Overview of Different Information about Acute Radiation Syndrome among
Inhabitants around Chernobyl
Alla YAROSHINSKAYA
Alla Yaroshinskaya Charity Fund
20/2 Beresnevskaya naberezhnaya, Moscow 103790, Russia
Tel: +7-095-959-0914 e-mail: yaro@glas.apc.org
the following: the population has experienced no healthchanges and will not experience any. This political
diagnosis was made considering the ideologicalconflict between totalitarianism and democracy. It did
not contain a shred of truth. The overall concealment of
truth on radioactively contaminated areas had lasted forthree years — till the first Congress of People's
Deputies of the USSR. The lies of both the authorities
and the medical officials were at first disclosed byspeeches of the deputies, acting on behalf of theaffected territories' electorate, of the Gorbachev period,and by thefirst open hearings at the parliament session
on the catastrophe at the ChNPP and its consequences
for human health and the environment.
The official medical documents from my archive
allow to trace easily the dynamics of changes in theposition of "fathers" of the notorious soviet 35-remconcept for safe living of the population in the affected
territories. Briefly, the essence of this concept lies in abelief that a person may receive 35 rem over 70 years
without health disorders. A month after the accident
this "ceiling" was increased to 70 rem over 70 years,
and several months later was decreased to 50 rem over
70 years, then to 35 rem. The same official scientists —L.A.Ilyin, E.I.Chazov and A.KGuskova had stated intheir book, written before the Chernobyl accident in
1982, that the threshold is 25 rem over lifetime. Hence,
we can conclude the "scientific" nature of thementioned official concept.
The first open report under the title"Radio-contamination Patterns and Possible HealthConsequences of the Accident at the Chernobyl
Nuclear Power Station" (70 pages typescript) waspresented by Academician L.A.Ilyin at the General
Session of the Academy of Medical Sciences of the
USSR in Moscow, which took place on the 21st-23rd of
March 1989 [1]. An important remarkable thing: thisopen report had taken place just on the eve of the first
Congress of the People's Deputies of the USSR (theCongress opened on the 25th of May 1989). The
Moscow authorities had no doubts that this question
was going to be raised by deputies at the Congress, thus
they decided to avoid the blow in advance.
Although the report was made by L.A.Ilyin, it was
signed by 23 official medical celebrities from Russia,
the Ukraine, Byelorussia. In the Soviet Union,
responsibility has always been collective and never

The Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe has divided
scientists of the world, studying the consequences of its
impact on the health of people, into two opposed, attimes irreconcilable blocks. The first block generallycomprises representatives of medical officials in thesoviet and post-soviet society. They have been
concealing the truth from the soviet and the world
public for years. This group advocates the point of view
that, except for firemen and several staff members whodied at the time of the catastrophe, the Chernobyl
accident has produced no practical impact on humanhealth and will not do any such effect also in future. The
second block consists basically of independentscientists. They are anxious about the facts ofconcealment of the truth on actual radiation doses,
received by inhabitants of the areas around theChernobyl NPP (ChNPP), as well as about impacts oflow radiation dose on human health. Scientists of thesecond block are convinced that doses received by the
population in the first days and months after thecatastrophe at the ChNPP have played and will playsignificantly negative roles in worsening of humanhealth years after the accident. The data on these doses
have been deliberately concealed by the authorities
from both the sufferers and the public. This fact has
been already proven (by the Procurator General of the
Ukraine as well).
I have official and unofficial documents in myChernobyl archive, which are demonstrating two
approaching ways to the problems of radiologicalconsequences due to the Chernobyl catastrophe. I
would like to emphasise that these documents havenever been published anywhere.
In searching the answer to the question about theacute radiation syndrome among inhabitants in theareas around the Chernobyl NPP in the first weeks andmonths after the catastrophe, we will compare
positions, arguments and conclusions of two blocks
based on the facts presented in these documents.

What has been publicly said about risks ofirradiation by soviet medical officials?
