Chernobyl kills 56

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
Yes that's the conclusion of a UN report, all that 'millions dead' crap, just hysteria and exagerations by dubious experts

Like so many scare stories these days, the actual risk is inflated out of all proportion, I remember them closing off mountains in Wales cos of the radiation even though there was LESS radiation up there than down in the cities.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050905/sc_nm/nuclear_chernobyl_dc
 

Ezteq

Queen of OT
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Messages
13,457
About 4,000 people developed thyroid cancer as a result of the accident, most of them children and adolescents in 1986. The survival rate, however, had been almost 99 percent, the report said.
this is what i remember from it, seeing all those bald little kids and being told they got cancer from chernobyl, according to that link there was like 9 kids that died from cancer in the end, but afaik cancer can come back later in life so if all these "survivours" die in their 40's will that still count?.

tbh dont care if it was only a relatively small amount of people that died, i know i dont want that happening again.
 

Cozak

Part of the furniture
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
2,871
Earl said:
The UN don't know shit
Agreed, watched a tv program on the kids of the Chernobyl accident (The kids born of parents affected by radiation) saddest program i ever seen im my life. 3rd generation babies being born with half their brains hanging out, seeing kids with the most horrible disfigurations just broke me, was in tears by the end of the program.
 

Huntingtons

Resident Freddy
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Messages
10,770
Cozak said:
Agreed, watched a tv program on the kids of the Chernobyl accident (The kids born of parents affected by radiation) saddest program i ever seen im my life. 3rd generation babies being born with half their brains hanging out, seeing kids with the most horrible disfigurations just broke me, was in tears by the end of the program.
still have to remember its tv, so you never know how true it can be - remember according to the article its a report made by scientists, economists and whatnot.
im still sceptic about the article tho.
 

Earl

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
593
Some scientists would say plastic spoons cause aids.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
Not again, lost the last one..don't want to go into it, suffice to say, loads of x-rays and the services of a small boy with a hook and cane.

Very traumatic especially for the small boy.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,082
Im involved with a charity that brings children from chernobyl to the uk for 4 weeks every summer. 56 dead is horseshit.
 

Fianno

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
148
yeah, likewise, my mum was leader of a local branch of chernobyl children appeal a few years back (they switch it around every so often), she went over with them to visit the kids we had at our home, and also the orphanages with 100's of deformed kids dying of cancer, 56 is pulled out of kofi's arse tbh
 

Bahumat

FH is my second home
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
16,788
i dont know the full story but after chenobyl the direction of the wind blew the fumes accross the land, experts showed the direction the wind was going and the area's that would have been affected.

things such as Cancer/diabetes rose 10 fold in the next few years only in the region the wind was going.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
I know it's horrible an all, but think of any disaster anywhere on the planet and you can drag up kids with deformities, deformed children are much more common in poorer areas, in the UK most people have them aborted or whisked away to homes, we see very few of them on the streets cos we don't like to see them, travel around poor Eastern bloc countries and you will find severely disabled children who quite simply would have been detected as malformed before birth over here and aborted.

The UN report uses .you know 'SCIENCE' to actually track down exposure, which for most was minimal , as in barely above background level, whenever there's the slightest hint of some chemical or radioactive exposure no matter how insignificant every child born with a deformity is automatically associated with it.

Of course radioactivity is undoubtedly a 'biggie' when it comes to genetic mutation, the reoprt rightly points out that depression and hopelessness steming from unfounded fears of shortened life spans led to far more ill health than the exposure did, hysteria and media exageration killed more than the accident.
 

Cozak

Part of the furniture
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
2,871
Job said:
I know it's horrible an all, but think of any disaster anywhere on the planet and you can drag up kids with deformities, deformed children are much more common in poorer areas, in the UK most people have them aborted or whisked away to homes, we see very few of them on the streets cos we don't like to see them, travel around poor Eastern bloc countries and you will find severely disabled children who quite simply would have been detected as malformed before birth over here and aborted.

The UN report uses .you know 'SCIENCE' to actually track down exposure, which for most was minimal , as in barely above background level, whenever there's the slightest hint of some chemical or radioactive exposure no matter how insignificant every child born with a deformity is automatically associated with it.

Of course radioactivity is undoubtedly a 'biggie' when it comes to genetic mutation, the reoprt rightly points out that depression and hopelessness steming from unfounded fears of shortened life spans led to far more ill health than the exposure did, hysteria and media exageration killed more than the accident.

So your trying to say that the huge rises in cancers case's, kids born with deformities etc etc, around the Chernobyl area after the accident is just because mothers decided not to have their deformed kids aborted?
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
Well yes.

Huge rise in cancers always has to be read in context, cancer is VERY rare in the young and a jump from 15-20 would be considered huge, how many extra cancers were there?

As for diabetes, thats like the oldest moan in the book, take any town in the country, tell them they've been exposed to some unknown substance and that theyshould have full medical tests, which of course is what the people near the site had, and you would get a big jump in diabetes, cos most people live without knowing they have it, getting diabetes from radiation exposure is very unlikely, but getting an increase in normallevels by testing everyone is very likely.
 

Fianno

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
148
radiation levels just above background levels is not true, radiation in soil which crops are grown on is enough to give nasty doses of radiation sickness, and cancer with prolonged exposure.
 

Fianno

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
148
Job said:
take any town in the country, tell them they've been exposed to some unknown substance and that theyshould have full medical tests, which of course is what the people near the site had, and you would get a big jump in diabetes
The area we work with is the gomel region of Belarus (chernobyl is in the ukraine next to it) gomel region extends from between 30 to 150 miles from the chernobyl reactor.

Winds carrying radioactive material dropped 70% of the fallout onto belarus, and its not just the gomel area that is affected. so your reasoning that the reason cancer rates among local ppl will rise because they are the only ones being tested doesnt stand in this case as radioactive iodine fell over 80% of Belarus.

the global average for thyroid cancer is 1 to 2 per million, whereas in belarus the number is steadily increasing with figures atm around 125 per million children, and thyroid cancer is almost unheard of in children.

56 may have died initially from the blast due to high exposure, or over the following months/years, but not including the 1000's of people dying from cancer doesnt show the full extent of the problem.

and to say that the reason there is so many deformed children is due to mothers not being able to hide the numbers effectivly as uk mothers who can afford abortions? that shows how ignorant you are. :puke:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom