum, IAEA nor the WHO have deemed it necessary to let the public know that, on
the basis of their own analysis, a two to five-fold higher number of deaths due to cancer and
leukaemia are to be expected as the figures they have published.
Even in 2011 – some 5 years on - no official UN organisation has as yet corrected these
figures. The latest UNSCEAR publication on the health effects of Chernobyl does not take into
account any of the numerous results of research into the effects of Chernobyl from the three
countries affected. Only one figure – that of 6,000 cases of thyroid cancer among children
and juveniles, and leukaemia and cataracts in liquidators – was included in there recent
information to the media. Thus, in 2011 the UNSCEAR committee declared: On the basis of
studies carried out during the last 20 years, as well as of previous UNSCEAR reports,
UNSCEAR has come to the conclusion that the large majority of the population has no reason
to fear that serious health risks will arise from the Chernobyl accident. The only exception
applies to those exposed to radioiodine during childhood or youth and to liquidators who were
exposed to a high dose of radiation and therefore had to reckon with a higher radiationinduced
risk.
2011-04-01 Nuclear's green cheerleaders forget Chernobyl at our peril: Pundits who downplay the risks of radiation are ignoring the casualties of the past. Fukushima's meltdown may be worse by John Vidal,
"...I prefer the words of Alexey Yablokov, member of the Russian academy of sciences, and adviser to President Gorbachev at the time of Chernobyl: "When you hear 'no immediate danger' [from nuclear radiation] then you should run away as far and as fast as you can..."
"...At the end of 2006, Yablokov and two colleagues, factoring in the worldwide drop in births and increase in cancers seen after the accident, estimated in a study published in the annals of the New York Academy of Sciences that 985,000 people had so far died and the environment had been devastated. Their findings were met with almost complete silence by the World Health Organisation and the industry..."
2008-04-01 The World Health Organisation and Nuclear Power Chernobyl: The Great Cover-Up by Alison Katz, Le Monde diplomatique
"For 50 years dangerous concentrations of radionuclides have been accumulating in earth, air and water from weapons testing and reactor incidents. Yet serious studies of the effects of radiation on health have been obscured – not least by the World Health Organisation. . ."
Stronger than the tobacco lobby
For decades the tobacco, agrochemical and petrochemical lobbies have obstructed implementation of public health and environmental measures that might interfere with their profits. But the nuclear lobby is incomparably more powerful than any of these as it comprises governments of nuclear states, most significantly, the United States, the United Kingdom and France, and powerful intergovernmental organisations. The disinformation emanating from industrial and military lobbies is overwhelming – and dangerously, it carries state authority.
Furthermore, the corruption of science also concerns our most prestigious academic institutions which, as an editorial in The Lancet reported, “have become businesses in their own right, seeking to commercialise for themselves research discoveries rather than preserve their independent scholarly status” (10). Peer-reviewed studies, cited as evidence of the safety of nuclear activities, all too often emanate from, or are financed by, the nuclear lobby ....
2003 Nuclear Controversies (50:15) "Documentary of 51 mn of Wladimir Tchertkoff (2003). In June 2001 in Kiev, the nuclear based experts of the IAEA and WHO maintain that the catastrophe of Tchernobyl made only 31 died `approximately'…"
2011-10-22 German Gov’t Study: Children living near nuclear plants have double leukemia rates, high incidence of solid cancers — Reactors cannot prevent radiation from escaping (VIDEO) by ENENews.com [Ed. Note: I have added the red boldface].
LINK TV, Oct. 21 — Dr. Helen Caldicott appeared on the LINK TV program Earth Focus to discuss the Fukushima crisis and other nuclear issues.
Caldicott received her medical degree from the University of Adelaide Medical School. In 1977 she joined the staff of the Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Boston, and taught pediatrics at the Harvard Medical School from 1977 to 1978. She worked to establish the group International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985. -Wikipedia
[Transcript Summary]
At 6:15 in
Chernobyl health effects are the biggest cover-up in the history of medicine. WHO, IAEA, UN all covered up effects.
At 7:20 in
German gov’t study on children under 5 that lived within 5km of reactors showed double leukemia and high incidence of solid cancers… deformities (teratogenesis). The closer to reactor, the higher the malignancy.
At 10:15 in
Nuclear plants cannot prevent tritium (Radioactive hydrogen) from escaping… highly carcinogenic.
It is probably what’s causing the cancers in the kids that live near power plants in Germany.
2008-04-14 The World Health Organisation and nuclear power: Chernobyl: the great cover-up:
For 50 years dangerous concentrations of radionuclides have been accumulating in earth, air and water from weapons testing and reactor incidents. Yet serious studies of the effects of radiation on health have been obscured – not least by the World Health Organisation. by Alison Katz
"In June 2007 Gregory Hartl, World Health Organisation (WHO) spokesman for Sustainable Development and Healthy Environments, claimed that the proceedings of the international conference held in Geneva in 1995 on the health consequences of the Chernobyl disaster had been duly published (1). This was not so. And the proceedings of the Kiev conference in 2001 have never been published either. Challenged by journalists a few months later, the WHO repeated the claim, providing references to a collection of abstracts for the Kiev conference and just 12 articles (out of hundreds) submitted to the Geneva conference.
Since 26 April 2007 (the 21st anniversary of Chernobyl), a large placard has informed WHO employees each day that one million children in the area around Chernobyl are irradiated and ill. IndependentWHO, the group organising the action, accuses the WHO of a cover-up of the health consequences of the catastrophe, and of failing to assist populations in danger.
The WHO, they insist, must end the agreement made in 1959 which binds it to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2) and prevents it from initiating a programme or activity in the area of nuclear power without consulting the IAEA “with a view to adjusting the matter by mutual agreement” (Article 1, Point 2).
Independence from the IAEA would permit the WHO to conduct a serious, scientific evaluation of the disaster and provide appropriate health care to contaminated people. A resolution to this effect is in preparation for the World Health Assembly in May 2008 (3) and an Appeal by Health Professionals has been launched (4).
Industrial and military lobby
According to its statutes, the IAEA (a UN agency which reports to the Security Council) is mandated to “to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world”. It is in fact a lobby, industrial and military, which should have no role to play in public health policymaking or research.
The IAEA has vetoed conferences planned by WHO on radioactivity and health and, in turn, the WHO has endorsed the nuclear lobby’s grotesque statistics on mortality and morbidity relating to the Chernobyl accident – 56 dead and 4,000 thyroid cancers (5). Denial of disease inevitably implies denial of health care. Nine million people live in areas with very high levels of radioactivity; for 21 years now these populations have had no choice but to consume contaminated food, with devastating effects on their health (6).
For the nuclear lobby, any research indicating harm from ionising radiation represents a commercial threat that must at all costs be averted. Research on damage to the human genome (one of the most serious consequences of the contamination) was not part of the international project requested of the WHO in 1991 by the health ministers of Ukraine, Belarus and the Russian Federation. Yet dental caries was made a research priority. And although these countries had addressed their research request to the WHO, it was the IAEA which planned the project.
This conflict of interest has already been fatal for hundreds of thousands of people according to studies by independent scientists and institutions (7). And the greatest burden of disease and death is yet to come – given long latency periods, the increasing concentration of radionuclides in internal organs from food grown in contaminated soil, and damage to the human genome over many generations.
Hundreds of epidemiological studies in Ukraine, Belarus and the Russian Federation have established that there has been a significant rise in all types of cancer causing thousands of deaths, an increase in infant and perinatal mortality, a large number of spontaneous abortions, a growing number of deformities and genetic anomalies, disturbance and retardation of mental development, neuropsychological illness, blindness, and diseases of the respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, urogenital and endocrine systems (8).
But who will believe them? Four months after the meltdown Morris Rosen, the IAEA’s director of nuclear safety, said: “Even if there were an accident of this type every year, I would still regard nuclear power as a valuable source of energy” (9). Public information on the real health consequences of Chernobyl could seriously change the debate about nuclear options. And that is why the WHO is afraid of the children of Chernobyl ...[more here]

 