Official position of the party leaders of the Soviet
Union on the problem about the scale of the catastrophe
at the ChNPP and its impact on human health has been
known from the party press. Its main conclusion was114

as a Result of the Accident at the ChNPP", the authors
give, by means of the specified approaches, their"predictions for three levels of exposure of the whole
population and separately for children aged 0-7 years at
the time of the accident: 1) for 39 districts of 9 regions
where the levels of exposure were relatively high (total
population about 1.5 million, including 158,000
children); 2) for the entire population of these regions(15.6 million, including 1.666 million children aged 0-7
years); and 3) for the population of the central regionsof the European part of the USSR (75 million,
including 8 million children aged 0-7 years)". For the
first time after the catastrophe at the ChNPP these data
have been opened to the public. Bear in mind that thereport was made in 1989, three years after thecatastrophe had happened.
What are the official prognoses? "... according to
the linear (non-threshold) hypothesis, the projected
number of malignant thyroid tumour among children
aged 0-7 years is around 90 in the whole period of 30
years following the accident. This includes about 10
projected fatal cases." For the whole population ofthese districts (1.5 million) a possible 200 excess casesof malignant tumour over the 30 years period werepredicted without correction of the specified
hypothesis.
Investigation of the possible consequences ofirradiation of thyroid for the whole population in therelevant regions (9 regions — A.Ya.) and, in the firstplace Kiev, Gomel, Bryansk and Zhitomir regions
shows that malignant tumour may amount to 3.3*102,
including 3*101 incurable cases." The prediction for the
population of the Central regions of the European partof the USSR, including the whole territory of the
Ukraine, Byelorussia, Moldavia and several central
regions of the RSFSR (now Russian Federation ) — 75
million people, including 8 million children aged 0-7
years — are following. "The projected numbers of
thyroid malignant tumour caused by radiation in the 30
years following the accident are as follows: incurable
tumours in children — up to 20 and in the whole
population — up to 50; curable malignant tumours are
up to 170 and up to 400 cases, respectively."In the paragraph "Prediction of Possible Late
Effects of Whole Body Exposure in Various Groups of
the Population of the USSR as a Result of the Accident
at the ChNPP" of the report, the estimates of the
population irradiation are given. Here appears the
35-rem concept of the Ministry of Health of the USSR.
It is especially noted that for the population of the strict
control zones (SCZ) "the estimations of late effects was
based on the actual doses in the four years following theaccident and on the projected doses until 2060, thelatter having been calculated on the assumption that
restrictions on the use of home-grown products would
be lifted in the SCZs." Hence, two simple questions
arise. Firstly, the time of this report was three years, notfour, since the accident. If this is an error on the part ofbeen personal. This was more convenient and safe.
Many of the above-mentioned scientists still holdinfluential posts in science and, even 11 years after thecatastrophe, they continue to deny the obvious andproven facts about the impact of the Chernobyl
catastrophe on the health of the population.
In the paragraph "The Characteristics of Radiation
Exposure of the Population, and Theoretical Premises
for Prediction of Late Radiological Consequences" ofthe report, it was noted that "thyroid irradiation doses asa result of radioiodine incorporation were delivered
over a comparatively short period — two to threemonths after the accident. .... Immediately after theaccident, the Ministry of Health of the USSR
implemented a previously composed emergency
regulation on the maximum acceptable concentration of
131
I in milk (3,700 Bql-1), corresponding to a radiationdose to thyroid of children of 0.3 Sv (30 rem).
