Chernobyl

[Dave]

cc

[Dave]

From Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the_Catastrophe_for_People_and_the_Environment

Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment

Author Alexey V. Yablokov, Vassily B. Nesterenko, and Alexey V. Nesterenko

Series Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, v. 1181.
Subject Chernobyl disaster
Publisher Blackwell Publishing
Publication date 2007
Published in English 2009
ISBN ISBN 978-1-57331-757-3
OCLC 456185565

Biologist Alexey V. Yablokov, the primary author, is a member of the Russian Academy of Science, and was deputy chair of the commission of ecology of the USSR' Parliament (1989-1991), councillor on ecology and public health to the President of the Russian Federation (1991-1993) and chair of the state commission on dumping of radioactive wastes in seas surrounding the Russian Federation (1992-1993). He is also a co-founder of Greenpeace Russia.

The late Prof. Vassily B. Nesterenko was the director of the Institute of Nuclear Energy at the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, from 1977 to 1987.

Dimitro M. Grodzinsky, chairman of the Ukrainian National Commission on Radiation Protection and chairman of the Department of General Biology at the Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences, uthored the foreword of the book.

1 - The book presents an analysis of scientific literature and concludes that medical records between 1986, the year of the Chernobyl disaster, and 2004 reflect 985,000 premature deaths as a result of the radioactivity released.

2 - The authors suggest that most of the deaths were in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, though others occurred worldwide throughout the many countries that were struck by radioactive fallout from Chernobyl.

3 - The literature analysis draws on over 1,000 published titles and over 5,000 internet and printed publications, primarily in Slavic languages (i.e. not translated in English), discussing the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. The authors contend that those publications and papers were written by leading Eastern European authorities and have largely been downplayed or ignored by the IAEA

[Dave]

Review #1

Two expert reviews of the book were commissioned by the Oxford journal Radiation Protection Dosimetry.
The first, by Dr. Ian Fairlie, generally endorses the book's conclusions. Dr. Fairlie, a radiation biologist, was a scientific secretary to UK Government’s Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters and one of two authors of the TORCH report commissioned by the European Green Party. He greets the book as a ... welcome addition to the literature in English. …
In the opinion of the reviewer, this volume makes it clear that international nuclear agencies and some national authorities remain in denial about the scale of the health disasters in their countries due to Chernobyl's fallout. This is shown by their reluctance to acknowledge contamination and health outcomes data, their ascribing observed morbidity/mortality increases to non-radiation causes, and their refusal to devote resources to rehabilitation and disaster management.

The absolute biggest criticism:

Fairlie notes two shortcomings of the book: that it does not sufficiently investigate the large decrease in average male life spans throughout Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, in both contaminated and uncontaminated areas; and that it does not make enough effort to reconstruct estimated doses of contamination and discuss their implications for eastern and western Europe (though Fairlie agrees with the authors that studies should not be rejected for failing to contain dose estimates—a criterion commonly applied by western nuclear agencies such as the IAEA).

My Paraphrase – He is history is in examining radiation risks from internal emitters – He agrees with the conclusions of the book – His disappointment is that the research does not quantify dosage (a standard part of Western Studies supported by the Nuclear Industry)

Fairlie specifically concurs with Yablakov et al. on three points:

1- The IAEA's exclusion of data where estimated dose is below a certain threshold (following ICRP recommendations) is contrary to normal practice, even the ICRP's own practice, and contradicts the linear no-threshold model (LNT).

2- The ICRP's recommendation in this regard is inconsistent with LNT and its own practices.

3- The IAEA and the ICRP both want to discredit any data where a minimum exposure (limits set by them) is not documentally provable.

So, the West would say you can only document cases where a minimum exposure can be measured.

The problem is – how would anyone ever quantify the exposure dose of something that happened hundreds of miles away and 25 + years ago.
But I take the research to say any exposure – which includes everyone – everyone from the Chernobyl fallout area.

The IAEA/WHO have often sought to justify their dismissal of eastern European epidemiological studies by citing questionable scientific practices: but epidemiology is not an exact science, and the same shortcomings exist in western studies uncriticised by the IAEA. The IAEA also point to shortcomings with pre-Chernobyl Soviet cancer registries, but cancer registries in western countries had similar issues at that time. (From Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the_Catastrophe_for_People_and_the_Environment)

Review #2

The second review, by Dr. Monty Charles, is largely critical, noting several problems: The authors expressly discount socioeconomic or screening factors when considering increased occurrence of diseases, but this methodology does not seem to account for variations between territories prior to the accident.