Other European Questionable Behavior Patterns

2012-04-25 Norway, Sweden, Russia Animal Radiation Contamination Explored, agreenroad.blogspot.com
The Sami are an indigenous people living in Norway, Finland, Sweden and Russia. They are reindeer herders, who manage hundreds of thousands of reindeer in the frigid North.
Despite living approximately 1,100 miles from Chernobyl, their way of life and food that they relied on as their main source of nutrition was negatively affected by Cesium 137 contamination from the Chernobyl accident in 1986.
After the accident, the authorities told the Sami people that they would not be able to sell or eat the meat of their reindeer "for at least 40 years".
According to Wikipedia; "Reindeer have major cultural and economic significance for indigenous peoples of the North. The human-ecological systems in the North, like reindeer pastoralism, are sensitive to change, perhaps more than in virtually any other region of the globe, due in part to the variability of the Arctic climate and ecosystem and the characteristic ways of life of indigenous Arctic peoples.[57]
The 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster caused nuclear fallout in the sensitive Arctic ecosystems and poisoned fish, meat and berries. Lichens and mosses are two of the main forms of vegetation in the Arctic and are highly susceptible to airborne pollutants and heavy metals. Since many do not have roots, they can absorb nutrients, and toxic compounds, through their leaves. The lichens accumulated airborne radiation, and 73,000 reindeer had to be destroyed as "unfit" for human consumption in Sweden alone. The government promised Sami indemnification, which was not acted upon by government.
Radioactive wastes and spent nuclear fuel have been stored in the waters off the Kola Peninsula, including locations that are only "two kilometers" from places where Sami live. There are a minimum of five nuclear waste "dumps" where spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive waste are being deposited in the Kola Peninsula, often with little concern for the surrounding environment or Sami population." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_people
The Swedish National Food Administration (SLV) converted the Swedish Radiation Protection Authority (SSI) recommendations into safe radiation limits for food. After the Chernobyl accident, the SLV set an initial trigger for unsafe radiation levels and destruction of the reindeer for any found to contain radiation above a 'safe' limit of 300 Bq per kilogram.
This meant that wild game, fish, berries or any other food above this limit was considered unfit for human consumption.
In Sweden, this 'safe' level was gradually raised from 300 to 1,500 and then finally to 10,000 Bq per kilogram over the next few years. Any reindeer now testing lower than 10,000 Bq/kg is now considered 'safe' to consume, sell or export.
This raising of 'safe' radiation levels in wild meat also had the effect of lowering the percentage of animals testing unsafe for consumption from 80% in 1986, to less than 1% today. In 1986, some of the reindeer meat tested with radiation levels as high as 40,000 Bq/kg.
Of course, this also reduced the amount of money that the government authorities had to pay to the Sami for these destroyed animals by a huge amount. Could this monetary incentive be part or possibly the only reason why radiation levels were raised from 300 to 10,000 Bq/kg?
Another problem with this fast implementation is that it was discovered that the fallout from nuclear testing had been subjecting the Sami peoples to doses of radiation over 3,000 Bq/kg for many years, without the health or nuclear radiation protection authorities doing anything about it, much less notifying people about the dangers or risks.
The Soviets were testing nuclear bombs in Novaya Zemlya during the 1950's and 60's, which produced radioactive Cesium levels in the reindeer at levels that reached 3,000 Bq/kg.
So the Sami people had a problem understanding why all of a sudden, 300 Bq/kg of radiation was considered unsafe and their animals had to be destroyed. Many of them lost faith in radiation protection authorities and started ignoring them completely.
http://www.utexas.edu/courses/sami/dieda/socio/chernobyl.htm
In the UK, the trigger for contaminated animals such as sheep was 1000 Bq per kilogram, and in Germany, the trigger for animals such as deer and wild pig is still only 600 Bq per kilogram.
In Norway, right after the Chernobyl crisis in 1986, the reindeer meat radiation limit was set at 600 Bq/kg. This was then raised one year later to 6,000 Bq/kg. The authorities said it was still safe to eat even with this elevated radiation level, because this meat was considered a 'luxury' food item, not meant to be consumed daily.
It is also interesting to note, that the 'safe' standards of radiation in food or drink vary by orders of magnitude, depending on which country one lives in or visits. There is no international standard for 'safe' levels of radiation in milk, meat or water, so a person could be exposed to 10,000 Bq/kg of radiation in food or drink, and that food or drink could still be considered 'safe'.
See the following articles for more information;
UK Established Animal Radiation 'Controls' Due To Cesium Contamination; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/uk-established-animal-radiation.html
Radioactive Boars And Deer Unfit To Eat 950 Miles From Chernobyl; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/radioactive-boars-and-deer-unfit-to-eat.html
One of the responses to the Chernobyl nuclear accident was the loss of fish, berries and other wild game that was often harvested by people living areas such as Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc. The governments of these countries set up reimbursement programs and compensated people for the loss of berries, fish, and wild game meat that was found to be radioactively contaminated.
One type of reimbursement was to pay reindeer herders to feed their deer uncontaminated feed brought in from other areas, not affected by radiation. Many berry farmers and fishermen received monetary compensation due to the radioactive contamination of these foodstuffs.
http://www.utexas.edu/courses/sami/dieda/socio/chernobyl.htm
In Norway, some researchers developed a radiation binding pellet product that could be fed to the reindeer about six weeks before harvest, and they found that the radiation levels would be reduced as a result. These feed pellets contained Prussian blue pigment.
The effect of these pellets was to bind the Cesium 137 coming in with the contaminated lichen, and prevent it from being absorbed into the meat. The bonded particles would end up being too large to be absorbed in the gut and would thus be excreted rather than being absorbed. Researchers found that by using this technique they could reduce the Cesium 137 load in meat by 50% or more. In milk cows, this product could reduce the Cesium 137 in milk by 80%. Hoke, Franklin. “Seizing Cesium.” Environment. June 1991, Vol. 33, Issue 5: 21.
Scientific Research
"Within the most contaminated area the reindeer born in 1986 showed significantly more chromosome aberrations than those born both before and after 1986. This could suggest that the Chernobyl accident fallout created an effect particularly among calves, during the immediate post-accident period in the most exposed areas."
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0165799295900489
Teachers Guide
A teachers guide is available from PBS, to help students understand more about radiation, these reindeer and how they were affected.
http://www.pbs.org/safarchive/4_class/45_pguides/pguide_803/4483_rudolph.html
Scientific American Frontiers:Previous Shows:Transcripts:Nordic - PBS
www.pbs.org/saf/transcripts/transcript803.htm
2012-04-25 PBS; Radioactive Wolves In Chernobyl Exclusion Zone Movie Review, agreenroad.blogspot.com.
The following is a review of the PBS movie 'Radioactive Wolves'.
German Filmmakers and scientists come into the Chernobyl area to document the lives of the packs of wolves. These German scientists 'start' the animal research studies and then turn it over to the Belarus and Ukranian scientists so that they can continue the 'studies'.
Our question is; why were there no animal, fish, bird or insect studies done from 1986 to now? What happened to all of these Russian scientists and researchers, biologists and scientists? Where did they all go?
The researchers then mention that the Pripiat River carries lots of radiation downstream. Then they fail to connect the dots and say what negative effect this radiation in the river has on people who live downstream. Once more, an opportunity is lost to educate people about the dangers of low level radiation spreading out of the exclusion zone, via flowing water. Why avoid the whole subject? Why not go into it and explore this whole subject of radiation in river water, fish and downstream populations?
The researchers then test moose bones on the bank of the river and find that they are contaminated with radiation that is '50' times normal levels. (Too bad that they did not mention the actual radiation levels or the type of radiation that they found, because it makes it sound like this is no big deal.) They did not even say what kind of radiation detector they had, or what kind of radiation they were measuring. Was it alpha, beta, gamma or something else entirely, like neutron beams? Again, lots of useless information that means absolutely nothing. This segment provides no helpful information for people to learn about radiation.
The announcer says that about 300 radioactively contaminated wolves are estimated to live inside the exclusion zone around Chernobyl (This number is disputed by the actual professor at the end, who says there are no more than 120).
In this PBS movie, they explain that after they trap the wolf, that the researchers have to wear masks and gloves. They mention that if they ingest any wolf hairs either by nose or mouth, they will be ‘poisoned’ by radiation.
Again, there is no mention of the amount of radiation they found in or on the wolf, or how one wolf hair would 'poison' them. Too bad, because this was ANOTHER excellent opportunity to educate the public about the dangers of low level radiation. How and why is one radioactive wolf hair going to poison and kill someone? And how does the wolf stay so healthy, when just one hair from it will kill a human?
The lack of reporting about any useful information about radiation and the danger it poses makes the movie a little entertaining, but not at all scientific, informative or educational.
In Section three of the movie, they focus on a bison calf that died, which the wolves discovered and ate. The announcer says the calf died of the cold. How do they know that? Why would a calf just die of cold, when it is living in the most radioactive contaminated zone in the world?
Wouldn't it make more sense that the calf died of radiation poisoning, or that it died of a genetic defect caused by living in such a highly radioactive environment?
Again, an opportunity existed to educate the public about the dangers of radiation, but is lost once again by dismissing radiation as the cause of ANY animal deaths. They never bother to take any tissue samples or measure ANYTHING at all. A meaningless and useless claim is made, with NO EVIDENCE to back it up.
The assumption made by viewers is that ALL animals in the zone must be healthy, which is an absolute deception, falsehood and lie. By saying what they say, they make it seem like this exclusion zone is all normal or safe, and that radiation is actually HELPING the animals and good for them somehow.
When they say in this same section that the wolves do not have to hunt anymore, what do they mean? When they say there are a large numbers of wolves, and that means that they must be in 'robust' health, how did they reach that conclusion?
How can ONE wolf hair 'poison' researchers, but at the same time, all of these wolves are in 'robust' health? This does not make any sense, and shows how ignorant the announcer of this program is about the negative health effects of low level radiation. Either that, or this announcer is trying to mislead the viewers completely.
The announcer says that the Russian and German researchers are given only a 'limited' time in the radioactive exclusion zone, to keep their exposure to radiation down to 'safe' levels.
However, the announcer says wolf cubs are 'thriving' while living in this highly radioactive environment FULL TIME. So how can humans be in danger of negative health effects, while only visiting briefly, and at the same time, wolves living in this death zone are 'thriving'? Again, this makes no logical sense. Is the announcer claiming that massive amounts of radiation are good for animals, but small amounts are dangerous, or what?
Then the announcer says that low level radiation negative health effects are difficult to measure or find in either animals, rats, wolves or humans. They claim that they can learn NOTHING by examining individual animals. They can learn something only by looking at the overall population. This is a patently absurd claim, totally devoid of meaning or truth.
Guess again... scientists can learn a lot by doing animal autopsies. They can learn a lot by taking tissue samples, and internal radiation measurements of individual animals. Again, this claim by the announcer is NOT scientific, just pure speculation. Once again, we have pure falsehoods being spewed by either an ignorant person, or someone who is TRYING hard to mislead people.
None of these things are true that the announcer is claiming. How did they come up with this rationale, which is not scientific, nor logical? This announcers conclusion makes absolutely no sense at all.
In an area that is only a mile from the Chernobyl reactor, the announcer says the researchers 'have to wear masks', due to dust and windy conditions that stir up radiation. Then they enter into an area where the whole forest was killed by radiation, and then it was bulldozed. The researchers are studying mice in this area, which they say is highly contaminated and radioactive.
The door mice that they are studying are in the Red Forest, which is now green again. A six year study found that out of all door mice that they find, only 4 - 6% of them have 'slight' abnormalities. They say this is 'twice' the level of 'clean' areas. This again makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever.
They also say that door mouse reproduction and number of mice are better than in clean areas. The announcer is concluding that all other animals in the exclusion have similar effects as these door mice. Are these mice being raised in a bulldozed area where all radioactive soil was removed? Are they bringing in clean, vitamin enriched food for them to eat? No Geiger Counter measurements were taken of either the soil, what they were eating, or of the mice.
Again, there is no mention of actual radiation amounts in the mice, or any other animals, what types of radiation they are finding or if they are even measuring anything except for checking on numbers of mice in a nesting box once in awhile, in a possibly artificially cleaned up area. Lots of useless information is presented again, with no REAL information.
In section four, a 'researcher' observes and counts the number of chicks in ONE falcon nest. He concludes that they are 'healthy'. Again, there is absolutely no mention of radiation levels and no Geiger Counter or other radiation measurement is taken in any way. No feather samples are taken.
NO genetic tests are being done on any of these animals, because they do not believe in testing individual animals, which is beyond absurd.
The lack of radiation measurements at this point is becoming ridiculously apparent, making the whole movie seem like a staged stunt, designed to promote tourism of this whole highly contaminated area.
Why not build a hotel in this area and bring in the tourists, if everything is so 'safe' and 'healthy'? Why not catch some fish out of the cooling pond next to the reactor and serve them in the hotel restaurant, along with some bison meat?
There is absolutely NO mention of any health effects from the high doses of radiation that are inside of all of these animals that they are obviously consuming. This is misleading at best and totally deceptive at worst.
No one is doing any internal radiation measurements. No one is doing autopsies of animals that do die in this area, or so it seems. This is not science, but rather more like a promotion stunt for establishment of more 'exclusion zone' Nature preserves.
Then they mention giant catfish, which are eight feet long in a cooling pool next to the Chernobyl reactor. The announcer concludes absolutely that the large size of the fish is due to their age, and has absolutely nothing to do with radioactivity. How does he know FOR SURE?
Yet, in the very next scene, they are measuring fish bones from the very same pool, from the very same fish near the Chernobyl reactor, where those 'healthy' falcons and hawks dragged them out and ate their flesh.
When they go near the bones, the radiation meters go crazy, beeping like mad, as the researchers bring them near to the bones, and the announcer says; "These fish bones should not be touched with bare hands. What this contamination does to the eagles is still NOT KNOWN".
The only reason that the effects are not KNOWN, is because no one is researching that. Purposefully avoiding researching something makes it seem like a mystery.
Radiation at such high levels is going to negatively affect health of animals or humans that eat it, pure and simple. There is no mystery here.. They are just avoiding the whole subject of the negative health effects of radiation in this movie, PERIOD. At this point, we can conclude this is pure propaganda for the nuke industry, and nothing more. This movie is getting more and more ridiculous.
Then the researchers go down the river, while making the claim that the river downstream of the Pripiat, where it meets a larger river is all "clear of radiation", and "the fish are all safe to eat, even by humans". They offer no proof, just boasts.
Again, no actual fish are shown, no radiation measurements are taken. There are just lots of empty boasts and claims, which sound completely ridiculous. The announcer stated in the beginning of the show, that the Pripiat still carries radiation downstream from the Chernobyl contaminated exclusion zone, where it floods twenty mile across areas.
How can both things be true at the same time? How can the river Pripiat flood highly radioactive areas? How can this highly radioactive water then flow downstream, while magically getting clean and radiation free again, while not affecting anyone or anything downstream? Again this makes absolutely no logical sense and makes the whole movie seem stupid and propagandistic.
Are they trying to promote the nuclear industry by making these toxic waste zones with very high radiation zones seem inviting, healthy, safe and friendly? If this is the goal, we could not do a better job if we tried.
In the final segment the announcer glowingly exclaims how wonderful the endangered species of horses are in this exclusion zone, and that they are quickly breeding and recovering remarkably.
He blames poachers for cutting their numbers from the 300 they 'expected' to have by this time, down to the 60 that actually exist now. How does he know what killed these horses? What if radiation killed the foals? What if they were aborted or stillborn? This is normally what happens in highly radioactive zones like this.
Who has the evidence that 'poachers' are the ones to blame for killing (and eating) all of these wonderful but highly radioactive horses? These horses are wandering around in a highly toxic, radioactive exclusion zone where people are not even allowed in. Why would people eat highly radioactive horse meat anyway?
Could it be possible that the wolves are taking out all of the sick, genetically deformed and weak horses, who are most affected by the radiation? Nope, the announcer is ABSOLUTELY sure that the wolves do not prey on these cute horses... It ABSOLUTELY must be the evil poachers.
The program ends by summarizing what the researchers are studying, which consists of counting the wolves and their pups and estimating their 'survival' rate, compared to 'clean' areas of equal size.
The Russian professor concludes that in a clean area that has the same area as the Chernobyl exclusion zone, he would expect about 300 wolves. However, he could not count more than around 120 wolves in this same amount of land around the Chernobyl meltdown site.
Then the PBS announcer says that there are just as many wolves in Chernobyl, as in a clean area of the same size. How can he come to this illogical conclusion, when the professor just said the opposite of that?
The announcer makes it sound like this Chernobyl exclusion zone is a wolf resort area, full of healthy, happy wolves, galloping health horses, and birds who just love this area, and who cannot wait to sunbathe by the 'clean' Pripiat River.
This movie, though interesting visually, is a HUGE disappointment. It contains absolutely no scientific or useful information, other than glowing testimonials about how safe radiation exclusion zones are for animals, and presumably for humans too.
It is strange to note that there are no humans living in this area.. Why not, if it is so healthy and safe? If it is so good for the animals, why would it not be healthy and safe for humans?
Again, all of this makes absolutely no logical sense, nor does it have any scientific merit, but it sounds good and makes the nuclear industry look like something desirable to have around, so they can have more nuclear 'accidents' and create more 'Nature' zones, where wolves, birds and horses can have their Garden of Eden...
...Our take on this whole movie is that it was directly financed by the nuclear industry. This movie in our opinion puts a deceptive spin on a deadly truth, which is totally covered up in this movie.
Bottom line, to find out the truth about nuclear radiation, the public is much better off avoiding the entire PBS site and reading the following articles.
PBS; Radioactive Wolves In Chernobyl Exclusion Zone Movie Review
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/chernobyl-pbs-radioactive-wolves-in.html
2012-03-20 Dr. James Fetzer interview with Leuren Moret and Dr. Majia Nadesan on The Real Deal, 30 March 2012:

L. Moret: There is a book you might like to read Majia, or people in the audience. It is called Fire in the Rain: The Democratic Consequences of Chernobyl by Peter Gould, and he was the Evan Pugh professor of geography at Penn State. This was published by John Hopkins Press in 1990. And it is very interesting because we can compare what is happening today surrounding Fukushima in terms of deception, and basically "deny and delay" is the main mechanism. They keep shoving the disaster off the chart. And in this book it has a figure which is called the relationship between the degree to which a country is dependant on atomic power and the degree to which information about Chernobyl's effects were manipulated or suppressed. And what is interesting is the countries who were least dependent on atomic power were the least manipulative with the information and the developments. And those countries were Denmark, Portugal, Norway, Austria, and Ireland. And contrast that to the countries or the governments that did the most manipulation and suppression of information and those were Belgium and France, which are very, very, very dependent. In fact France is 75% dependent on nuclear energy compared to the U.S. which is maybe 20% or something like that. So that is one of the explanations. It is the profits and the finances that really have a lot to do with what they report and don't report. --- Their own industry. And then also General Electric and Westinghouse own ABC and NBC so they are the biggest builders in the designers of nuclear power plants in the world. So we are not going to see it on TV in the U.S.

 

 

2011-07-09 French court dismisses ‘Chernobyl effect’ case, euronews.com
"...Critics complain that French authorities were negligent, failing to take preventive measures such as banning the consumption of fresh produce. Some claim the effects of Chernobyl were minimised, partly to protect France’s own nuclear industry."
2006-06-01 Pierre Pellerin: French Nuclear Henchman Indicted in Aftermath of Chernobyl LAURENT / Lasting News
France — An ex-government official was indicted yesterday of lying and misleading the population in areas affected by radiation doses after the Chernobyl explosion. Pierre Pellerin, the head of the nuclear security watchdog in France at the time of the Chernobyl explosion in April [1986] 2006 [sic], has been accused for a long time of having lied about the effects in France of the explosion.
In a now legendary TV statement in early may, Professor Pellerin famously declared that the Chernobyl nuclear cloud stopped its course just short at the French eastern border.
For Mr Pellerin, there never were public health issues after the Chernobyl explosion in France. This point of view, which is also the stance of the powerful nuclear lobby in France, has been challenged for twenty years by independent studies giving evidence of an increase of thyroid cancer and thyroid disease in the most affected areas — especially in the eastern part of the island of Corse.
2011-04-24 Primordial fear: why radiation is so scary by Marlowe Hood,
Agence France-Presse (h/t Molecular Geneticist: They said there was nothing in France from Chernobyl… in fact there was — Impression authorities were lying, April 23, 2011)
...The health and death tolls from Chernobyl -- and the areas affected -- are still fiercely disputed, and estimates vary hugely.
That very uncertainty further fuels alarm, experts say.
"How was one [living in France] supposed to know whether or not to worry about a radioactive cloud?" asked Francois Taddei, a molecular geneticist at the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM).
"For Chernobyl, we were told that there was nothing, which in fact there was. How does one rebuild confidence?"
"One had the impression -- justified or not -- that the authorities were lying, and so everything they said was cast into doubt," said Klein.



The Russian "Woodpecker Facility" very close to Chernobyl and powered by its reactors, NATO code-named "The Steel Yard." (Illustration from Prison Planet Forum thread web page which has extensive commentary on this topic). This site had many probable uses, such as detecting incoming missiles, employing climate control and weather-warfare HAARP applications, and perhaps even transmitting frequencies capable of exerting mind-control effects on people around the world.


Business as usual for Israel, the U.S., the UK, and their Rothschild / City of London overseers

 


From: Study: All of Western US and most of East Coast, Midwest, Canada covered in airborne particles on March 20, Fukushima plume model shows — Based solely on Reactor No. 1 explosion (PHOTO), enenews.com, March 2, 2012. This illustration is listed at the top of my 20-26 March 2011 Fukushima Radiation and Fallout Projections web page. Please scroll through my "Aerial Dance of Mass Death and Genetic Destruction" Week-by-week Fukushima radiation and fallout projections and companion articles series which shows plume charts for dangerous isotopes such as Plutonium 239, Cesium 137, Iodine 131, and Xenon 133 over North America. Given the fact that major U.S. government agencies and controlled national media have continually refused to alert the public to these grave dangers so that people can take even the most rudimentary protective measures -- such as staying out of the rain and avoiding highly bioaccumulative poultry products -- all of this should immediately sound alarm bells that something highly sinister could be taking place at higher levels on a level of evil that is consistent with a Chernobyl sabotage hypothesis.

 

Criminal and Other Subversive Analysis: The Case for Chernobyl as a False Flag (Covert Sabotage) Event


Overview by William B. Fox
President, America First Institute

 

I am providing links to a variety of different false flag hypotheses below, which are sorted out by standard false flag characteristics. Thus far I have uncovered numerous strong "indicators" that Chernobyl Reactor 4 was deliberately sabotaged.
I am indebted to Leuren Moret, whose helped me better understand a more complex underlying reality than the usual U.S. vs. U.S.S.R. "Cold War" paradigm typically portrayed by "conservatives" during the Gorbachev-Reagan era. In reality, there was a complex three way interaction between the U.S., Rothschilds / City of London, and U.S.S.R. Sometimes all of these parties were covert partners with each others. At other times, one or two of these parties would stab another in the back. (As an aside, there were certainly more than just three social, cultural, ethnic, and economic factions in global competition with each other on different levels during this era, and hence the underlying reality was really more "three dimensional" than just "two dimensional" in nature, but for the purposes of this discussion, the three-way "two dimensional" model is adequate).
This reminds me of the Machiavellian standoff within the former Soviet Union described by Viktor Suvorov (pen name) in Inside the Aquarium: Making of a Top Soviet Spy about the GRU (Soviet military intelligence). According to Suvorov, the Soviet military was so traumatized by the Stalinist purges of the late 1930's that it decided to develop its own internal intelligence organization (the GRU) that essentially duplicated major capabilities of the KGB in order to serve as a defensive shield against any possible future purges. According to Suvorov, the post WWII Soviet power structure evolved into three pillars, namely the Communist Party, the KGB, and the GRU. They often watched each other as closely as they watched foreign enemies. Whenever one group would get too powerful, the other two would gang up against it to pull it down.

