Apparently WHO, UNSCEAR, ICRP, BEIR, and the editors of all of the world's scientific journals are part of a conspiracy to cover up the "work" of the "European Committee on Radiation Risk."
...Rather than use this opportunity to investigate the health effects of these exposures, the international radiation risk community has ignored the many reports of ill-health emerging from the contaminated territories. International and National bodies (e.g. ICRP, UNSCEAR, BEIR, WHO), whose remit is the evaluation of ionising radiation effects on health, have glossed over, marginalized, ignored or denied the existence of the terrible consequences of the Chernobyl fallout. Research papers have been excluded from official reports. Cries for help have been dismissed as due to ‘Radiophobia’.
Research into these effects has been mainly published in Russian language journals; these valuable contributions have (perhaps purposely) rarely been translated into English. To do so would have been fatal to the nuclear industry which routinely discharges the same radioactive substances into the environment under license...
http://www.euradcom.org/publications/chernobyleflyer.pdfPersonally, a member of the Board of Directors, and as a Past President, General Secretary, Chief Scientific Officer and Director of Hoagie Buying for the "International Board of Scientific Organizations for the Rationalization of 5 Million Annual Biomass Fatalities" I know how these things can get.
In my attempt to publicize the fact that 5 million people died last year from burning wood, dung, and garbage, I have routinely encountered the fact that the
only energy deaths that count are deaths from Chernobyl.
I suspect that it has something to do with intellectual honesty, but I can't be sure.
The World Health Organization - as part of the international conspiracy to pretend that Chernobyl deaths are
not the only deaths that count - has noted that biomass deaths will rise to 8 million per year by 2030. By then of course, we will
still be talking about how many people died at Chernobyl. Personally I think people who are dying from Chernobyl risk having their deaths resulting from old age unless they hurry up, not that I'm suggesting that they should hurry up. They should however keep in mind that if they die of old age and live long life spans this will negatively impact the anti-nuclear movement. Nothing could be worse than that and they really should get their priorities straight.
Since Chernobyl, the number of deaths associated with biomass burning has exceeded the number of deaths attributed to Stalin's rule, and still, I can't give anyone to give a fuck.
Maybe I should write the Committee on Radiation Risk and ask them for marketing help. Whattaya think.
By the way, the depopulated country of Ukraine put two new reactors on line in the last two years and continues to operate 15 others and has ordered two others. I would guess that the Ukrainians, in whose country the Chernobyl reactors(s) exist, and who parenthetically suffered 4,300 coal mining deaths since 1991, doesn't give a fuck what the "European Committee on Radiation Paranoia, whoops, I mean Risk" thinks.
Belarus, the
other country most effected by Chernobyl has also announced an intention to build new nuclear power plants, even though everyone in the country was killed by Chernobyl.
Russia, which also doesn't give a fuck what the "The European Committee on Radiation Risk" thinks - and which has ready access to the journals written in Russian that the Committee has translated into French, English, Japanese, Etruscan, Old English and certain old Frisian dialects - has three reactors under construction, 8 on order, and 18 under discussion. This is true even though
they own all that natural gas that Europe feels it should be able to buy.
Lithuania in alliance with its neighbors is also discussing a new reactor.
Bulgaria announced last week that it is awarding the construction contract for its new reactor to
Russia.
I think the committee's contention that a "true" analysis of deaths from Chernobyl would
end the nuclear energy industry immediately is a little bit over-confident, but then again, one cannot expect these people to make sober and rational analyses of cause and effect. After all, hundreds of millions of people have been killed in connection with activities related to fossil fuels in the last century and nobody is doing
anything to shut that industry down. In fact there are many people here lobbying to continue it while we all await the grand renewable future, four million deaths per year notwithstanding. In fact the "European Committee on Radiation Risk" doesn't even acknowledge that those deaths
occurred. One wonders continuously how stupid and fraudulent the anti-nuclear movement can get, but there seems to be
no limit. It really doesn't matter anymore though. It's not like nuclear power is being shut down. Nobody apparently gives a flying fuck what these people represent.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