While Charles agrees with the importance of making eastern research more available in the west, he states that he cannot tell which of the publications referred to by the book would sustain critical peer-review in western scientific literature, and that verifying these sources would require considerable effort.

Although Wikipedia footnotes this section as (Oxford JournalsScience & Mathematics Radiation Protection Dosimetry Volume 141, Issue 1Pp. 101-104) I cannot discover who Dr. Monty Charles is, wher he work, or to whom his allegiances are.

Review #3

A third review by Mona Dreicer was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.[14] It was highly critical of the book's methodology:
... by discounting the widely accepted scientific method for associating cause and effect (while taking into account the uncertainties of dose assessment and measurement of impacts), the authors leave us with only with their assertion that the data in this volume "document the true scale of the consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe."

Dr. Mona Dreicer is the Deputy Director of the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. She is also Deputy Program Director for Nuclear and Domestic Security in the Laboratory's Office of Strategic Outcomes. … Prior to joining LLNL, Dreicer served as Director of the Office of Nuclear Affairs at the U.S. Department of State, where she was involved in assessing compliance with nuclear arms control treaties and worked to ensure effective verification of nonproliferation agreements and U.S.-Russia nuclear materials programs.
Dr Mona Dreicer makes the same ol’e criticism – proof of exposure – look at her credentials – IAEA and ICRP insider

Review #4

The New York Academy of Sciences published a fourth review, by M. I. Balonov of Institute of Radiation Hygiene, St. Petersburg, Russia. The reviewer condemned the book for completely discounting dosimetry and radiation dose reconstruction, relying instead on inferior, simplistic methodologies, such as ecological and geographical techniques and tracking health indicators over time, which is known to give erroneous conclusions.

This paper investigates the mistakes in methodology made by Yablokov et al and concludes that these errors led to a clear exaggeration of radiation-induced health effects. Should similar mistakes be made following the 2011 accident at Fukushima-1 NPP this could lead quite unnecessarily to a panic reaction by the public about possible health effects and to erroneous decisions by the authorities in Japan. (J Radiol Prot., 2012 May 8, On protecting the inexperienced reader from Chernobyl myths.:181-9. doi: 10.1088/0952-4746/32/2/181. Epub, Balonov M.)

M. I. Balonov make exact same critism as the other pro-West, pro-Nuclear Energy, pro-IAEA and pro-ICRP insiders.

Why? -- following the 2011 accident at Fukushima … this (information) could lead … to a panic reaction by the public about possible health effects and to erroneous decisions by the authorities in Japan.

Then Nuclear regulatory Commission must discredit this information:
1- supporting this information would be the end of their originations, credibility, and their jobs
2- Because of all the talk about Global Warming – moving away from fossil fuels to generate enough electricity for the globe only leaves Nuclear Energy to date. So, they must keep those reactors running, they must protect their reputations, and their jobs.
3- if this information was made credible
a. the public would demand the end of Nuclear Energy
b. the public would demand the cleanup of Fukushima NOW not in 40 years or more
c. the resulting panic and anger – would tear our country apart violently – imagine the resulting chaos, and the collapse of any social structure, of trying to evacuate California or Washington State

[Larry]

the resulting panic and anger – would tear our country apart violently – imagine the resulting chaos, and the collapse of any social structure, of trying to evacuate California or Washington State


Yes, how would you evacuate California or even Rhode Island?

All the diligent people who pay attention would pack up and leave in an ordly fashon
But all the criminals would stay behind to loot whatever was left and become overly exposed

Hey. Ther's a thought!