Preliminary assessments suggest that, due to a series ofmeasures recommended by the Ministry of Health of
the USSR to protect the population from radiation in
the early phase, and especially to prevent or reduceradioiodine intake by the human body, .... probableradiation doses were on average by 50% and in someplaces by 80% lower than they would have been had theprotective measures not been taken." The authors of thereport state that "absorbed doses were calculated bycomputer for inhabitants of each settlement in the strict
control zones for different times after the accident,
including prediction of radiation burden in humans up
to the year 2060." The authors specify that, although thewidely accepted hypothesis of non-threshold impact ofradiation on human health "exaggerates the actual riskof late effects", they have used this approach, "realising
its limitation for extrapolation and a need for prudent
interpretation of the results obtained." So, what are thelimitations that the authors bear in mind? In their report,
they state that "one of the main objections (to the
non-threshold hypothesis — A.Ya.) is that the values ofrisk factors e.g. probabilities of effect per unit of dose,
have in fact been deduced from observations at highdoses and high dose rates." And further on: "Nostochastic effects of somatic or genetic nature havebeen observed in the low dose range." These statements
are at least strange even for a non-specialist inradiobiology, because at that time the results of studies
on impact of low radiation doses on human health havebeen already published by such world-known scientists
as John Gofman, Rosalie Bertell, Ralph Greyb, Petko,
etc. Furthermore, one should consider that the United
Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Radiation, which "legitimatised" on international scale
the non-threshold (not the threshold) concept of low
radiation doses impact on human health, had followed
scientific, not emotional estimates.
In the paragraph "The Prediction of Possible
Stochastic Effects in Different Groups of the
Population of the USSR after Exposure of the Thyroid115

irradiation dose of 62 percent of the population who
were subject to medical examination was found to be 1
to 5 rem. Out of 1.5 million people residing in areas
most contaminated with radioiodine, including 160
thousand children, thyroid irradiation dose of 87
percent of adults and 48 percent of children was at most
30 rem. Of 17 percent of children the dose amounted to
100 rem."the authors, it is very symptomatic. Secondly, WHO
and WHEN had ACTUALLY evaluated the doses
received by the population in the first 2-3 months? I
know very well about the efforts made by officials in
the Narodichi district of the Zhitomir region in order toeliminate primary medical documents representing the
ACTUAL doses. Instead, medical staffs were ordered
to register understated dose values. Are these"ACTUAL" dose estimates worth of belief? Of thesame nature are the official secret documents of the
Academy of Medical Sciences of the USSR from myarchive. According to these documents, even autopsiesof those who died after the accident, including children,
have not been carried out in the strict control zone in
Zhitomir region. However, if the authors of the report
are confident in what they say, why were these "actual
doses" not accessible, and are still not accessible foranalysis not only to common people interested in these
problems, but also to doctors of medicine,radiobiology?
The conclusion, drawn by the authors in theprediction of the future of the population of the strict
control zones, is astonishing: "Despite a trend forincrease in spontaneous morbidity and mortality ofmalignant neoplasm, which is registered in data fromall over the USSR, values of these parameters are
assumed to remain stable throughout the investigated
70 years period. Hence, ratios of increase in the numberof excess fatal tumours over their spontaneous level canonly be corrected to their decrease." This idea isrepeated in the general conclusion: "The data presented
in this report provide evidence that the predicted levelsof the discussed radiogenic effects as a result of theaccident at the Chernobyl NPP, in the majority of cases
including the population in the strict control zones, will
likely be in the range of values which are less thanstandard deviations of spontaneous levels of thecorresponding pathology." In other words, among the
population and, in the first place, among the population
residing in the strict control zones and being exposed toirradiation every day since the catastrophe at the
ChNPP, the authors say, there will be less fatal cases of
induced cancers than among the population of all other
territories. Speaking of thyroid tumour, the authors
conclude that "excess incidence of radiogenic tumourof this organ may be noticeable." In short, it may or may
not be noticeable. Today, only 11 years, instead of 30
years, since the catastrophe at the ChNPP, it is obvious
what these collective soviet prediction are worth.
A year later, at the parliament sessions in theSupreme Soviet of the USSR, the same academician
L.A.Ilyin told deputies that "1 million 600 thousandchildren have received doses that are causing ourworries; we need to decide what is to be done further."
In 1990 in the meeting of the Supreme Soviet of the
USSR, the Chairman of the Government Commission
on Liquidation of the Consequences of the Accident at
the Chernobyl NPP, V.Ch.Doguzhiev said [2]: "... theWhat have soviet medical officials been saying
about radiation dose to the public?
