Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 49 posts

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#21

Post by industriousthou »

I'm intrigued by the mention of farmers growing crops in contaminated areas. Presumably the soil has detectable levels of radioactive isotopes, but is there any evidence that this is taken up into the crops themselves? Same with the harvesting of fish or fungi in these zones... is there evidence that they contain harmful contaminants? If so, would they be medically significant?

The essay seems to imply that this stuff is irresponsible, but doesn't really delve into specifics.

Full disclosure: I've done a lot of construction work in the nuclear power industry, so I'm pretty familiar with radiation, contamination, and their effects. A lot of contamination events result in exposure that is statistically insignificant (e.g. eating a banana would result in more exposure), but there are certainly more harmful forms. My admittedly limited understanding is that a lot of the areas surrounding Chernobyl have detectable, but not really harmful levels of radiation.

I'm just a layman, so I'm hoping more informed folks can fill me in!

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#23

Post by Loughla »

industriousthou wrote: post #21

I'm intrigued by the mention of farmers growing crops in contaminated areas. Presumably the soil has detectable levels of radioactive isotopes, but is there any evidence that this is taken up into the crops themselves? Same with the harvesting of fish or fungi in these zones... is there evidence that they contain harmful contaminants? If so, would they be medically significant? The essay seems to imply that this stuf…

There was a documentary on either PBS or NPR in the last year or so specifically about harvesting plants and fungi in the disaster area. I can't find it now, but the overall idea was that it would be a really bad idea to eat meat, worse to eat the plants and grains, and just an overall terrible idea to eat the fungus. This: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_hunting#Radiation

Is the only thing I could find regarding mushrooms specifically. I wish I could find that documentary. Essentially, mushrooms are really good at accumulating radioactive particles through their mycelium.

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#24

Post by lampe3 »

gus_massa wrote: post #13
lampe3 wrote: post #4

here i'am ! Because of chernobyl I was born 2 months to early. I had luck on the same day there where children born with 3 hands or other deformation.

Do you have a link to an article about the children with three hands? It's an unusual deformation in newborns, but I think it's not related to radiation. Radiation is bad and is especially bad for small children and unborn children, but it can produce only certain types of deformations. The number of hands in a baby is fixed after the 4th week after fertilization. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_development…

no that's what i was told.

A little bit more about me: I was born in August 1986 in Grudziądz, Poland. I was 2 months to early.

I had to be revived 3 times after i was born. usually they tried only twice. I was told that by a Nurse who begged the Doctor to try it once more. I know all that because years later I thanked her with flowers. She and my mum told me some stories. They dont have a source or article about that. They are just stories.

there were more miscarriage then normal since April 1986. She told me that some children were horrible deformed and that she was happy for every child they could save.

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#25

Post by lampe3 »

salgernon wrote: post #12
rasz_pl wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children with deformations are born every day.

I feel like you're looping the conversation, since that sentiment was expressed and dismissed in the article. So, should financial support be withdrawn for Chernobyl cleanup / support?

to clarify That is what i was told. For more info here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10131797

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#26

Post by lampe3 »

huhtenberg wrote: post #22
lampe3 wrote: post #4

here i'am ! Because of chernobyl I was born 2 months to early. I had luck on the same day there where children born with 3 hands or other deformation.

> with 3 hands I really hope that's just some morbid humor.

to clarify That is what i was told. For more info here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10131797

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#27

Post by industriousthou »

Loughla wrote: post #23
industriousthou wrote: post #21

I'm intrigued by the mention of farmers growing crops in contaminated areas. Presumably the soil has detectable levels of radioactive isotopes, but is there any evidence that this is taken up into the crops themselves? Same with the harvesting of fish or fungi in these zones... is there evidence that they contain harmful contaminants? If so, would they be medically significant? The essay seems to imply that this stuf…

There was a documentary on either PBS or NPR in the last year or so specifically about harvesting plants and fungi in the disaster area. I can't find it now, but the overall idea was that it would be a really bad idea to eat meat, worse to eat the plants and grains, and just an overall terrible idea to eat the fungus. This: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_hunting#Radiation Is the only thing I could find regard…

Wow, the uptake of caesium-137 in mushrooms was something I was not aware of. That's really interesting, as I thought it was something that mostly just bio-accumulated in higher-order predators. I might just be mixing it up with mercury though.

Thanks for the response!

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#28

Post by paulmd »

rasz_pl wrote: post #9

Where are they? In the scaremongering imagination of pop writers and lobbying scientists. Last time I checked there was a <3% leukaemia bump after 'the worst nuclear disaster in the world'.

The comparisons of Fukushima to Chernobyl really got my goat, personally. Despite the fact that fuel rods melted in both cases (thus both were "meltdowns"), there is an extraordinary difference between fuel rods overheating in a cooling pond and explosive breach of a critical reactor in a runaway condition. It's like classifying a campfire and the Hindenburg together because both are combustion - both can certainly burn you, but they're fundamentally dislike in intensity, scale, and kind.

Most of the really nasty stuff (high-level actinide waste) is highly radioactive because it decays so quickly. After the reactor is shut down and the fuel rods are removed, all that stuff is gone, whereas breach of a critical reactor results in the release of that stuff. The byproducts of a fuel fire is stuff like radioiodine and radiocaesium - it's not healthy by any means, if ingested it will elevate the risk of cancer over the long term, but it's not instadeath like actinide waste.

"What is expected to happen in Fukushima" is nothing like what happened to Chernobyl. A couple years later people are moving back, and it's perfectly safe to do so after some minimal decontamination efforts.

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#29

Post by rdtsc »

I remember the day it was announced. We were sitting with my dad watching evening news.

The news was almost over and just in passing they quickly mentioned there was "a malfunction" at the Chernobyl power plant. They showed a quick picture of some smoke rising. And that's it. Nothing more. It was like they were announcing about how the local sports team won a medal or something.

My dad said, yeah this is not good.

We didn't live too close but we were a bit downwind. The only thing I remember then was that my mom's flowers on the balcony outside died. It was probably not related now that I think about it, but she believed it was. People didn't know what to believe. They obviously didn't trust the official channels.

There was a lot of fear mongering and people making up stories.

It got worse later when people from Chernobyl were sent to live in other cities. Unbelievably, they carried a stigma! People would shun them, as if those people were carrying a disease or were somehow responsible for it. I can't even imagine being uprooted from your home, irradiated with an unknown dose, sent to live in a new city starting with nothing, and then have your new neighbors and coworkers shun you as well.

But that's not all. At some point they called for volunteers. Basically people to help clear up the mess. They promised money and free apartments for those that went. Many went but, when they came back they didn't enjoy the apartments too much longer because they got cancer.

Anyway just a few personal anecdotes if anyone is interested.

Re: Where Are Chernobyl’s Children?

#30

Post by vasilipupkin »

hga wrote: post #19
vasilipupkin wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the link: Rates were 1.2 times higher after the accident compared to the pre-accident period among the population living in territories with a level of radioactive pollution exceeding 555 kBq per m2

We're talking about absolute numbers so small that we can't have much confidence in the cause ( http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/1/125.full ): Between 1986 and 1996 a total of 21 cases of leukaemia were observed in Zhitomir occurring among children born during 1986. A total of eight cases were observed in the largely uncontaminated Poltava region.

yes, but we can bolster our confidence somewhat because we know radiation causes leukemia. it's not a statistical association, but causual
Post reply on HN