Just like the farmer and the cowman in the musical Oklahoma!, the GRU and FSB (formerly the KGB) should be friends! Caption from Putin inspects new Intelligence HQ; "Russian President [and former KGB officer] Vladimir Putin (R) and GRU military intelligence head Valentin Korabelnikov (C) listen to explanations during a visit at the new GRU military intelligence headquarters building in Moscow November 8, 2006. (Xinhua/AFP Photo)"

As an aside, the GRU attempted to duplicate and parallel virtually all of the KGB's foreign espionage activities, which actually was not such a bad thing for the Soviets to the extent that intelligence agencies often like to confirm information from at least three different independent sources before accepting anything as fact, and the GRU and KGB cross-checked with each other in certain areas. Furthermore, a little interservice rivalry helped keep people on their toes. Lastly, there is strong evidence that the Soviet military was victimized during the Great Purge by the incompetence of the KGB's predecessor, the NKVD. According to Jean Vaughan, the biographer of Nazi security services chief Reinhard Heydrich, "In 1936 Heydrich helped forge thirty-two documents that launched the purges that caused Joseph Stalin to liquidate his entire General and General staff command."
One senses a similar tug of war took place during the Reagan-Gorbachev era, sometimes cooperating, sometimes back-stabbing, between various factions of the United States, Rothschilds / City of London, and U.S.S.R. on an international level that echoes the aforementioned internal turf battles between the GRU, KGB, and Communist Party.
The old SPOTLIGHT, precursor to The American Free Press, once noted that the key to solving the JFK assassination mystery lies not so much in determining who had a motive to kill John F. Kennedy, but who had the power to compromise America's security forces and sustain a cover-up in national media for decades, an approach used by Michael Collins Piper in his classic work Final Judgment. The same approach applies to Chernobyl. Focusing on who has the capability to not only conduct intelligence operations, but also sustain a continuous cover-up in the U.S., UK, and former U.S.S.R. produces a very short list of suspects.
There are important reasons why I try to take a "full spectrum analysis" approach and explore deep sociological, ethnic, and historical roots behind the hypothesis that this was another Rothschild / City of London false flag operation carried out through Mossad-CIA-MI6 and their allies with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The general public must understand the underlying agenda and motivations of nuclear saboteurs. They are increasing global radiation levels while simultaneously covering up their crimes in major media. Deep background knowledge is necessary for fellow citizens to de-brainwash themselves and motivate themselves to take appropriate self-protective action against existing levels of contamination related to the Chernobyl catastrophe, bomb testing, nuclear power plants, and depleted uranium while at the same time guard themselves against rising -- and dangerous -- levels of Fukushima fallout that are still raining down on America and bio-accumulating in America's food and water supplies.
The following are key points regarding Chernobyl I have unearthed so far in my research:

* Four significant sources point the finger at Chernobyl as a false flag sabotage event:

a) Radiation expert and DU whistleblower Leuren Moret. She claims that a former head of naval military intelligence for India who was intimately familiar with nuclear reactors for subs and who had toured Soviet nuclear facilities told her that the Chernobyl catastrophe could only have been due to sabotage because of the 14 layers of safety procedures that had to have been deliberately violated. She also cites testimony of former co-workers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. Lawrence had workers at Chernobyl both before and after the explosion, and they subsequently created what Ms. Moret views as a highly suspicious and phony cover-up after action report. Ms. Moret does not believe that a mini-nuke was necessary to trigger the explosion. Simply sabotaging enough procedures could do the job, causing reactor fuel to quickly go into melt-down and produce extremely hot "corium." According to Ms. Moret, hot corium can melt through concrete floors and down through the ground water fairly quickly, which is what she believes what might have caused the main explosion. In Ms. Moret's view, stories about a mini-nuke going off or Soviet miners placing additional concrete underneath the reactor to prevent the corium from reaching ground water could be disinformation. There are people in charge of nuclear industries who do not want the public to know how quickly reactors can go into meltdown and how fast corium can melt through not only containment structures, but also through basement areas and down towards groundwater.
[Ed. Note: For more background on Ms. Moret, please see the author archive that I have created for her works here. A number of experts believe that the Fukushima 3 reactor explosion was atomic in nature and due to "supercriticality" within the corium. The article The Non-Battle of Fukushima … by Steve From Virginia explains how a large mass of corium can "condense" and go "supercritical," resulting in an atomic explosion without necessarily hitting groundwater. In the RT video Fukushima Crisis in the Spotlight As Chernobyl Tragedy Turns 25, uploaded April 25, 2011 to YouTube, Dr. Chris Busby talks about how a recent conference of physicists in Germany concluded that both the Fukushima Reactor 3 explosion on March 14, 2011 and the Chernobyl explosion were very likely nuclear explosions involving corium reactions. Ms. Moret's observation that there exist high level officials who do not want the public to know how quickly reactors can go into meltdown and how fast and how far corium can melt through has been validated by my Fukushima research, where the Japanese government and major media covered up the quick meltdown status of the reactors on 3-11 2011 for months. Government officials and major media have also covered up Fukushima plume forecasts and radiation readings in North America and Europe. Please start at the beginning of my "Aerial Dance of Mass Death and Genetic Destruction" Week-by-week Fukushima radiation and fallout projections and companion articles series and scroll through for supporting evidence. Please also see Dr. Majia Nadesan's "Lessons of Fukushima" lecture about media cover-ups. This was provided at a Feb 2012 symposium at Willamette University in Portland, Oregon. If certain high level officials and the general public were made fully aware of how quickly nuclear power plant "accidents" can result in a meltdowns, out-of-control melt-throughs, supercriticality atomic explosions, and continuous "dirty nuke" poisoning of vast areas, the political reaction may cause all nuclear power plants within a country to shut down. As a point of fact, within four days of the Fukushima 3-11 melt-downs, the German government took seven reactors offline, and in May 2011 it decided to shut down all 17 of its nuclear power plants by the year 2022.]

b) V. Baranov, Former Chief Of Staff Deputy For Special Zone Forces, in Chernobyl nuclear power plant area retired colonel. His statement is provided below.

c) Former Soviet Intelligence officer Dimitri Khalezov, who worked for the Soviet military intelligence directorate that tracked nuclear explosions around the world. He claimed in his 21 February 2011 interview with Dr. Kevin Barrett and Gordon Duff (Editor of Veterans Today) that the catastrophe was caused by a mini-nuke explosion, as noted in a transcript that I have reproduced below. He became a columnist for Veterans Today, and posted the article Comparing the 1986 Chernobyl “nuclear disaster” with the 2001 Manhattan thermo-nuclear catastrophe, March 14, 2011 in which he lays out his sabotage theory in some detail. As mentioned previously, Leuren Moret disagrees with his mini-nuke theory.

d) Boris Ivanov Gorbachev, PhD. Sci. Sciences, Senior Research Fellow has posted articles that talk about a "double order" passed down from a mystery person at the Politburo level that very likely helped cause the catastrophe. He also talks about how important evidence has been covered up, and how all of this may be traced to a hostile foreign intelligence agency like CIA and MI6. One example is his article "The Chernobyl Catastrophe: who provoked it?" NuclearNo.ru, 26 April 2012. [Editor's note: Unfortunately running the page URL through translate.google.com does not translate the entire Russian text, so you have to copy and paste all of it yourself. Also, some items do not get properly translated, such as "ee" in the title. A reader was kind enough to send me an email explaining that "`ee' means `it'; in Russian a catastrophe is a female"].
While I do not know enough about the aforementioned Russian individuals to vouch for their credibility, I think that they are generating enough leads and ideas to be worth mentioning.

* Highly suspicious circumstantial evidence regarding "accident"-related investigations, investigators, testimony, and "findings of fact."

There are too many contradictions and unanswered questions regarding the actual cause of the event. For starters, Reactor 4 which blew up was relatively new, and Dr. Thomas J. Csermely at Syracuse University claims that all the reactors in the Chernobyl complex had an exemplary operating record.
None of the documentaries I have viewed on YouTube produced by major sources such as BBC, History Channel, and Discovery Channel are in solid agreement about the key causes of the explosion. Interestingly enough, a Swedish blogger (at chernobylproject.blogspot.com) who has visited Chernobyl came up with this same opinion independent of myself, as reflected in the extract I provide in the questionable American media section above. Also, no can anyone adequately explain a frequently alleged second explosion.
Many witness testimonies given in court about Chernobyl -- in which the Director of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant was sentenced to ten years in prison for violation of safety procedures -- have apparently not been released to the public yet. Obviously there is quite a lot of legal "discovery" work that needs to be done for serious Chernobyl researchers.
Significantly, the Director of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant has stated that authorities are concealing the truth from the public. When the Devil Gets Old..., chernobylproject.blogspot.com, (by a Swedish blogger, I have added the boldface below), dated 27 Sept 2011, comments:

Viktor Petrovich Bryukanov - the former director of the Chernobyl NPP was persecuted and convicted due to actions and decisions made during the preceding hours as well as the critical period of the disaster.  On the 3rd of July in 1986, the Politburo decided to sentence Bryukhanov to 10 years of imprisonment for "serious errors and shortcomings in the work that lead to the accident with severe consequences"...
.... Generally Bryukhanov's original points of view haven't changed much over the years but he carefully avoids making definite statements, but still claims that the real truth about Chernobyl will never be learnt because "they are still concealing it" and he doesn't believe that the disaster has taught anyone anything. 

There are other strong indicators that high level individuals have been hiding important information and much additional research needs to be done before drawing valid conclusions:

  • Dr. Valery Legasov, chief of the Chernobyl investigation committee, committed suicide (or so it appears) by hanging himself from the stairwell of his apartment on the second anniversary of the disaster. According to Wikipedia, "Reportedly, before his suicide, he recorded himself on audiotape revealing previously undisclosed facts about the catastrophe."
  • The chief Chernobyl engineer Nikolai Fomin attempted suicide in his jail cell. The Chernobyl Trials, chernobylproject.blogspot.com, 11 October 2011 reports that: "The trial [of Chernobyl suspects for criminal offenses] was supposed to be held on the 24th of March 1987 but was postponed due to  the also arrested chief engineer Nikolai Fomin's suicide attempt. In his cell, Fomin had broken his glasses and cut his wrists but his attempt to take his own life was discovered and his life was saved."

In his Veterans Today article Comparing the 1986 Chernobyl “nuclear disaster” with the 2001 Manhattan thermo-nuclear catastrophe, March 14, 2011, former Soviet intelligence officer Dimitri Khalezov suspects Dr. Valery Legasov and General Vladimir. K.Pikalov (the Commander of the Soviet Chemical Forces who became supreme military commander in the Chernobyl area, and who died in 2003) of working for foreign interests and supporting a cover-up.
The web site The causes of Chernobyl accident are known (some web pages in English, most in Russian) seems to offer important perspectives related to the false flag issue. It is hosted by "Dmitriev, Victor Markovich, Ph.D.," a man who claims to have considerable nuclear reactor-related experience. [Editor's Note: web page in Russian here, translate.google.com English version here].
Dr. Dmitriev's web page "Myths of Chernobyl" refutes many assertions that I have seen in YouTube documentaries on Chernobyl. Dr. Dmitriev questions the credibility and identity of the aforementioned Dr. Boris Ivanov Gorbachev on his web page version of Chernobyl disaster causes, but also highlights the way Dr. Gorbachev questions the inconsistencies in documentaries and other forms of research:

This page is dedicated to the critical analysis of only one of the theories about what caused the Chernobyl disaster - the theory of B. I. Gorbachev. To start with, let us briefly summarise the essence of Gorbachev’s numerous Internet articles.

1) All scientific and technical investigations of the causes of the Chernobyl accident which have been carried out throughout the past 20 years, are nonsensical, false or erroneous. The initial information about the accident is inaccurate, garbled, counterfeited and was partially destroyed by operational personnel immediately after the emergency. And even experts themselves are not to be believed, since half of them were operational personnel, who would do anything to protect corporate interests.
On the whole, this is a plot, going to the very top, involving somebody’s "hairy hands", schemes of "the family" and so forth, that at the time transferred nuclear energy from [Minsredmash] (Ministry of Atomic Industry) into the hands [Minenergo](Ministry of Power Engineering) only to ruin the whole thing. They hid everything, deceived everybody, including the IAEA, and moreover, in order to confuse the general public, they came up with various silly "well sounding" versions of the accident, which can be easily exposed.

2) An objective analysis of all the available data on the Chernobyl accident can only be undertaken by independent scientists from the Academy of Sciences (Ukraine), who are not interested in behind-the-scenes politics, such as B. I. Gorbachev himself. As well as by certain "competent authoritys" [sic] (i.e. security bodies), that conducted their independent investigation, but were not allowed to disclose the results of these investigations. In fact, the entire truth is contained in the of witness statements produced in evidence at court, however, it is also not permitted to disclose them to the general public, so we never learn the truth.

3) After having thought over the situation and having analysed all the available information, including accounts of eye-witnesses, extracts from the scientific and technical reports and statements of different scientists, as well as fiction, B. I. Gorbachev developed his own theory of the Chernobyl disaster.
According to his theory, the entire chronology of events of the Chernobyl disaster is incorrect, so he created his own chronology, in which all the events occurred earlier, with the single exception of the pushing of the RPS knob. But explosion happened 25-30 seconds earlier than it was in reality.
The reactor exploded because the operational personnel took the absorbing rods out of the reactor core beyond any measure, thus provoking, an uncontrollable power acceleration with prompt neutrons
So what are we supposed to make of all of this? Perhaps let us begin by looking at what B. I. Gorbachev knows about reactor physics in general, and in particular of the RBMK reactor. For instance, why does he persistently confuse two principally different concepts: of reactivity and reactivity margin . . ..

Dr. Dmitriev's site map has a web page titled "Chernobyl Secrets" in Russian, for which translate.google.com provides the following translation::

But maybe the Chernobyl accident was the result of sabotage, and the defendants-time agents of foreign intelligence services? And because everything is so secret? But no, the published material operational and investigative work of the KGB of Ukraine [EV], from which it follows that anything that was not there.
So what's the matter? Why is classified from the outset and not declassified until now. The only answer that suggests itself: it is therefore not to be ashamed of our Court and our Attorney General's Office. Nothing else of interest in these materials is not secret.

Many Russian text translations appear difficult to interpret because they seem to be heavily "nuanced." People who grew up under the Soviet police state system often dared not say things directly, but instead utilized more subtle tools like sarcasm, innuendo, prevarication, damning with faint praise, showing inappropriate levels of enthusiasm, or dancing around topics with wordiness. I am reminded of the Feb 1982 Playboy magazine interview conducted with Polish solidarity union leader Lech Walesa who said words to the effect that "Thank God for the Communist Party and other big brother overseers or else Poles would all be gunning each other down in the streets." The sarcasm was so thick that even Westerners like myself "got it." Then there was the old joke that when Pravda (of the Soviet era) starting promoting potato recipes, it meant the wheat cropped had failed once again. Therefore, when Dr. Dmitriev raises the question "But maybe the Chernobyl accident was the result of sabotage, and the defendants-time agents of foreign intelligence services? And because everything is so secret?" and then subsequently says "But no...The only answer that suggests itself: it is therefore not to be ashamed of our Court and our Attorney General's Office. Nothing else of interest in these materials is not secret." I hope that he is being sarcastic by suggesting that we can merrily trust the KGB, Court, and Attorney General's Office to only classify things that we don't need to know to rule out sabotage by a foreign intelligence agency, but I am not completely sure. I welcome emails from anyone who is fluent in Russian language, culture, and cynicism who wants to help me with these kinds of "nuances."
The primary purpose of this web page is to perform a basic Internet reconnaissance and provide preliminary commentary that introduces readers to important leads and ideas. At this stage, it is currently beyond my scope to resolve the issue about who is more credible, Dr. Gorbachev or Dr. Dmitriev, or determine which one of them has a better handle involving the physics of "reactivity" and "reactivity margin" regarding the RBMK reactor. However, the contention by Dr. Gorbachev that "All scientific and technical investigations of the causes of the Chernobyl accident which have been carried out throughout the past 20 years, are nonsensical, false or erroneous. The initial information about the accident is inaccurate, garbled, counterfeited and was partially destroyed by operational personnel immediately after the emergency..." rings intuitively true to me thus far in my research:

* Strong Evidence that Ronald Reagan and his Zionist handlers deliberately sabotaged the Soviet Union as part of a longer term "disaster capitalist" takeover plan.