As I was sorting my Chernobyl archive, whichaccumulated a great deal of various materials, I cameacross a very interesting document that may become asensation. Over 11 years after the catastrophe at
Chernobyl, many different secret official documents
have been published (by me, as well). However, I haveseen nothing of the kind so far. FOR THE FIRST TIME
concrete and ACTUAL doses, received by people in thefirst months after the catastrophe at the CNNP, areconcerned.
On the 26th of May 1987 the Minister of Health of
the Ukrainian SSR, A.E.Romanenko reported a letter
N428c "On course of implementation of the decreeN527-dsp of the Ministry of Health of the USSR fromthe 13.04.1987" to the Minister of Health of the USSR,
E.I.Chazov [3]. With stamps of "Secret" and "No rightfor publication" of the CPSU (Communist Party of theSoviet Union) Central Committee, there was noted:"215 thousand inhabitants, including 74.6 thousandchildren, reside in the districts with increased radiationlevels of the Kiev, Zhitomir and Chernigov regions. ....
39.6 thousand persons, that have not been registeredpreviously, were found ill. In cases of different somatic
disorders, patients are subject to continuous
observation, hospital and out-patient treatment. The
total number of hospitalised persons over the year is
20.2 thousand persons, including 6 thousand children."
And now — attention: "IN THE FIRST MONTHS
AFTER THE ACCIDENT AT THE ChNPP
DOSIMETRIC MEASUREMENTS OF THYROID
GLAND OF ALL CHILDREN HAVE BEEN
CONDUCTED. THE CONTENT OF IODINE
RADIONUCLIDES, EXCEEDING 500 REM WAS
FOUND AMONG 2.6 THOUSAND CHILDREN(3.4%)." Could it be that the group of soviet scientists,
who signed the above-mentioned report, as well as
Academician L.A.Ilyin, did not know about these
literally deadly facts? In that case, how is it possible toconsider the estimates ofradiation doses andpredictions of their effects, presented in the 70 pages of
the report on the session of the Academy of Medical
Sciences of the USSR, to be scientific?
It is still unknown to the public how many otherchildren have received thyroid irradiation less than 500
rem. The Minister of Health, E.I.Chazov in his
memorandum [4] to the CPSU Central Committee on
the 16th of November 1987 N3634s, with stamps of116

protocols indicate that the Politburo had urgently
revised the maximum acceptable doses and increased
them by several times. Just then all the hospitalised—according to the protocols their number was really
15,000 people — have been found healthy anddischarged. Is this what Professor Vorob'ev means? In
this case, contrariwise, his confession is just anotherindirect acknowledgement of the fact thatapproximately 15 thousand people have received ARS
during the first weeks and months, and only the special
regulation issued by the Politburo in concordance withthe court medics had helped the soviet government not
only for concealing this fact, but also not to hospitalise
new victims of the catastrophe by the new dose limits.
Further in his article the professor seems tocontradict himself. He reports that "In 40% of
examined inhabitants of the Chernobyl region no
irradiation doses have been found, 50% have received
50 rad, and more than 5% have received a dose of 50-80
rad. In the last group a marked increase in tumour
incidence may be expected. 2% of inhabitants in thecontaminated districts... have been irradiated with adose of more than 100 rad. Among liquidators, thisdose group is even larger." Vorob'ev also notes in his
article: "In some persons in Gomel and Bryansk
regions, such changes in some cells have been foundthat indicate the effects of highly intensive radiation! A
discrepancy is obvious: the whole body dose was 30-50
rad, while the exposure of some cells was about 1000
rad and more." The professor had reported this facts to
the Ministry of Health Care and the Academy ofMedical Sciences of the USSR, but had received noanswer to his scientific assumptions.