[Irrido]

Эта международная компания ОАО ЗЩЫУК Чайковский делает современным способом видеодиагностикутехнических систем, сетей хозяйственно-бытовой, сетей хоз. бытовых, инженерных систем, ливневой канализации и так далее.
Видео/телеинспекция различных труб осуществляется специальной видео камерой, которая перемещается по трубе и подает изображение на видеомонитор и в одно и то же время делается видеозвукозапись труб.
Данная проверка предоставляет возможность определить состояние стенок и стыков труб, зоны расположения трещин, свищей и иных повреждений, обнаружить засоры и посторонние предметы, незаконные врезки и прочие. Видеоинспекция также может быть использована и при приёме труб после выполнения строительных работ, ремонта.
Хорошим плюсом системы телеинспекции считается ее мобильность, простота подхода к трубопроводу, а ещё возможность получать видеоизображение внутренних деталей различных труб.

Наша отечественная объединение Предприниматель без образования юридического лица АУОАПШ Щелково
функционирует на предприятиях как частных так и муниципальных предприятиях.

Чистка фильтров скважин : <a href=https://synergy90.ru>Теледиагностика скважин</a>

[Dave]

Спасибо -
1- но, я думаю, у вас неправильная доска обсуждений
2- Или, пожалуйста, немедленно приходите ко мне домой в Колорадо, США, и дайте мне оценку

[Richard]

I just figured this out - how funny

Plumbers are God's children too

[bbzIrrido]

В Сервисе имеется к продаже КАНАЛИЗАЦИОННЫЕ ДРОБИЛКИ, Емкости и резервуары с подогревом, Мешалки складные под еврокуб, Декантерные центрифуги, Водоприемный колодец, Коалесцентные модули, Комплексы реагентного хозяйства (КРХ), ОДЪЕМНЫЕ УСТРОЙСТВА И МЕТАЛЛОКОНСТРУКЦИИ Подъемники, ВОДООЧИСТНОЕ ОБОРУДОВАНИЕ Статические смесители, ПОДЪЕМНЫЕ УСТРОЙСТВА И МЕТАЛЛОКОНСТРУКЦИИ Шнеки из конструкционной и нержавеющей стали, ОЧИСТКА ЛИВНЕВЫХ СТОЧНЫХ ВОД Маслобензотделители, НАСОСНОЕ И КОМПРЕССОРНОЕ ОБОРУДОВАНИЕ (Грунфос, КСБ, Вило, КИТ, Взлёт, ТВП) Дозирование и разгрузка, ВОДОПОДГОТОВКУ Озонаторы и хлотаторы, а также все для автомойки Система очистки воды для автомоек.

У нас вы найдете Обслуживание очистных сооружений, а также биозагрузка купить , мы можем произвести Подбор оборудования для обустройства скважины. Бурение неглубоких скважин, Поиск полезных ископаемых, Монтаж водоснабжения.

У нас проектирует, производит Монтаж канализации.


установка обезвоживания осадка и ббз для очистных сооружений <a href=https://bbzmsk.ru>ббз московская область</a>

[bbzIrrido]

В Сервисе имеется к продаже КАНАЛИЗАЦИОННЫЕ ДРОБИЛКИ, Емкости и резервуары с подогревом, Мешалки складные под еврокуб, Декантерные центрифуги, Водоприемный колодец, Коалесцентные модули, Комплексы реагентного хозяйства (КРХ), ОДЪЕМНЫЕ УСТРОЙСТВА И МЕТАЛЛОКОНСТРУКЦИИ Подъемники, ВОДООЧИСТНОЕ ОБОРУДОВАНИЕ Статические смесители, ПОДЪЕМНЫЕ УСТРОЙСТВА И МЕТАЛЛОКОНСТРУКЦИИ Шнеки из конструкционной и нержавеющей стали, ОЧИСТКА ЛИВНЕВЫХ СТОЧНЫХ ВОД Маслобензотделители, НАСОСНОЕ И КОМПРЕССОРНОЕ ОБОРУДОВАНИЕ (Грунфос, КСБ, Вило, КИТ, Взлёт, ТВП) Дозирование и разгрузка, ВОДОПОДГОТОВКУ Озонаторы и хлотаторы, а также все для автомойки Система очистки воды для автомоек.

У нас вы найдете Обслуживание очистных сооружений, а также биозагрузка купить , мы можем произвести Подбор оборудования для обустройства скважины. Бурение неглубоких скважин, Поиск полезных ископаемых, Монтаж водоснабжения.

У нас проектирует, производит Монтаж канализации.


установка обезвоживания осадка и ббз для очистных сооружений <a href=https://bbzmsk.ru>ббз московская область</a>