This includes the deliberate sabotage of Soviet pipelines and exacerbating the Soviet quagmire in Afghanistan.
In his autobiography, former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev claims that the Chernobyl catastrophe was a major factor in bringing down the Soviet Union. Many other sources claim that Afghanistan was also a key factor. Probably both of these factors, combined with the fact that many Russians felt they could not economically compete with the West as a consequence of a tyrannical and inefficient system deliberately fastened on them to cripple them by WWI German enemies, Jewish Bolsheviks, and City of London and New York Jewish financiers (like the Rothschilds and Schiffs, see Behind Communism by Frank Britton) -- all these factors certainly provide a more complete answer.


Zbigniew Brzezinski, from The outrageous strategy to destroy Russia by Arthur Lepic.

Zbigniew Brzezinski was a key player in the Afghanistan quagmire for the Soviet Union that persisted throughout the Reagan administration and the Chernobyl catastrophe. This Polish-American served as National Security Advisor for President Jimmy Carter, and continued to exert a strong influence over American foreign policy in the Reagan era. He was a top Bilderberger, Trilateral Commission Director, Rockefeller and Rothschild operative, and even handler of CIA asset Barack Hussein Obama II (aka Barry Soetero). Brzszinski was also well-known for harboring a "legendary" hatred of the Soviet Union. In fact, there is strong evidence that he deliberately baited the Soviet Union into Afghanistan to help bleed the country white. According to Zbigniew Brzezinski: the Empire’s Adviser; The outrageous strategy to destroy Russia by Arthur Lepic, voltairenet.org, 22 Oct 2004:

...When the French magazine Le Nouvel Observateur interviewed Brzezinski in 1998, he admitted that the equipping of Bin Laden’s anti-Soviet troops was before the Russian invasion and was aimed at provoking its reaction:
Le Nouvel Observateur: Former CIA director, Robert Gates, says in his memoirs: the American secret services assisted Afghan mujahedeen six months before the Soviet invasion. By that time, you were President Carter’s adviser and you played a key role on this. Do you confirm it?
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of the story, the CIA began to assist mujahedeen in the year 1980, that is, after the invasion of the Soviet army against Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the truth that remained secret until today is quite different: it was on July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed his first order on the secret assistance to Kabul’s pro-Soviet regime opponents. That day I wrote a memorandum to the President in which I told him that that assistance would cause the Soviet intervention (...) we did not force the Russian intervention, we just, conscientiously, increase the intervention possibilities.
NO: When the Soviets justified their intervention by affirming they were fighting against a secret American interference nobody believed them, though they were telling the truth. Don’t you regret it?
Z. Brz.: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. Its objective was to lead the Russian to the Afghan trap, and you want me to regret it? The very same day the Soviets crossed the Afghan border I wrote the following to President Carter: «This is our chance to give Russia its Viet Nam» (...).
N.O.: Aren’t you sorry either for favoring Islamic fundamentalism and providing weapons and consultancies to future terrorists?
ZBrz.: What is the most important thing when you look at world history, the Taliban or the fall of the Soviet empire? Some excited Islamists or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War? [4]

It is worth making an aside regarding how U.S.-Israeli. support for mujahedeen fits into a longer term picture of U.S.-UK-Israeli-sponsored false flag operations and other types of intrigues. Mossad-CIA-MI6 created "Al Qaeda" to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, and then later used "Al Qaeda" as a boogeyman for 9/11 and the subsequent U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Later, "Al Qaeda" was also used as a boogeyman in connection with Iraq resistance to the U.S. occupation of Iraq despite the fact that Saddam Hussein was a secular Arab nationalist who wanted to have little to do as possible with the Sunni Muslim fundamentalist ideology of Afghanistan's Taliban and "Al Qaeda." The U.S. Government and its Zionist handlers subsequently performed another amazing realpolitik gyration when they publicly supported "Al Qaeda" in Libya to depose Muammar Gaddafi and also to bolster opposition against President Assad of Syria in 2012, while simultaneously opposing alleged "Al Qaeda" bases in Pakistan, to include angering top Pakistani officials by killing innocent civilians reputed to be "Al Qaeda" in drone attacks and staging a bogus raid on an alleged Osama Bin Laden compound with SEAL Team 6.
As noted in Chapter 12, the real Osama Bin Laden, a long term CIA asset and friend of the Bush family, probably died in December 2001. Mossad-CIA-MI6 probably arranged the explosion that killed SEAL Team 6 on board a helicopter to eliminate witnesses capable of contradicting an official story that most astute observers of intelligence operations refuse to believe anyway. But Oh, what the heck, the U.S. Government and its Zionist New World Order handlers have been soft-killing so many of our own troops with depleted uranium poisoning for so long that maybe someone decided it was time to try a different kick (besides "suiciding" former West Point ethics professor Col Ted Westhusing near Gen. David Petraueus' office in Baghdad or firing a short small arms burst into CPL Pat Tillman's face) by blowing up a group of airborne SEALS.
As another interesting twist, according to Wikipedia, "Brzezinski himself has denied the accuracy of the [Le Nouvel Observateur] interview.[35] According to Brzezinski, an NSC working group on Afghanistan wrote several reports on the deteriorating situation in 1979, but President Carter ignored them until the Soviet intervention destroyed his illusions."
As they say in the spy business, don't believe anything until it is officially denied, so all the more reason to believe that Brzezinski & Co. actively baited the Soviets into Afghanistan.
Once the Soviet Union collapsed, Zionist kleptocrats immediately swarmed in to gobble up control of major former Russian and Ukrainian assets. Mossad-CIA-MI6 had infiltrated Soviet society to the point that it was able to harass the political opposition of Boris Yeltsin, who served as a puppet for the Zionist kleptocrats. I provide an overview of kleptocratic exploitation of Russia below in my extract from the article Why Putin is Under Attack by Dr. David Duke.
Last, but not least, Brzezinski harbored ill will not only towards Russians, but also towards a large portion of the world's humanity. He, along with Henry Kissinger and other agents of global shadow government, created the Global 2000 document which calls for the "depopulation" (some prefer the term "mass murder") of a large portion of the world's population -- amounting to billions of people. Please see Leuren Moret's comments from her "HAARP and Mind Control" interview below. If a man is willing to "depopulate" billions of people, why would it bother him to "downgear" a bit and "only" eliminate millions of people in the Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus via a reactor "accident"?

* Sabotage that covertly turns a nuclear power plant such as Chernobyl into a "dirty nuclear bomb" is consistent with many longstanding Israeli and U.S. polices involving wanton use of nuclear devices and conducting major releases of dangerous levels of radiation on civilian populations.

Both countries have openly and repeatedly engaged in the first use of nuclear weapons and the destruction of operating nuclear power plants as conscious and deliberate policies. Both countries have also continuously engaged in dirty nuclear warfare that generates millions of casualties a year, to include damage to their own military forces and civilian populations. As some examples, the U.S. exploded the first nuclear devices on civilian populations at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. According to Col Donn de Grand Pre in his 25 Feb 2004 Alex Jones interview, satellites tracked 6-8 Israeli nuclear tipped missiles fired from the Negev desert to Baghdad in Feb 1991. Mossad-CIA-MI6 very likely used mini-nukes to bring down the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11 and another mini-nuke in the 2002 Bali bombing. The U.S. exploded a neutron weapon over Baghdad Airport in the 2003 "Battle of Baghdad," and Israel exploded DU bombs in Lebanon in 2006. (Israel has exploded so many DU weapons near its own civilian populations that Israeli men have a serious problem of rising sterility. Leuren Moret commented in her 28 October 2011 interview with Dr. James Fetzer: "The sperm count in the last ten years has declined 40 percent in Israeli men. It was already at least 20 percent in decline because of nuclear technology, but at this rate, by 2020, just as Dr. Busby has said, basically Israeli men will be sterilized. At 20 percent sperm count, men are considered to be sterile." See HAARETZ: “Study: Quality of Israeli sperm down 40% in past decade” by Ofri Ilani [11.05.09]). In the 1950's the U.S. led the arms race by releasing massive amounts of nuclear material into the atmosphere from bomb testing. It also seriously contaminated major portions of the U.S. from routine nuclear power plant releases. (See Secret Fallout: Low-Level Radiation From Hiroshima to Three-Mile Island by Dr. Ernest Sternglass). Although depleted uranium from exploded munitions was known to be a very dangerous "soft kill" weapon as early as the 1940's, the U.S. and its allies commenced massive use of DU in Persian Gulf War I in 1990-1991, giving catastrophically macabre new meaning to the term "blowback." Despite continuing feedback regarding DU's extremely toxic effects on innocent civilians and U.S. military personnel, U.S., UK, and Israeli authorities have only intensified and broadened their use of DU over time, to include using it in small arms munitions like 7.62 mm rounds on firing ranges. Over a million U.S. veterans are permanently disabled from DU, and major portions of Iraq and Afghanistan have permanently sickened civilian populations. Tens of millions of people around the world suffer from increased sterility, cancer, birth defects, and myriad other diseases fostered by DU contamination. It has even influenced newborn sex ratios in Los Angeles and other major U.S. cities. The U.S. and Israel have also recklessly employed the Stuxnet virus not only against Iranian nuclear facilities but also (in all likelihood) against Fukushima reactors, serving as the main cause of the melt-downs. Israeli Air Force pilots have knocked out operating nuclear reactors in Iraq and Syria. Last, but not least, as documented in my Mission of Conscience series, Mossad-CIA-MI6 has been more aggressively involved than any other espionage operations in the world in conducting false flag operations. Their long string of "credits' very likely include Oklahoma City in 1995, NYC and Washington, D.C. 9/11, Madrid 3-11, London 7/7, and Oslo-Utoya 7-22. Therefore, a sabotage operation at Chernobyl in 1986 would hardly have been out of character with everything that I have mentioned in this very long paragraph.

* There is overwhelming evidence that a longstanding global dirty nuclear wars and even suicidal "Masada" and "global depopulation"-type operations are being waged by Zionists in control of nuclear industries against the global population.

The arch-Zionist Dr. Edward Teller, often called "the Father of the American H-Bomb" as well as a major inspiration for the fictional movie character "Dr. Strangelove" (and also a practicing Satanist according to a statement by a Jewish woman reproduced on my 2011 nuclear crisis web page), deliberately had nuclear reactors placed over America's worst earthquake fault lines and also in established flood zones. He also condoned reactor designs which accumulated spent fuel rods directly over reactors -- about as prudent as storing gasoline cans over burning stoves-- and advocated poisoning the atmosphere with chemtrails and dumping fluoride waste into public drinking water.
Teller's self-chosen co-tribalists and co-religionists have brought us other forms of extreme hazard and soft kill genocide, such as the BP Gulf catastrophe, Trojan Horse vaccine additives, and even GMO foods (produced by the Jewish-run Monsanto Corporation) which contain "Trojan Horses" DNA that cause sterility and birth defects in second and third generation test animals -- and which are being covertly inserted into a wide variety of foods carried by grocery stores across America today. Then let us not forget that massive stores of biowar materials ready to be injected into the general public around the world discovered by whisteblowers in 2009, and an abortive attack on Ukraine which occurred later that same year.
Elsewhere on this web page I provide pro-doomsday quotes from Michael Collins Piper's book The GOLEM. I also list pro-global depopulation remarks by Dr. Henry Kissinger and talk about Israel's wanton use of DU and its cavalier air strikes against operating nuclear reactors, all of which suggests that Teller was hardly alone in his stealth war against humanity. Worse yet, we continue to get indications from a wide variety of sources that the world is being heavily influenced by a malevolent cabal with more than just a few screws loose, for example, Commander's veto sank Gulf buildup by Gareth Porter, Asia Times, May 17, 2007 quotes former U.S. Central Command Chief Admiral William J. "Fox" Fallon "...There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box". Blunt Putin attacks reckless US, thestandard.com, Feb 12, 2007 begins with "Russian President Vladimir Putin has attacked the United States as a reckless power that has made the world more dangerous by pursuing policies that have led to war, ruin and insecurity." Paul: GOP rhetoric on Iran "reckless", johnkingusa.blogs.cnn.com, March 6, 2012, begins with "(CNN) – Ron Paul said Tuesday that his rivals have `blown way out of proportion' the Iranian nuclear threat and that their language is `reckless' and `dangerous.'"

* The date of the Chernobyl Reactor 4 explosion, namely 26 April, coincides with one of the most bitter and pivotal dates in Jewish history, namely the inception of the Kiev pogrom of 1881.

Zionists often like to use false flag terror dates that have either historical or Kabbalistic numerological significance. For example the Oslo bombing and Utoya massacre on 22 July 2011 came 65 years to the day after the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem by Zionists in 1946. Kiev is the capitol of Ukraine, and the Chernobyl complex had the closest reactors. If Zionists were planning a revenge date and location based upon the history of pogroms (1881 to 1919), Chernobyl on 26 April would have to be at the very top of the list. Chernobyl was the closest reactor complex to the site of one of the most historically significant pogroms which took place on the same day as the nuclear catastrophe. Jews have a long historical memory, like to repeat historic dates, and openly practice "Never Forgive, Never Forget" (This slogan has been seen posted inside many Jewish synagogues).

* There is strong evidence of never-ending subterranean racial hatred by Jews towards gentiles based upon ethnic genetic distance models and other factors which motivates nuclear-related genocidal behavior.

High level psychopathic Jews have a very long historical track record of deliberately fostering mass exterminations of gentiles. In The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, the secular historian Sir Edward Gibbon lists numerous Jewish atrocities. In the Middle Ages, Jews dominated the slave trade, remained notorious for loan-sharking, and engaged in the ritual murder of Christian children. Their bad behavior eventually caused them to get thrown out of every Western European country. In the 20th century Jewish Bolsheviks were the prime leaders of the Soviet Red Terror and GULAG systems that victimized over 60 million people, as noted by Alexandr Solzhenitsyn. Jewish groups in the United States have promoted more subtle forms of genocide by promoting open borders, racial integration, and deindustrialization programs. Open borders policies have been a major factor in reducing the percentage of whites in the total population from 90% in the 1960's to less than 60% today. Racial integration policies have destroyed the identity and cohesion required to resist biological replacement or dilution. Deindustrialization programs have severely reduced domestic economic carrying capacity and the ability of America to internally scale up living standards. (See further discussion of deindustrialization below). The mass casualties inflicted by the Chernobyl catastrophe is consistent with longstanding historical patterns of highly destructive Jewish activity on many different levels.
Unfortunately most Americans have been so deeply brainwashed by controlled national media and anarcho-libertarian ideology that they simply cannot fathom how an alien group could gain control of strategic bases of their society and consciously and systematically promulgate long term policies that parasitically undermine the very nation that has done more for Jews than any other country in history. Elsewhere on this web page I discuss zoological animal models and ethnic-genetic distance concepts that help to explain Jewish anomalies. Please also see my discussion of Jewish Criminal Totalitarian Psychopathology in the "Parasitism" section of my "Mutualism vs. Parasitism" article that is part of my "Resolving Opposing Political and Economic Ideologies" series.

* The U.S. deeply penetrated the Soviet Union on an operational level as a partner in many major covert projects, and therefore had the operational capability to sabotage Chernobyl reactor 4 and control the Soviet reaction.

Radiation expert Leuren Moret has testified that HAARP and the Project Woodpecker mind control program were jointly developed by both the U.S. and Soviet Union as secret partners, probably orchestrated at a higher level by Rothschilds / City of London. Weather warfare and mind control operations have only intensified after the Chernobyl disaster, utilizing HAARP facilities located in the U.S. and among many "western allies" as well as in the former Soviet Union. The U.S. utilized electro-magnetic mind control technologies to induce the surrender of Iraqi soldiers during Persian Gulf War I (please see the transcript of the 23 July 2007 interview "HAARP and Mind Control" by Alfred Webre with Leuren Moret). The U.S. Government also attempts to affect the behavior of U.S. citizens by delivery pulse messages via cell towers, televisions, and other electronic devices. Please see the description of the "Sound of Silence" technology described in Chapter 39 of my Mission of Conscience series. The U.S. has been run by globalist bankers who ultimately work for themselves against the best interests of the general population of the United States (please see Chapter 33 Wall Street Coup de Etat and Banker False Flags Against America). They covertly funded and supported the Bolshevik regime, and also orchestrated its downfall once it had run its course. They have a long track record of utilizing both covert as well as overt methods on a scale unparalleled in the history of mankind to ruthlessly manipulate the general public in Russia as well as the United States.

* Chernobyl sabotage fits in with ruthless "negative sum game" and "go for broke" grand strategic behavior of the Rothschilds / City of London / Mossad-CIA-MI6 and associates consistent with landmark events that unfolded both before and after 1986.

At the time of Chernobyl, Jewish-controlled Wall Street ignored urgent warnings by leading academics across America that the country had been suffering industrial decline ever since the 1960's, and major policy changes had to be taken to pull America out of the tail-spin. In June 1980 Business Week sounded the alarm with its cover story "The Reindustrialization of America." This was followed by a long series of books and studies explicitly addressing America's competitiveness problems. For example, in 1985 Harvard Business School professor Bruce R. Scott and his coeditor George C. Lodge, published U.S. Competitiveness in the World Economy (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1985). Scott and his colleagues went on a national road tour, and the working papers version of this book which explained the nature of decline in great detail was circulated widely around the country among business school organizations and top consulting firms. In 1999, Eamonn Fingleton published In Praise of Hard Industries: Why Manufacturing, Not the Information Economy, Is the key to Future Prosperity, almost like a last call before America plunged into its Central Asia/Middle Eastern military adventures post-9/11 designed to grab natural resources and destroy real or perceived enemies of Israel.
America's Jewish power elite was not only served notice in the1980's regarding the true underlying nature of America's economic decline, and what needed to be done immediately to stage a turnaround -- that is, if they valued a peaceful productive economy vs. one based on deception, exploitation, aggressive war, and intrigue -- but as another important form of notice, the Grace Commission Report presented to Congress in January 1984 explained that the longstanding patterns of steadily increasing government spending and growth in debt obligations were unsustainable.
Re-industrialization of America implied rehabilitation of the productive white middle class, a reversal of the open borders policies with Third World countries, and a re-imposition of at least modest tariffs and other trade barriers against foreign slave labor exploitation. Although many contemporary libertarians (like Lew Rockwell and Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo with the Mises Institute) disdain tariffs as a coercive measure to stimulate reinvestment in domestic industry, tariffs had in fact played a major role for much of the 19th century to help America build its industry and raise its living standards to the highest level in the world..
Instead of taking a corrective course of action that would restore American productivity and get government spending and debt growth under control, major Jewish groups continued to push for more open borders and racial integration that continued to erode the white middle class, and continued to push for more outsourcing of American industry to China and other ultra low cost labor countries. They also sanctioned continued growth in government spending, debt obligations, and escalating growth in Wall Street derivatives (which billionaire Warren Buffett once called "Weapons of Mass financial destruction"). Last, but not least, they continued their nonstop scheming for ways to make themselves relatively stronger by ruthlessly crippling or destroying all real or perceived competition, a very nasty and spiteful "negative sum game" approach to life.
Logically, without taking the aforementioned recommended corrective measures, there was really only one path left for America, and that would involve the conquest of natural resources around the world to compensate for the decline in production of tradeable quality goods at home. It would also entail continuous intimidation of foreign countries to defend the dollar as a global currency (despite ever higher balance of trade deficits that weaken the dollar), the use of ruthless negative sum game tactics towards all real or perceived competitors to maintain relative strength, the development of a police state to curb domestic dissent as the economic pie inevitably continues to shrink due to loss of domestic industry, and the increased use of false flag terror and other forms of deception to control people through fear.
More than six years before Chernobyl, Henry Kissinger signed off on the Global 2000 depopulation document (discussed in the Leuren Moret interview contained below) while serving in the Carter Administration that preceded Reagan. Only four years after Chernobyl, the U.S. and its allies commenced the massive use of depleted uranium despite its well-known genocidal effects on U.S. military personnel and millions of innocent civilians, and the fact that America was fighting a Third World country against whom depleted uranium munitions were completely unnecessary to win. Unlike U.S. vs. U.S.S.R. bomb test competition in the 1950's and 1960's, no one could invoke any kind of alibi that there was some kind of competitive pressure to continually test and "upgrade" DU use. Also, with the implosion of the Soviet Union, there was no longer any need to maintain such a large "guns vs. butter" military-industrial complex as opposed to rebuilding "butter vs. guns" civilian industry. Reduction in Force to re-gear industry for civilian priorities had always been a grand American tradition after every major American war up until World War II, but America continued to move in the opposite direction.
According to talk show host Alex Jones, by the late 1980's the U.S. military was already conducting domestic pro-police state drills in which "demonstrators" were treated like insurgents. On Sept. 11, 1991 George H. W. Bush delivered his infamous "New World Order" speech which was an open slap in the face to traditional American values. I have listed a number of other important benchmarks in my chronology listed below. It is worth adding the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin on November 4, 1995. Many observers strongly suspect that this murder was instigated by hardline members of Mossad (which runs the Israeli government behind the scenes) who felt that Rabin had become too "accommodative."
In retrospect, a nuclear false flag at Chernobyl in 1986 may have been a final "crossing of the Rubicon" that totally committed the Rothschild Crime Family /City of London / Israel / Mossad-CIA-MI6 towards the use of "negative sum game" tactics and other ruthless approaches -- at the expense of "reindustrialization" and all other more humane, honest, and peaceful approaches -- to achieve their objectives over the next several decades. I say "Crossing of the Rubicon" because while it is true that the aforementioned power elite had promoted many very evil "negative sum game" policies in the past that served their interests, such as the Balfour Agreement that unnecessarily prolonged WWI past 1916 and severely weakened and destabilized many leading European societies (such as Russia, Germany, Austria, and Italy), or supporting the Bolshevik takeover of Russia that cost the lives of tens of millions of people, or creating the Morgenthau Plan which threatened the lives of over ten million Germans after World War II, one might argue that elite Jews were in a strong enough position in 1986 to "repent and reset." They could have taken their poker chips off the table, that is, supported corrective actions that would have reversed America's industrial decline and the liquidation of the white middle class, and still could have finessed a secure position for themselves at the top of American society for many, many decades to come.
But this is not the nature of the beast. We are talking about master criminals at the top who have committed so many crimes on so many levels for so long -- to include running the global drug trade, international "blood banker" and "economic hit man" operations, and unsustainable fiat money and fractional reserve central banking systems -- that they must have felt that they had a perpetual tiger by the tail. For such individuals, intensifying low cunning and ruthlessness -- to include forever feeding their addiction for quick gain through financial speculation, keeping their enemies off balance with fear tactics, and "kicking problems upstairs" by creating ever larger and more monopolistic organizations -- these are the only playbooks they really understand and have a talent for executing.

* The patterns of extremely callous, malevolent, and reckless covert behavior surrounding the BP-Gulf crisis, sabotage of Iranian nuclear facilities, and the Fukushima catastrophe point to Mossad-CIA-MI6 and their handlers as the most likely suspects for Chernobyl false flag sabotage.

The BP-Gulf Catastrophe clearly demonstrated the strong grip that British Petroleum and its Rothschild Crime Family / City of London / UK Monarchy controllers have had on the Obama Administration and its subsidiary the U.S. Department of Energy. Please see strong evidence of this on my BP-Gulf summary web page. I also list articles that describe the mind-boggling arrogance and abusiveness that British Petroleum demonstrated towards Gulf Coast residents by wantonly deploying the highly toxic (and unnecessary) dispersant Corexit.
The Fukushima catastrophe demonstrates the strong likelihood that Mossad-CIA-MI6 and their ultimate handlers used HAARP and the Stuxnet virus to sabotage Japan's nuclear industry as a follow on to the openly admitted sabotage of Iranian nuclear facilities.
CIA, Department of Energy Behind Program to Attack Iran Computers
Officials Say Move 'Preferable Alternative to Airstrikes'
by Jason Ditz, antiwar.com, June 01, 2012, states:

Details continue to pour in about the Obama Administration’s decision to authorize a hostile computer hacking campaign against Iran, one of the first decisions he made upon taking office.
The most public of the attacks, Stuxnet, which was also an embarrassment since it quickly spread beyond the Iranian nuclear program and started attacking industrial computers across the planet, was created by the CIA, with the help of the Department of Energy’s Idaho National Laboratory.
Israeli experts were also involved in the creation of the Stuxnet worm, and while this fact has been floating around over a year, officials are just now getting around to confirming it.
US officials have defended the move, saying they believed it was a “preferable alternative to airstrikes,” but the enormous damage such viruses have caused when they inevitably move beyond the target and start attacking computers worldwide suggest it isn’t exactly a panacea either.
Despite the damage of the Stuxnet fiasco, the Obama Administration has continued the program. Though it has yet to be confirmed, it is widely believed that the Flame Virus, an advanced surveillance program, is also a product of this scheme.

The New York Times also acknowledged reckless use of the Stuxnet virus by Israel and the Obama administration in Obama Order Sped Up Wave of Cyberattacks Against Iran
by David E. Sanger, published: June 1, 2012

WASHINGTON — From his first months in office, President Obama secretly ordered increasingly sophisticated attacks on the computer systems that run Iran’s main nuclear enrichment facilities, significantly expanding America’s first sustained use of cyberweapons, according to participants in the program.
Mr. Obama decided to accelerate the attacks — begun in the Bush administration and code-named Olympic Games — even after an element of the program accidentally became public in the summer of 2010 because of a programming error that allowed it to escape Iran’s Natanz plant and sent it around the world on the Internet. Computer security experts who began studying the worm, which had been developed by the United States and Israel, gave it a name: Stuxnet.
At a tense meeting in the White House Situation Room within days of the worm’s “escape,” Mr. Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency at the time, Leon E. Panetta, considered whether America’s most ambitious attempt to slow the progress of Iran’s nuclear efforts had been fatally compromised.
“Should we shut this thing down?” Mr. Obama asked, according to members of the president’s national security team who were in the room.
Told it was unclear how much the Iranians knew about the code, and offered evidence that it was still causing havoc, Mr. Obama decided that the cyberattacks should proceed. In the following weeks, the Natanz plant was hit by a newer version of the computer worm, and then another after that. The last of that series of attacks, a few weeks after Stuxnet was detected around the world, temporarily took out nearly 1,000 of the 5,000 centrifuges Iran had spinning at the time to purify uranium.
This account of the American and Israeli effort to undermine the Iranian nuclear program is based on interviews over the past 18 months with current and former American, European and Israeli officials involved in the program, as well as a range of outside experts. None would allow their names to be used because the effort remains highly classified, and parts of it continue to this day.
These officials gave differing assessments of how successful the sabotage program was in slowing Iran’s progress toward developing the ability to build nuclear weapons. Internal Obama administration estimates say the effort was set back by 18 months to two years, but some experts inside and outside the government are more skeptical, noting that Iran’s enrichment levels have steadily recovered, giving the country enough fuel today for five or more weapons, with additional enrichment . . .

In her 18 July 2011 interview titled Fukushima and the Global Danger, hosted by Dr. James Fetzer, Leuren Moret explained sabotage programs aimed at both Iran and Japan. The following are two transcript excerpts:

Leuren Moret: ...The U.S. and the Department of Energy and Dr. Steven Chu and Dr. Koonan are controlling the emergency response and they are controlling what TEPCO does. And the documents that are being released jointly in Japan by the Japanese government and the U.S. government -- actually a friend of mine hacked one of the maps of contamination in northern Japan and underneath the top layer was the map, was the same map, but it said "The Department of Energy." So it is the Department of Energy that is coming up with the maps, the numbers, measuring --
Dr. James Fetzer: That is the U.S. Department of Energy?
L. Moret: The U.S. Department of Energy is running the whole thing.
Dr. Fetzer: And it appears to me a cover-up, right? A massive suffocation of real information about what is going on.
L. Moret: Oh it is the biggest cover-up about the most serious nuclear issue that has ever happened in the history of the world. And it will certainly contribute to a major extinction. A genocide of, oh, many, many people in the northern hemisphere...

L. Moret: ...The Stuxnet, virus, as I have mentioned, before the break, was developed by a U.S team aided by a Siemens team from Germany. The reason Siemens had to be involved was because of all of the firewalls and the privacy and everything of their computer language, and it would have taken much longer for the U.S. team to unravel it or to get around the protective software. Or they might not have even been able to do it. So it had to be co-developed, and what we know is that the U.S. gave the Stuxnet virus to Israel and Israel delivered it to the Natanz facility where the centrifuges, about 800 of them, were just destroyed by the virus. And that virus appeared in Japan in October. It was discovered that something like 62 computers were infected with it. However, what is very strange is that in September of 2010, even though the governor of Fukushima Province had prohibited MOX fuel in any reactors in that prefecture, the MOX fuel, which is a mixture of plutonium oxide and uranium oxide fuel was covertly put into reactor number three at the Fukushima plant. And in November or December an Israeli security team from Dimona, which is the nuclear weapons facility in Israel, put a new security system in that particular Fukushima I Daiichi 1 plant, and they left shortly before the earthquake and tsunami caused all the problems, and they must have been the ones who introduced the Stuxnet virus while they were installing a new security system.
Dr. Fetzer: So who was responsible for this again, Leuren?
L. Moret: Well, the Israelis delivered it, but --.
Dr. Fetzer: So there was an Israeli aspect to this.
L. Moret: Yes.
Dr. Fetzer: And the MOX fuel was a bad thing to introduce here too.
L. Moret: Well it was already prohibited by the governor of the Prefecture in 2002. So obviously they were sneaking it in, and the Stuxnet virus was already in Japan in October, and the Israelis were there in November or December or about that time. And so the whole thing was a big set up. I mean all the forensic evidence is there. It is irrefutable. The earthquake was a magnitude 9.0. They never had a magnitude 9.0 earthquake reported in 1,200 years in Japan...

My Fukushima web page provides additional articles that support Ms. Moret's facts and analysis. Unusual seismic readings and follow on patterns of earthquakes strongly suggest the 3-11 earthquake was induced by HAARP.
Major government agencies and controlled national media in Japan, North America, and Europe have refused to adequately address the continuing and very dangerous radiation hazards to general populations in these areas, thereby inhibiting the public's ability to take the most elementary individual and group protective measures. They are passively allowing tens of millions of people to suffer myriad radiation-related ailments, to include massive upsurges in infant mortality and permanent damage to human gene pools. My "Aerial Dance of Mass Death and Genetic Destruction" Week-by-week Fukushima radiation and fallout projections and companion articles illustrates the extreme seriousness of the continuing catastrophe that is being ignored.
The level of murderous criminality and total recklessness implied by all of the aforementioned covert activities is breathtaking. Once covert operatives unleash a Stuxnet virus, or damage reactors with HAARP-induced earthquakes, they have no idea how far the damage will go. Once a reactor goes into meltdown and produces corium, this can go supercritical and generate an atomic explosion, which in turn might strip away the cooling systems and personnel support for other reactors and nuclear fuel located within a given area, causing them to eventually go into meltdown as well. Even without an explosion, the fission products of corium can so heavily contaminate an area that no one can adequately service other nuclear facilities to prevent other meltdowns. In other words, there is no way to predict what sequence of meltdowns might take place, how far each meltdown might go, and whether or not enough meltdowns might take place to cause major extinction events across our planet, not to mention horrendous levels of birth defects, dysfunction, disease, and "genomic instability" among those who do not die off right away.
In view of all these incredibly grave risks, we have to ask what kinds of people would go ahead and impose them on the rest of humanity? In addition, we might also ask what kind of electorate, media, and security services would tolerate "leaders" willing to act in such a horrendously irresponsible and destructive manner?
The so-called "power elites" in the U.S., UK, and Israel have not changed significantly between the 1986 Chernobyl meltdown and the 2011 Fukushima meltdowns. Their pattern of high level criminal behavior surrounding Fukushima has been so extreme and pervasive that one would almost be surprised if this criminality had not been expressed at least once before at a place like Chernobyl.
2011-07-07 Stuxnet: Cyber Warfare by Israel & The U.S.(video) (13:22)

 


CHRONOLOGY


The following is an overview of suspicious events, predictions, and alerts that are covered in the Mission of Conscience series or in subsequent alert campaigns by Capt. Eric May, Maj. William Fox, Dr. James Fetzer and their associates.


