Comments on: Revisiting Chernobyl http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/revisiting-chernobyl.html Science Blog from Freelance Science Writer David Bradley Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:14:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Aladar Stolmar http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/revisiting-chernobyl.html/comment-page-1#comment-627796 Aladar Stolmar Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:46:15 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/?p=2042#comment-627796 The coverup continues and I had enogh of silence. I published My Chernobyl about the US Chernobyl investigation and the Soviet situation leading to the accident because the unsafe RBMKs are still in operation in Russia. To have a nuclear power revival Russia has to shut them down. http://www.amazon.com/My-Chernobyl-What%C2%92s-Wrong-Nuclear/dp/1439220174/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1233232676&sr=1-1 The coverup continues and I had enogh of silence.
I published My Chernobyl about the US Chernobyl investigation and the Soviet situation leading to the accident because the unsafe RBMKs are still in operation in Russia.

To have a nuclear power revival Russia has to shut them down.

http://www.amazon.com/My-Chernobyl-What%C2%92s-Wrong-Nuclear/dp/1439220174/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1233232676&sr=1-1

]]> By: Sundeep http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/revisiting-chernobyl.html/comment-page-1#comment-537293 Sundeep Sat, 20 Sep 2008 02:21:57 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/?p=2042#comment-537293 And, I thought radio-anxiety was what caused Howard Stern to switch to Sirius. Boy, is my face neon green! And, I thought radio-anxiety was what caused Howard Stern to switch to Sirius. Boy, is my face neon green!

]]> By: Mark http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/revisiting-chernobyl.html/comment-page-1#comment-536900 Mark Fri, 19 Sep 2008 17:07:04 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/?p=2042#comment-536900 I think it would be helpful if these organizations also provided counts of the number of people who may have died as a result of radiation from Chernobyl. When people die today (or even in the last 10-20 years), it is impossible to say with 100% certainty that these people died as a direct result of radiation from Chernobyl. However, it is also impossible to say with 100% certainty that these people did NOT die as a direct result of radiation from Chernobyl. I know people who used to live in Pripyat who are very ill. I hate to think they are being ignored or their claims discounted merely due to the Chernobyl accident having occurred 22 years ago. I personally visited the Chernobyl area for two days in June 2006 with a friend and former resident of Pripyat. We toured the Chernobyl Plant (including the Reactor 4 control room), several of the abandoned villages, and Pripyat. I have posted a photo journal of my trip at: <a href="http://www.chernobylee.com/articles/chernobyl/my-journey-to-chernobyl-1.php" rel="nofollow">My Journey to Chernobyl: 20 Years After the Disaster</a> I think it would be helpful if these organizations also provided counts of the number of people who may have died as a result of radiation from Chernobyl. When people die today (or even in the last 10-20 years), it is impossible to say with 100% certainty that these people died as a direct result of radiation from Chernobyl. However, it is also impossible to say with 100% certainty that these people did NOT die as a direct result of radiation from Chernobyl.

I know people who used to live in Pripyat who are very ill. I hate to think they are being ignored or their claims discounted merely due to the Chernobyl accident having occurred 22 years ago.

I personally visited the Chernobyl area for two days in June 2006 with a friend and former resident of Pripyat. We toured the Chernobyl Plant (including the Reactor 4 control room), several of the abandoned villages, and Pripyat. I have posted a photo journal of my trip at:

My Journey to Chernobyl: 20 Years After the Disaster

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/revisiting-chernobyl.html/comment-page-1#comment-536801 David Bradley Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:47:46 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/?p=2042#comment-536801 Yes, but you know what they meant by that statement. But, to be pedantic it's death that's fatal not life. Life is terminal, but not fatal. Yes, but you know what they meant by that statement. But, to be pedantic it’s death that’s fatal not life. Life is terminal, but not fatal.

]]> By: Chemgeek http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/revisiting-chernobyl.html/comment-page-1#comment-536771 Chemgeek Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:11:04 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/?p=2042#comment-536771 "According to the WHO, some 4000 people - emergency workers and residents - died or could die in the future because of Chernobyl." Life is 100% fatal. “According to the WHO, some 4000 people – emergency workers and residents – died or could die in the future because of Chernobyl.”

Life is 100% fatal.

]]>