Suspicious Event:  Friday, November 22, 1963.  John F. Kennedy likely assassinated in a Mossad-CIA operation.  See Final Judgment by Michael Collins Piper.  JFK attempted to thwart Israel ’s atomic bomb program, and became the last U.S. President to take a serious stand against the Zionist state. 

 


Illustration from 20 April 2009 Wired Magazine article "American Stonehenge: Monumental Instructions for the Post-Apocalypse" by Randall Sullivan. Caption "The Georgia Guidestones may be the most enigmatic monument in the US: huge slabs of granite, inscribed with directions for rebuilding civilization after the apocalypse. Only one man knows who created them—and he's not talking. Photo: Dan Winters."

 


Suspicious Event: March 22, 1980:
According to the 20 April 2009 Wired Magazine article "American Stonehenge: Monumental Instructions for the Post-Apocalypse" by Randall Sullivan, the "The team that built the [Georgia] Guidestones didn't know who was financing the project—just that it was the biggest monument in county history... The unveiling on March 22, 1980, was a community celebration. Congress member Doug Barnard, whose district contained Elberton, addressed a crowd of 400 that flowed down the hillside and included television news crews from Atlanta..." As discussed in Chapter 36 about the swine flu false flag pandemic of 2009, or "U.N. Agenda 21," the Guidestones suggest that global depopulation is desirable by calling for "1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature."

Suspicious Event 1980:
Future Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publishes his first “global terror” themed book titled:  International Terrorism: Challenge and Response . Netanyahu becomes a leader among Israelis in developing “Global War on Terror” ideology for Western consumption.

Suspicious Event:  September 11, 1990
(exactly 11 years before the 9-11 attacks) President George H. W. Bush makes his “Towards A New World Order” speech before Congress.

Suspicious Event: Friday, February 26, 1993 Explosion rocks World Trade Center Towers , allegedly kills seven and blamed on terrorists. Some sources claim radiation found at site. Former FBI Agent Ted Gunderson noted: “The FBI not only knew in advance of the car bombing of the World Trade Center in February 1993, they furnished the ingredients for the bomb (The New York Times, October 28, 1993—source 29 Aug 2003 letter to Ashcroft)

Suspicious Event:  Wednesday, April 19, 1995.  Oklahoma City bombing. Former FBI agent Ted Gunderson has noted: “An inside investigator informed me that at least 11 other individuals, besides McVeigh and Nichols, were involved in the Oklahoma City bombing.” In his book The Judas Goats, Michael Collins Piper identifies Mossad involvement in what was used by the Clinton administration to try to discredit American patriotic/militia movements.


Suspicious Event: 1996.  Arch-Zionist Murdoch media firm Fox releases movie Independence Day, which anticipates key events in 9-11 attack five years later.

Suspicious Event: 1996:  Richard Perle, leader of a study group, along with fellow neo-con Zionist co-tribalists Douglas Feith and David Wurmser, co-authored “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu which trashes every principle of traditional American conservative foreign policy in favor of nakedly aggressive, pre-emptive war as an acceptable tool to accomplish Israeli/U.S. objectives.

Suspicious Event:  1998 U.S. Embassy bombings (Friday, August 7, 1998), hundreds of people were killed in simultaneous car bomb explosions at the United States embassies in the East African capital cities of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya blamed on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. In fact, it is this incident, and not 9/11, for which Bin Laden is on the FBI wanted list.  However, given that Bin Laden was once a CIA asset in the Afghan-Soviet War, the extremely close ties between the Bush crime family and the Bin Laden family identified in Michael Moore’s documentary Fahrenheit 911, and the fact that on the day of the London 7-7-2005 terror bombing a former Mossad chief would suggest that the 1998 bombings started the war on terror, these explosions become very suspicious.  Note also that the explosion in Saudi Arabia was incapable of shearing off the edifice of the adjacent building, unlike the alleged bomb that allegedly took off 1/3 of the face of the Murrah building in Oklahoma City in 1995. 

According to the 16 June 2008 Wayne Madsen Report: "WMR learned from US intelligence and customs agents that the 1998 terrorist bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania had a Houston connection. The terrorist attacks were blamed on Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The two trucks used in the two East Africa bombings were stolen vehicles that were shipped from Houston via Guatemala. In addition, the bombs used passed though the same Guatemalan smuggling route. In 1998, Israel's Mossad and Guatemala's intelligence services continued to enjoy a close relationship and the Central American nation's successive military juntas could count on the support of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and other Israeli lobbying organizations in Washington."

Suspicious Event: September 2000.  (exactly 1 year before the 9-11 attacks) White paper “Project for a New American Century: Rebuilding America’s Defenses” published by the same Jewish Neo-cons in control of American foreign policy that published “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” in 1996. Called for pre-emptive invasions and use of nukes.  Aggressive war and other behaviors punishable as war crimes at Nuremburg are “OK” as long as they benefit Israel and the U.S.

Suspicious Event:  Thursday, October 12, 2000.  Bombing of U.S.S. Cole, exactly 333 days before 9-11-2001.  According to the July 14, 2008 Wayne Madsen Report: “A CIA source who worked with [former FBI team leader John P. O'Neill] in the New York Joint Terrorism Task Force previously told WMR that the Cole was attacked in a "false flag" operation by a Popeye cruise missile fired from an far over-the-horizon Israeli submarine.

Suspicious Event on Tuesday, September 11, 2001 
Two World Trade Center Towers and WTC 7 are brought down by controlled demolitions (and possibly even mini-nukes to create extreme pulverization of all structural materials)  and Pentagon hit by a likely cruise missile, all likely orchestrated by high level U.S. Government and Mossad insiders to justify invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and other objects of imperial lust in the Middle East on behalf of OIL (Oil, Israel, and Logistical Bases).  As an interesting coincidence, the World Trade Center towers were constructed to resemble the number “11” in the New York Skyline.  The flight numbers of the planes that hit the towers are divisible by “11,” as are the dates of most subsequent “Al Qaeda terror” bombings.  The number “11” is a significant number in various occult numerologies, to include ancient Chaldean numerology and subsequent Kabbalistic numerology, utilized by various secret societies and esoteric groups as Kabbalistic Jews, Zionists, the Mossad, Masons, and Skull & Bones members like George Bush and other major Establishment leaders. 

October 11, 2002, the United States Congress passed the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,” giving U.S. President George W. Bush the authority to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein did not give up his Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs).”  Congress completely copped out on its Constitutional duty to be the ultimate war-making body, allowing Bush dictatorial power to attack another country on flimsy pretexts, and giving him freer reign to conduct covert and false flag operations.

Suspicious Event on Saturday, October 12, 2002 First Bali Bombing.  Exactly one day after Bush given dictatorial war-making powers, and two years after the U.S.S. Cole attack.   Called “Asia’s 9/11,” reportedly killing 202, was blamed on Muslim militants by Australian government to justify internal “Patriot Act”-type repressive measures and alliance with U.S. in Middle Eastern interventions.  Retired Australian intelligence analyst Joe Vialls called it a likely CIA-Mossad false flag attack that used a mini-nuke.

Suspicious Event on April 5-7, 2003:
Battle of Baghdad cover-up. The use of at least one neutron weapon at the Baghdad Airport and the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers and Marines killed in action permanently thrown down the memory hole. 

Suspicious Event in November 2003:  CONPLAN 8022-02. According to Wikipedia: “The plan was reportedly completed in November 2003, resulting in a preemptive and offensive strike capability. The main plan involves the preemptive use of tactical nuclear strikes (mini-nukes) on deep-ground rocket/bomb installations, computer viruses, and radar disruption technology.”  The military had already gone first-use nuclear with the use of one or more neutron weapons in the Battle of Baghdad, not to mention long-standing use of depleted uranium weapons.  Now the Establishment is preparing the military to use nukes in a possible war on Iran and elsewhere to help make up for U.S. manpower shortages in an all-volunteer system.

Suspicious Event November 21, 2003.
  Commander of U.S. Armed Forces in the Iraqi invasion, Gen Tommy Franks, stated that “the worst thing that could happen” is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties.   If that happens, Franks said, “... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.”  He also said, “It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution."
[Author’s Note: It is interesting that British invasions of the 19th century, to include the burning of Washington, D.C. buildings by British troops in the War of 1812, did not generate any talk about unraveling the fabric of our Constitution.  What is so different now?].

Suspicious Event on Thursday, March 11, 2004:  Subway bombing in Madrid kills hundreds. Originally blamed on Basque separatists, later on Al Qaeda. Global media says not a question of if, but when, another 9-11 on U.S. soil, possibly involving “suitcase nukes” missing from the former Soviet Union...[this page continued here].


 

During the summer of 2011 the Ft. Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant in Nebraska was deliberately flooded Please see my The Great 2011 American Nuclear Facility Crises web page for proof that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, acting on instructions from malefactors at higher levels, timed dam releases to cause major floods. My chronology includes commentary by experts or astute observers such as Dr Tom Burnett and Arnie Gunderson. If Ft. Calhoun and its spent fuel pool had gone into melt-down, this could have rendered major parts of the Midwest and eastern United States permanently uninhabitable for the next several hundred years. Perhaps we will never know until secret documents are declassified or certain whistle-blowers step forward if there had in fact been a deliberate Mossad-CIA-MI6 effort to bring Fukushima and Chernobyl-type melt-downs to the U.S. in summer 2011 that somehow got thwarted by various counterintelligence efforts behind the scenes. But one thing is for sure, this threat has not gone away.
According to Energy News at least three quarters of American nuclear power plants are seriously leaking. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is re-certifying for another 20 years many nuclear power plants that already exceed their planned service lives (typically about 40 years) and show serious signs of deterioration and obsolescence. The U.S. government is making no effort to move massive quantities of spent fuel rods in America that are stored in a very hazardous locations just like the fuel rods stored over reactors at Fukushima. In other words, there is already a strong case for massive criminal negligence at the highest levels of the U.S. Government even without any more melt-downs beyond Three Mile Island in America. Worse yet, according to Leuren Moret, the U.S. Department of Energy has played a key role in overseeing the Japanese government's response to Fukushma.
Punchline: The continued failure to properly identify, arrest, and punish the malefactors behind Chernobyl and Fukushima leaves them at large to sabotage even more reactors in other parts of the world in the future, to include in the U.S., UK, France, Russia, and Ukraine (once again).

 

 

Key False Flag Characteristics

False flag operations typically reflect major geopolitical interests covertly at war with their own host society or other countries.

 

Possible Motive: The Net Result of a Very Strange Mixture of Covert Cold War Alliances and Rivalries Involving the U.S., U.S.S.R., and Rothschilds / City of London / Israel Suddenly Presented an Opportunity Where It Was Advantageous to Sabotage Chernobyl

2012-04-15 Stuxnet: The Trail Of On-Line War Games, enochered.wordpress.com.
The Stuxnet computer virus, which was written by Mossad and the CIA and probably with some input from the UK arm of the main Global Terrorist Grouping, MI6, was designed to create disastrous problems in the computer system, which was built by Siemens in Germany and installed in the Iranian Bushehr Nuclear Plant.
The Iranians, whom despite a history of problems with the US, without a trace of irony, appear to have named the plant after the family whom have created many of those problems. Anyway, the Iranians were evidently, more than capable of dealing with the Virus and after treating it, were brave enough to launch the Power Plant with no apparent problems.
The contagion spread world-wide, infecting millions of computer controlled systems in China and other industrialised countries.
There is, according to many observers, evidence that the Fukushima catastrophic loss of control of the computer operated cooling system, was due to Stuxnet infection.
We are now in the middle of a total News blackout concerning the continuing Japanese nightmare. The remains of the reactors cannot be approached by workers because of the radio-active emissions and they are in a state of near collapse. They house hundreds of tons of spent radio-active fuel rods, which, should the buildings collapse, will start an unstoppable chain-reaction where they fall. The pessimists are talking of the evacuation of Tokyo and maybe the entire island.
We have no way of knowing how many other disastrous events may have been caused by Stuxnet. Of what we can be sure is that this kind of computer terrorism did not start with Stuxnet.
Reports are emerging of attacks which were carried out by the Reagan regime as long ago as the 1980's, in the infancy of computer programming. Reagan, we are told, was obsessed with destroying The Soviet Union. Francois Mitterrand, the, President of France, revealed the contents of the so-called “Farewell Dossier” to Reagan, which contained information which had been supplied by a KGB Agent Colonel Vladimir I. Vetrov.
The Russians were in need of computer programmes, which were essential, to control the pumping of gas from Siberia. The Russians were seeking help in Canada.
The US interceded with Canada to “doctor” the computer chips, with what would now be called virus, in order to provoke erratic behaviour, which would interfere with the smooth running of installations in which they were installed.
The object was to destroy the Soviet economy, through the destruction of its industrial base. What they in fact achieved was a series of massive explosions on the Siberian Gas Pipeline.
Colonel Vladimir I. Vetrov, appears to have suffered a catastrophic attack of madness, during which he attacked his girlfriend, he was executed in 1983, after his duplicity had come to light, by which time Mikhail Gorbachev was in charge of the Soviet economy.
Gorbachev was the man whom was selected to oversee the dismantling of the USSR. He quickly signed treaties with Reagan and started to create an atmosphere which encouraged the Soviet controlled Lech Walesa to kick off in Poland, in a “Communist Block Spring” all of it, as with the “Arab Spring” under control.
The ideal “false flag” event to take everybody’s eye off the political ball was Chernobyl. It would be dumb to believe that the US, which had been in league with the Soviets forever, were not aware that the Iron Curtain was being raised for a new show.
The intent had always been to blend the Soviets with the West and arrangements had been made to make sure that all the wealth and resources ended up in the same hands. Yeltsin was waiting in the wings to see to that.
Reagan, had already placed coded “chips” into the computer system of the Soviets, this would imply that Chernobyl, like many other facilities would have been under the control of the US Intelligence Agencies. It would not be too great a leap to suppose that the same ghouls, whom were prepared to destroy Iranian Nuclear Power Plants and may well have caused the breakdown at Fukushima, would baulk at sabotaging Chernobyl.
2012-04-13 Was Chernobyl Revenge for the Russian Woodpecker? by Zen Gardner, zengardner.com. [Ed. Note: Please also see the Leuren Moret interview titled HAARP and Mind Control below which explains how the U.S. and U.S.S.R. were secret partners on the Wood Pecker and HAARP projects. A discussion of HAARP and Mind Control is relevant to Chernobyl to the extent that it not only illustrates a higher level of influence over both U.S. and U.S.S.R. societies than what one might surmise by simply focusing on their official government leaders alone, but also fits into a broader pattern involving the global depopulation agenda, the wanton use of "dirty nukes," and other ruthless manipulation methods through which a psychopathic globalist elite demonstrates its utter contempt for all humanity outside themselves].
"Knowing what we know now about Mossad’s stuxnet virus capabilities and the outright sabotage of the Fukushima reactors, amongst others, we need to revisit Chernobyl.
I ran across this connection when studying the various HAARP type facilities around the world, all of which were preceded by the Russian “Woodpecker” phenomenon in the 70's and 80's. Interestingly enough, the giant “Steel Yard” as NATO called it, is located in Chernobyl, Ukraine. Within the “exclusion zone” of the now defunct Chernobyl reactor.
Why then was this reactor blown up? Retaliation? See for yourself. Coincidence? Or a Deliberate Sabotage!
Wikipedia says:

The Russian Woodpecker was a notorious Soviet radio signal that could be heard on the shortwave radio bands worldwide between July 1976 and December 1989. It sounded like a sharp, repetitive tapping noise, at 10 Hz, giving rise to the “Woodpecker” name. The random frequency hops disrupted legitimate broadcast, amateur radio, utility transmissions, and resulted in thousands of complaints by many countries worldwide. The signal was long believed to be that of an over-the-horizon radar (OTH) system. This theory was publicly confirmed after the fall of the Soviet Union, and is now known to be the Duga-3 (Russian: ????-3) [1] system, part of the Soviet ABM early-warning network. NATO military intelligence had photographed the system and given it the NATO reporting name Steel Yard.

And conveniently abandoned now, as it was within the now 30 km nuclear “dead zone” after the Chernobyl disaster.
They couldn’t even ship the massive antenna array anywhere it was so contaminated.
Whistleblower Testimony
A little digging around and I found this [testimony of V. Baranov]:

“The Chernobyl power plant was blown up by a foreign agent! Department of Nuclear Energy, Science Academy with its research and design institutes were not ready for such an unexpected disaster. Chernobyl nuclear holocaust was not an accident. Nuclear reactors have high level of reliability proved by a number of tests. Water pumps of primary and back up cooling systems could not have been simultaneously disabled. The picture of blown up reactor was taken too opportunely by the U.S. satellite that was “accidentally” on the proper orbit above the 4th block at that very time. Logically analyzed facts and developments of “cold war” in 50th show Chernobyl catastrophe was not an accident. That was a full scale sabotage of the century, which resulted in breakdown of the USSR economic basis and “soviet” socialist system in general. The adversaries of the USSR made an effective use of the negligence and incompetence of the government headed by Gorbachev along with the lack of sufficient control of restricted areas.”

V. Baranov,
Former Chief Of Staff Deputy For Special Zone Forces
in Chernobyl nuclear power plant area retired colonel Source

Strange Anomalies...again
Look at the unexplainable problems experienced at the Chernobyl plant–strikingly similar to Fukushima without the tsunami:
The disaster began during a systems test on Saturday, 26 April 1986 at reactor number four of the Chernobyl plant, which is near the city of Prypiat and within a close proximity to the administrative border with Belarus and Dnieper river. There was a sudden power output surge, and when an emergency shutdown was attempted, a more extreme spike in power output occurred, which led to a reactor vessel rupture and a series of explosions. (Wiki)
Power surge during routine check? Emergency shutdown failed and caused a spike? I mean, c’mon.
Makes Total Sense
As is the way of the wicked would-be world rulers, they like to retaliate and teach the “underlings” severe lessons. This is why you don’t hear other world leaders speaking up against the American-based military industrial machine. They know they play dirty, and wouldn’t hesitate to assassinate leaders or perpetrate horrific atrocities to accomplish their goals.
It’s believed the Mossad, in addition to implanting interfering software in the Fukushima and Iran operations, also planted not just the one nuke that caused the Fukushima tsunami, but they have several others planted off the coast of Japan with which they’re blackmailing the entire nation into submission.
Wouldn’t be surprised.
Remember, Mossad is just one stinky arm of the global elites’ henchmen, but a very effective one. They just happen to enjoy spectacular immunity via the protected Zionist hoax that most of the west has bought into. There’s plenty of other squads of empathy-free mercenary hit men stationed all over the globe.
It’s also very easy for middle eastern looking Mossad agents to parade as Muslim extremists as they pull off their murderous attacks against innocent civilians and false flag operations around the region, and the world.
Coincidence? Illuminati Cards Redux
The general understanding of the Woodpecker varies, but it goes as far as possibly being a mind-control device, similar to HAARP.
The Ukrainian-developed computer game S.T.A.L.K.E.R. has a plot focused on the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant and the nuclear accident there. The game heavily features actual locations in the area, including the Duga-3 array. It is presented as the “Brain Scorcher”, a wide-area mind control device which must be deactivated by the player. Source
The Russian Woodpecker also appeared on the History Channel on That’s Impossible as a suspected weather control device used by the U.S.S.R. (original air date 5/1/2010 10am CDT).
On a BBC Horizon documentary, the Mysterious Mr. Tesla, doctor Andrew Michrowski (the Planetary Association for Clean Energy) speculated that the Woodpecker could in fact be a Soviet mind control transmitter, imposing on people’s ability to think rationally and stay calm. (original air date 20th December 1982) Source
It’s Not the First Time
In 1982, US president Ronald Reagan approved a CIA plan to sabotage the Soviet Union’s economy through covert transfers of technology that contained hidden malfunctions, including software that later triggered a huge explosion in a gas pipeline, according to a former White House official.
Thomas Reed, a former Air Force secretary and member of the National Security Council, describes the episode in a book, At the Abyss: An Insider’s History of the Cold War, to be published next month.
Reed writes that the Siberia pipeline explosion was just one example of “cold-eyed economic warfare” against the Soviet Union that the CIA carried out under director William Casey during the final years of the Cold War.
“In order to disrupt the Soviet gas supply, its hard currency earnings from the West, and the internal Russian economy, the pipeline software that was to run the pumps, turbines, and valves was programmed to go haywire, after a decent interval, to reset pump speeds and valve settings to produce pressures far beyond those acceptable to pipeline joints and welds,” Reed writes.
“The result was the most monumental non-nuclear explosion and fire ever seen from space.” US satellites picked up the explosion.
“While there were no physical casualties from the pipeline explosion, there was significant damage to the Soviet economy.” Source...
2012-04-04 Alex Jones interview with Bob Fletcher, Second Hour. Download MP3 Here (6.9 MB, 58:59), at 28:31 at the online video version Here. [Editor's Note: This interview is very significant for many reasons. (a) It reinforces what Leuren Moret has said about the joint U.S.-U.S.S.R. partnership on HAARP at the time of Chernobyl involving the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory where she worked. If the Soviets had scientists working at Livermore on this project, it becomes that much more plausible that Livermore had scientists working at a place like Chernobyl in exchange. (b) It reinforces the idea that a pro-Zionist plutocracy, which includes Bill Gates, Ted Turner, and Warren Buffett as gentile "front men," has been working for its own interests, sometimes working with the U.S. and Russia, and at other times stabbing either side in the back when convenient. (c) The sale by Russians of much of their HAARP technology reinforces the "disaster capitalist" theme, to the extent that if Russians were forced into such desperation to make this kind of sale they were probably forced to sell many other sensitive technologies at fire sale prices to Zionist kleptocrats as well. We already know how Zionist kleptocrats gobbled up Russian natural resources at bargain basement prices. The sale of HAARP technology to Red China may have also involved a share deal with Zionists and their fellow travelers like Bill Gates. In Final Judgment by Michael Collins Piper, we learn how Israel and Red China were secret partners in atomic bomb development in the 1950's and 1960's. The SPOTLIGHT reported in the early 1990's how Israelis had been importing arms to Red China in the hulls of U.S. Navy ships! (During the Vietnam era, Mossad-CIA-MI6 imported heroin from the Golden Triangle into the U.S. by stuffing the bodies of American soldiers killed in action -- these folks just love to smuggle using U.S. military assets!). It is seems highly likely that Israel and its Zionist handlers such as the Rothschilds / City of London are not only abreast of the latest HAARP technologies, but probably run organizations that parallel U.S. military HAARP control capabilities as well as command and control organizations in other countries that host HAARP facilities. This would enhance their ability to monitor or hijack HAARP facilities for their own special operations, or for the special use of plutocrats like Bill Gates who want to use them for disaster capitalist and extortion purposes. All of this leads to the last point, (d) If Bill Gates and other Zionist-friendly plutocrats are willing to use HAARP for disaster capitalist and extortion purposes, why would their counterparts back in 1986 have been particularly reluctant to sabotage Chernobyl if it had suited their purposes? As a final note, find out more about Bob Fletcher at bobfletcherinvestigations.com]

Alex Jones: [at 48:00 MP3 version, at 28:31 online video version] ...Bill Gates says that he is going to have this global weather bureau that controls your weather. And see if you don't pay him, well then some bad things are going to happen.
Bob Fletcher: It is amazing, now and also to say that I said something, just briefly, or just a couple of minutes ago, it is, there is a three-sided deal to this now. All right, so we have what I call the covert government, the secret government that is trying to control and mess up America's future here and putting it all into their pockets, so to speak. One world government control --
Jones: They are threatened by freedom because it will stop their monopoly. They are bad guys.
Fletcher: Right. And what they have also done now, however, way back a long time ago the Russians were involved with us directly at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories. The Russians were even given an award for their cooperation. But they were here in Lawrence Livermore Laboratories working with our scientists on some of the earlier concepts on this many years ago. So what happened was that the Russians back in the '90's, around the period of time that I was getting ahold of all of this, the Russians set up a company called Elate, E-l-a-t-e, and this was the Russian weather control modification --
Jones: And they don't hide it, that is why they cleared things out for the Red Square events. I mean, they advertise that they control the weather.
Fletcher: Right. They actually said back in the '90's that for a couple of hundred dollars the American farmer could be guaranteed rain over his area and all that. Now I don't know if they ever got to be good enough to do that, but when they started becoming, running out of money, OK, when they all fell apart and all the rest of that, they sold this technology that they had, they had actually developed with us, hand in hand behind, under the table, all right, they sold a tremendous amount of this to the Red Chinese. So Red China, now with all of their money, see they are able to purchase all of these weapons and things that previously they did not have, because now they have more money than they know what to do with, because we buy everything through K-mart and Walmart, but anyhow, so now what we end up with, we have the Russians with the potential to do it, we have the American covert operations side doing it, and we have the potential of the Red Chinese. The Red Chinese weather control modification organization has 37,000 employees. Read my lips. Thirty seven thousand. Now of course this is spread out all over. They do a little bit of everything, but that is how big the Chinese weather modification operation is.
Jones: Amazing. I can't believe this [part of the show] has gone by so fast. I will be right back...

2011-02-21 9/11 Truth: Was Mossad in Charge? Kevin Barrett, Dimitri Khalezov and Gordon Duff Discuss (YouTube) (1:30:41) [Ed. Note: This is the sound track of Dr. Kevin Barrett's interview with Dimitri Khalezov and VeteransToday.com publisher Gordon Duff. At 15:35 into the interview, Dimitri Khalezov, who claims to have been a former Soviet military intelligence officer who worked in a Directorate responsible for detecting nuclear explosions around the world, describes how he detected an mini-nuke explosion under the Chernobyl nuclear reactor]

Gordon Duff [15:00] .. What explosions did you detect or were you aware of? Can you list a few?
Dimitri Khalezov:
Our service detected a lot of different explosions, really a lot. What else?
Duff: Can you name some of those, because Americans will be utterly unaware of this, especially considering none of us have the security level that our own government would tell us. This is the only way we will know is from you.
Khalezov: OK, one of the most scandalous that was detected, perhaps was the nuclear explosion under the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Because the official version [was] that the reactor exploded on its own. But our service actually detected an explosion of a mini-nuke underneath the 4th reactor of the Chernobyl plant, just for example.
Dr. Kevin Barrett: Wow.
Duff: Kevin, have you ever heard anything about this at all?
Dr. Barrett: I have never heard anything about this. What did this lead to? Do you know who was blamed for it or what the outcome was?
Khalezov: The problem [was] that discovery was so much politically incorrect at that moment that it was actually shelved. I mean that our service detected it, but the government did not make any use of that detection. They just press it with the old story.
Duff: Do you have any idea what organization may have been involved with that?
Khalezov: [Laughter] Yes, I have personal opinion, but it is just my personal opinion. Because the problem is that the explosion was detected at that time, it was in 1986, and they reported it of course to the government, but the government did not press it according to this information. They continued the story that the reactor exploded on its own.
Duff: So what is this group or individual or whatever that you suspect? Who are they?
Khalezov: I guess that it was some kind of the New World Order project, perhaps by the Freemasons who used the mini-nuke laid under the reactor. And then they pass it for that the reactor exploded on its own. Because they just want to kill the nuclear power industry.
Duff: Well it certainly was very successful at doing that...

2012-01-11 Email from William B. Fox to Leuren Moret, Subject: The very real possibility that the Chernobyl catastrophe was caused by Mossad-CIA-MI6 false flag sabotage [Memorandum of our phone conversation the prior day]
Dear Ms. Moret:
It was a pleasure to speak with you again yesterday evening about compelling evidence that the Chernobyl melt-down was a result of deliberate false flag sabotage and constituted a precursor to the likely Mossad-CIA-MI6 Stuxnet virus sabotage of the Fukushima reactors that has been the major factor behind the continuing global radiation catastrophe we face at present (as noted on my Fukushima Catastrophe open source intelligence summary page at http://tinyurl.com/4924xzn).
In particular, I want to share notes of our conversation with Dr. James Fetzer, who like myself is heavily involved in false flag-related research, and also with Dr. Chris Busby, the eminent UK physicist who has helped establish that the Chernobyl melt-down was the consequence of an explosion. Lastly, I have an extensive distribution list of individuals associated with alternative media that I will openly or blind copy for the record so that they may be able to assist us in this line of investigation at some point in the future. This is an open letter for public distribution.
You described your conversation with an admiral from India heavily involved in the intelligence field who had visited reactor sites throughout the former Soviet Union. He told you that it was impossible for Chernobyl to be an accident, because a melt-down could only take place if 12 layers of security were breached. In an earlier conversation, you said that it was likely that Livermore and Mossad-CIA were involved in the Chernobyl sabotage.
As another indicator, you mentioned that while you served on the Lawrence National Laboratory staff between 1989 to 1991, you became aware that one of the Livermore scientists sent to Chernobyl to investigate the accident had suspiciously falsified his report as part of a cover-up. In addition, during the 1991 coup d’ etat attempt against Mikhail Gorbachev (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat_attempt) the way in which Livermore scientists sent to Chernobyl to engage in research or provide advice regarding the catastrophe were prevented from leaving the Soviet Union was also suspicious.
Mossad-CIA-MI6 sabotage of Chernobyl fits a broader pattern besides the sabotage of the Fukushima reactors with the Stuxnet virus, such as the deliberate dumping of radiation by the UK Sellafield nuclear facility into the Irish Sea that you addressed in your 1 April 2009 article Global Implications of Sellafield: “Irish Sea Coast Effect" and Beyond, namastepublishing.co.uk, at:
(http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/Global%20Implications%20of%20Sellafield%20-%20Irish%20Sea%20Coast%20Effect.htm). This has led to the deaths of millions of people.
It also fits with the deliberate massive use of DU munitions beginning in 1990 by the U.S. and its allies and the horrendous impact in terms of global contamination documented on the web archive pages I have created for both yourself (at http://tinyurl.com/64m37tq) and Dr. Busby (at http://tinyurl.com/3k4zsty). This has not only killed millions of innocent civilians, but has also poisoned hundreds of thousands of America’s own troops.
It also fits in with the cavalier mentality behind the likely use by Mossad-CIA-MI6 of “Red Mercury” type mini-nukes in the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11 as explained in your joint 28 Oct 2011 "Fukushima Radiation and Uranium Weapon Update" three-way interview (at http://tinyurl.com/3ukrghe) with Dr. James Fetzer and Dr. Busby. (I also explain how a “Red Mercury” device made in Dimona, Israel is a prime candidate for the 2002 Bali bombing and the explosive used in the 7-22 Oslo bombing, as described on my Oslo-Utoya web page at: http://tinyurl.com/7o7uk44).
We encourage other individuals to come forward with more evidence regarding the likelihood that Chernobyl was a consequence of deliberate sabotage to assist our continuing false flag research.
Best regards,
Bill Fox

2011-03-14 Chernobyl and Manhattan by Dimitri Khalezov, Veterans Today.
[Editor's Note: I think that Dimitri Khalezov offers a lot of interesting leads and ideas, however, I also have problems with certain parts of his story, such as his assertion that mini-nukes planted below the World Trade Center towers were the prime factor in bringing them down on 9/11. I think it is more likely that mini-nukes were exploded on many different floors from top to bottom in the building and fired in certain sequences (for example first in the basement area to eliminate the underground supports for the central columns, and then from top to bottom as seen in many videos to pulverize most portions of the building to dust before they hit street level). Conventional "controlled demolitions" were probably also used closer to the periphery of the building and exploded in coordination with mini-nukes that quickly melted the massive central support structures. I also question the extent to which Khalezov plays down the amount of radiation at Chernobyl after the explosion. In addition, as previously mentioned, Leuren Moret questions the mini-nuke story, although Dr. Christopher Busby validates the strong likelihood that there was certainly a very powerful atomic explosion probably not caused by a man-made bomb. Ms. Moret believes that various high level interests want to play down how quickly reactors can go into meltdown through violation of safety procedures, and how fast corium can melt through containment and generate an atomic explosion from "supercriticality" as opposed to a man-made nuclear device. An atomic explosion might be caused by hitting ground water or due to some other cause such as "condensed" corium that hits a"neutron reflector" as suggested by the blog article The Non-Battle of Fukushima … by "Steve From Virginia." I recollect reading one source which claimed that the Soviets used HAARP and other rain-making methods to prevent fallout from coming down on Moscow, and that the Soviets also made the grim decision to rain out radioactive plumes over Belarus that were headed towards Scandinavia for fear of liability suits and other international repurcussions from the Scandinavians. If true, this suggests there are high level interests that may want to play down radiation liability, for whom the mini-nuke story could be a cover story to suggest that most of the nuclear material got immediately vaporized instead of turning into corium which proceeded to generate substantial amounts of fallout. Because of the conflicting interpretations betweeen Moret and Khalezov, I believe that one needs to pick and choose and engage in additional research and verification. Here is an example of a blog discussion on Khalezov's work. The following is an extract of Mr. Khalezov's Veteran's Today article:]
"...Chernobyl nuclear “catastrophe” (also referred to as a “disaster”) was planned with actually two reasons in mind, though the second reason also somehow additionally contributed to the first reason, in its turn:
1). It was one of a few other main mortal blows (along with provoking the Soviet leadership into sending its army to Afghanistan, Korean Flight 007, a so-called “Perestroika”, skillfully orchestrated sharp decline in oil prices, an “anti-vodka campaign”, and some other blows) delivered to the then weakening Soviet Union, in order to precipitate its complete collapse. Because “someone” simply hated the Soviet Union.
2). It was a skillful frame up intended to discredit the civilian nuclear industry in general in the eyes of the gullible general public, as well as in the eyes of the gullible politicians. “Someone” simply hated nuclear power plants and wanted them to become extinct. Also a sharp decline in the development of the civilian nuclear industry that followed the Chernobyl event, additionally contributed to the tremendous economic losses suffered by the Soviet Union which were caused by the sharp decline in the world oil prices, and as such it also contributed to the first reason as explained above.
Though the Chernobyl “disaster” was apparently designed to primarily target the former Soviet Union, it delivered near a mortal blow to France, which before that event spent enormous efforts on her nuclear research and on development of her peaceful nuclear industry. As a result of that “disaster” France lost practically all her former customers from among “civilized” countries. If any country still craves today to buy French nuclear reactors – it would be most probably a so-called “rogue” state, akin to North Korea or Iran, which only wants to use such a reactor to accumulate weapon-grade Plutonium for its atomic bomb.
The most of so-called “civilized” countries have completely ended up any long-term developments of their national nuclear power programs, and have dismantled the most of pre-existing nuclear power plants..."
2010-07-04 Comparing the 1986 Chernobyl “nuclear disaster” with the 2001 Manhattan thermo-nuclear catastrophe (PDF) by Dimitri Khalezov. [Editor's Note: This is another version of the Veteran's Today article listed above. The PDF provides the following background on Khalezov: "About author: Mr. Dimitri A. Khalezov, a former Soviet citizen, a former commissioned officer of the so-called “military unit 46179”, otherwise known as “the Special Control Service” of the 12th Chief Directorate of the Defense Ministry of the USSR. The Special Control Service, also known as the Soviet atomic (later “nuclear”) intelligence was a secret military unit responsible for detecting of nuclear explosions (including underground nuclear tests) of various adversaries of the former USSR as well as responsible for controlling of observance of various international treaties related to nuclear testing and to peaceful nuclear explosions. After September the 11th Khalezov undertook some extensive 9/11 research and proved that the Twin Towers of World Trade Center as well as its building 7 were demolished by three underground thermo-nuclear explosions – which earned the very name “ground zero” to the demolition site. Moreover, he testifies that he knew about the in-built so-called “emergency nuclear demolitions scheme” of the Twin Towers as long ago as back in the ‘80s – while being a serviceman in the Soviet Special Control Service..."]


2007-07-23 HAARP and Mind Control, Alfred Webre interview with Leuren Moret on COOP Radio. [Editor's Note: Given the close cooperation between the U.S. and U.S.S.R. on the Woodpecker Project and other high tech programs, the ability of Mossad-CIA-MI6 to penetrate security at the Chernobyl reactors and set up the "accident" becomes more understandable].

Alfred Webre: One of the concepts that we were exploring was that the development of the technology of mind control actually goes back in one significant program to the 70's, to a secret arrangement between the United States and the then Soviet Union. I wondered if you could tell us about that.
Leuren Moret: Yes, following World War II the ruling elite or the shadow government in the United States wanted to pursue a program to develop mind control because they believed that American servicemen who had been prisoners of war in, for instance, in China and other Asian countries, had returned as sort of mind-controlled victims or zombies. So John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles actually set up the CIA in the late 1940s for the purpose of developing mind control programs. They did not exactly know what the Asians had done, but they wanted to have that ability themselves. And in the 1950's several projects were set up. Project ARTICHOKE and I think Project Bluebird. These were the precursors of the MKULTRA Program. And they were brought under the umbrella of MKULTRA when it was started in, I guess, the mid-1950's. I didn't know anything about it. I had sort of heard about MKULTRA but I really didn't know anything about it until a Project ARTICHOKE victim approached me and asked me to help him write a book. And I said, "Well, why don't you bring all your documentation and your diaries and photos and whatever you have over to my house and I will look at it, and if it checks out, then of course I will help you. So I began to learn about MKULTRA. But before that, I am a nuclear weapons lab whistle-blower at the Livermore Lab and I am a geoscientist, so from about the year 2000 I began working 18 hours a day on radiation issues as a result of visiting the Hiroshima and Nagasaki museums and beginning to understand how horrific nuclear weapons are. And I had worked as a staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab when it was still conducting nuclear weapons research, although I was studying volcanoes. And then later on in 1989 I was hired at the Lawrence Livermore Lab and worked there two years and just quit in utter disgust over the science fraud and contractor [dishonesty] and all kinds of corruption. And little did I know that actually Livermore had a very important part to play in MKULTRA. That is where the software was developed for the global mind-control project for which George Herbert Walker Bush was the chief architect and CEO beginning when he was in the CIA. He was probably recruited when he was at Yale in Skull and Bones. He was certainly very early taken into the CIA, and a very important operative. A very nasty one too. So the software for mind-control was developed through MKULTRA. There was a monkey colony at UC Davis when I was an undergraduate there in the 60's and I always wondered what it was for. I heard stories from room mates and other people who worked there and they described this very large colony of monkeys that was off the campus and very isolated. Nobody was allowed over there, but people who worked there and took care of these monkeys told these horrific tales of monkeys running around with the tops of their heads cut off. These wires and electrodes coming out of their brains. It was really just some pathological experiment going on there. Then the hardware, the antennae for this global mind-control project came out of actually the Soviet Union. It was discovered in I think in the 1960's when -- maybe it was in the 1950's -- when at least three of our U.S. ambassadors to the Soviet Union died from brain tumors, brain cancer. And it was a result of the Russians, the Soviets microwaving the U.S. embassy in Moscow, and causing not only brain cancer in three ambassadors, or other illnesses, but some of the staff in the embassy also died of neurological diseases and very strange illnesses. And actually Henry Kissinger, who was in the State Department, stepped in, covered it up, gave the embassy workers' hazard pay, and some of them never regained their health. Their health was destroyed. So on July 4th, 1976, the 200th anniversary of the establishment of the United States of America as an independent country, the Woodpecker signal was turned on by the Soviet Union and nobody knew what it was, but the ham radio operators around the world picked it up immediately. It was sort of a knocking sound or a pecking sound on their transmissions, on their radio transmissions, and they nicknamed it the Woodpecker signal because it sounded like woodpeckers sound when they are pecking on trees. And it interfered with airplane and ship traffic on the seas, so the Soviets took out certain band widths or frequencies that were interfering with communications that were necessary for airplanes and ships. And it remained in operational mode for quite a long time. And it turns out that signal was over the horizon radar transmitted from seven of the largest transmitters in the world located on the eastern side of the Soviet Union, and on the western side. And one of them was powered by Chernobyl, the nuclear power plants at Chernobyl. So these consumed huge enormous amounts of electricity. They were transmitting beams of radar, over the horizon radar, which were transmitted all the way to the United States. They could cross these beams over each other because the transmitters were a long distance apart in the Soviet Union. They were conducting experiments with the full cooperation of the U.S. Government. In fact, they became secret partners in 1978 at a United Nations meeting which was held, it was a treaty signing conference where 68 countries signed a treaty agreeing not to use the environment as a weapon, and not to damage the environment with environmental weapons or other kinds of weapons. At that agreement, at that treaty signing agreement the United States and the Soviet Union became secret partners in the Woodpecker Project, and also in the co-development of environmental weapons which we would call exotic weapons today, such as weather modification or weather warfare, tectonic warfare that is triggering earthquakes and volcanoes erupting, and then the mind control is part of that.
Webre: So just to ask you, so that for example with regard to the Woodpecker Project, the U.S. then in effect outsourced its program to the Soviet Union and allowed it to attack a specific city.
Moret: -- And experiment upon American citizens.
Webre: Yes. And then the U.S. went in and evaluated the results.
Moret: Well actually we sent many scientists and a very, very large magnet that weighed many tons. We also transferred other technology and equipment and money to the Soviet Union. So really in a way you could say they were under contract to us. And we also outsourced testing the MKULTRA software and experimented on Canadians. Dr. Cameron, at -- what university was he at?
Webre: McGill University.
Moret: Yes, McGill University. He was actually conducting MKULTRA experiments on Canadian citizens. And they were doing horrific things like erasing their memories and doing just horrible things to their brains and their ability to function as normal human beings. They really destroyed them. And this was allowed secretly by the Canadian Government and the U.S. secretly allowed the Soviets to conduct the hardware experiments with the Woodpecker Project. The transmission of this mind-control technology through very, very large transmitters in the Soviet Union. So it most definitely was a joint project between the U.S., Canada, the Soviet Union, and of course --of course-- England was deeply involved as well.
Webre: So these are really just partners in the permanent war economy.
Moret: These are partners in the permanent war economy and this really involves the Wall Street banking establishment, Skull and Bones, the secret society at Yale, where the sons of the Wall Street banking establishment have been members and rose to very, very high and important positions in the secret government as well as infiltrating the regular government of the United States since even before the 1850's. And it involves this partnership between the Wall Street banking establishment, the British throne, and the London money power, which on the face of it is managed by the Rothschilds...

2003-06-01 Remote Viewing: What It Is, Who Uses It, and How to Use It by Tim Rifat (Amazon.com book listing). [Ed. Note: Question: was Mossad-CIA-MI6 trying to interdict something much more sinister than just a "woodpecker" signal, or is this simply "plot within a plot" disinformation promulgated by Mossad-CIA-MI6? I have not viewed this softcover book, but I have seen a pdf version titled Remote Viewing, also listed at scribd.com. I do not know enough about remote viewing to adequately judge Rifat's credibility, however, his description of Cold War competition by the Soviet Union and U.S. in the realm of "psychotronic warfare" looks like a very promising "intellectual rabbit hole" for further inquiry. Interestingly enough, in her interviews, Leuren Moret has described how the CIA was also very intensely interested in psychotronic research, particularly in conjunction with the development of HAARP technology, and the Lawrence Livermore laboratories where she worked was a major hub of C.I.A. R & D in this area. In addition, she describes how the U.S. and U.S.S.R. were in secret partnership rather than competition. In the video "Russian Woodpecker", Duga 3, Chernobyl 2..High-definition video!!" the narrator claims the Russians were building a 5th reactor at Chernobyl originally due to come on line the November following the April disaster, but of course had no choice but to abort it after the melt-down. Was this extra power needed for an enhanced global "Woodpecker" operation or was it for more innocent civilian use? Last, but not least, Mossad-CIA-MI6 often likes to construct a "plot within a plot" to deceive mid to lower tier members of their intelligence services. For example, in Chapter 17 "The Bombing Beat Goes On and On: The JFK Assassination Subplot, the McVeigh Subterfuge, Bali and Amman Explosions" of my Mission of Conscience series, I describe Michael Collins Piper's theory from Final Judgment that mid to lower tier CIA, FBI, and Secret Service agents were told that there would be a fake and unsuccessful assassination attempt against John F. Kennedy in Dallas on November 22, 1963 blamed on pro-Fidel Castro communists to help justify U.S. military intervention against Cuba. This induced them to cooperate with all the security violations that were necessary to set JFK up for assassination. They were as surprised as anyone else when the scenario went "live" with the actual killing of the president. They were never told the higher level reasons for the assassination, such as Israel's desire to get around JFK's prohibition against acquiring the atomic bomb (one of many different motives on many different levels, to be sure). Similarly, the "Woodpecker" story may been embellished and completely blown out of proportion to induce Mossad-CIA-MI6 operatives to engage in sabotage, when in fact the real motives at a higher level (such as the Rothschilds / City of London) may have been to set Russia up for a "disaster capitalist" takeover as well as to set an example for future extortion purposes. There may have also been some longstanding global depopulation goals that included the usual subterranean Jewish delight in anti-gentile enslavement and genocide. All this having been said, let us now return to extracts from the pdf/scribd version of Remote Viewing ]:
"...PSYCHOTRONIC MIND CONTROL
Edward Naumov, a leading Russian parapsychologist, is on record as stating, ‘A psychotronic generator can influence an individual, or a whole crowd of people. It can affect a person's psyche mentally or emotionally. It can effect memory and attention span. A psychotronic device can cause physical fatigue, disorientation, and alter a person's behaviour.’ The Soviets built the world's largest transmitter, code-named Woodpecker by the US, to beam mind-control waves at the West (see Appendix 3). It was powered by the Chernobyl nuclear power complex in the Ukraine.
A strange signal which disrupted short-wave transmissions around the world was detected in the early eighties. It was nicknamed Woodpecker due to its pulse modulation of 10Hz, which when listened to on radio equipment, sounded like a woodpecker due to loud modulations in the signal. It emitted a peak estimated power of 14 million watts per pulse at frequencies of between 3.26 and 17.54MHz, making it the most powerful man-made, non-nuclear, non-ionizing, i.e. non-radioactive, radiation source on the planet. Seven awesome transmitters near Kiev, also powered by the Chernobyl nuclear power complex, beamed Woodpecker’s emissions in the direction of western Europe, Australia, North America and the Middle East. These emissions permeated all obstacles and were conducted into homes via the power lines of each nation's national grid. They were capable of penetrating underwater and even into shielded bunkers.
So had the Soviets had discovered a method of affecting the neurological functioning of entire populations? Woodpecker had been designed to alter the brain functions of Nato populations by using ELF modulated signals. It was found that these extremely low frequency waves could penetrate the skull and change brain patterns when broadcast at test victims - 6.66Hz makes the victim depressed, 11Hz can make a person manic and prone to riotous behaviour (see Appendices 3). Of particular interest to the KGB scientists were the brain-wave maps of pathological criminals, hopelessly depressed mental patients and socio-psychopaths who had no regard for anyone but themselves. The Soviets hoped to remap the neural networks in the brains of the entire western population.
Prolonged exposure to ELF signals changes the brain’s neural wiring because the barrage of ELF waves stimulates the network used for the signal the brain is receiving, depression for example, while the normal-state neural network is unused. Top neuro-scientist Dr. Gerald Edelman has shown that neurones compete with each other and that unused neural connections and brain cells die. If you can keep a person in one brain state, such as depression, by use of ELF transmitted by pulse-modulated microwaves, then the brain connections and cells for normal consciousness will be destroyed and the person will become a chronic depressive. Under a barrage of ELF signals from the Woodpecker transmitters, that was powerful enough the sane mental connections in the brain would gradually die out. Woodpecker’s 10Hz ELF signal went on until the fall of the Soviet Union.
Dr Robert Becker of the Syracuse VA Hospital, a Los Angeles physicist and former member of a top-secret US mind-control programme which looked into the effects of ELF, claimed, ‘It's highly likely that the Woodpecker signal is causing neurological changes in thirty per cent of the population...’"