In 1989 the newspaper, Moscow News invited
several people's deputies (the author of this report aswell) to a round table on consequences of thecatastrophe at the Chernobyl nuclear plant [8]. A
deputy from Byelorussia Ales' Adamovich (deceased)
reported: "... autopsies of people, who had died of otherdiseases, for example from ischemia, revealed that theirlungs — this was registered by Professor E.Petryaev —contained enormous amounts of so-called "hotparticles". Up to 15 thousand! 2 thousand of suchparticles are enough for cancer!" As is noted in the
manuscript [9], which was sent from Israel to me by aformer soviet nuclear physicist, Sergey Titkin, such
effects of incorporation of solid particles has been
known long ago — tobacco smoke, coal dust, silica (atgreat amounts causing silicosis). In the cases ofChernobyl, particles of reactor fuel that have been in
the reactor, incorporated into lungs and have rigidly
stuck to the lung tissue are under consideration.
In the information of the USSR State Committee on
the Utilisation of Atomic Energy, compiled for the
IAEA Experts Meeting in Vienna on the 25-29 August
1986 "The Accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power
Plant and its Consequences [10]", the following isreported about the results of gamma-spectrometric"Secret" and "No right for publication" of the CPSU
Central Committee, reports: "By 30.09.1987, 620,016
people are subject to hospital observation. 5,213 people
have been hospitalised for thorough medical
examination and specifying of diagnoses established,
but not related to radiation effects, during hospital
examination." It is not known whether the Minister hadtaken into account 2.6 thousand children in the
Ukrainian radiation zone with more than 500 rem of
thyroid irradiation. If he had, how could he explain thatthese truly crazy doses, unbelievable not only forchildren but also for adults, was not related to theimpacts of irradiation? The most reliable explanation,from my point of view, is that the CPSU Central
Committee wanted to hear their own "truth". And theMinister had not failed to present it.
In the draft of the decree of CPSU Central
Committee "On implementation of the resolution of the
XXVIII Congress of the CPSU "On political estimationof the catastrophe at the Chernobyl NPP and the courseof elimination of its consequences", dated the 28th ofDecember 1990, reported by the Secretariat of the
CPSU Central Committee to the General Secretary of
the CPSU Central Committee, V.A.Ivashko, it wasnoted [5]: "The consequences of the accident continue
to produce effect on birth-rate and life-span. Thus, overthe past 4 years, birth-rate in the Belorussian SSR has
decreased by 10 percent; malignant tumour mortality
has increased. It has increased by more than 19 percent
in Mogilev and Gomel regions." These conclusions of
the CPSU Central Committee have nothing in common
with the optimistic conclusions on estimations of doses,
presented in the before-mentioned report, signed by 23
scientists of the Academy of Medical Sciences of the
USSR a year earlier.
This means that the following is quite real: theactual estimates of the doses received in the first 2-3
months after the catastrophe at the Chernobyl nuclear
plant are unknown to the public even after 11 years.
Some light was cast upon the classifying anddistortion of actual doses by an Academician of the
Academy of Medical Sciences of the USSR, thedirector of the All-Union Scientific HaematologicalCentre, Professor A.I.Vorob'ev. He wrote an article"Why Soviet Radiation is the Safest" in Moscow News
dated 18th of August of 1991 [6]. The author reported
that "in the first days 15,000 people have been
mistakenly hospitalised in the Ukraine because there
were no specialists in the accident area. However, on
the 2nd of May 1986, an instruction on diagnosing acuteradiation syndrome (ARS) was published, and then all
the people hospitalised by mistake have beendischarged from the hospitals." This discharge suggests
some affairs to be considered and concluded. In mybook "Chernobyl: Top Secret [7]" I have published 40
secret protocols of the Operative Group of the CPSU
Central Committee Politburo on liquidation ofconsequences of the accident at the ChNPP. These117

level has been 1 to 10 R/h. (Data that I have verified showthat the radiation level in Narodichi of the Zhitomir
region in the first days was 3 R/h, although Narodichi islocated at 80 km from the ChNPP — A.Ya.). The
relationship between the radiation level and the distancefrom the point of the explosion is very complex (winddirection, rain from the radioactive cloud and many otherfactors play important roles). However, the averageradiation level is assumed to be inversely proportional tosquare of the distance, i.e., the radiation is four times lessas the distance becomes two times larger (from the pointof the explosion).
The maximum radiation level that I have personallymeasured in Kiev in late May (1986 — A.Ya.) was
0.0018 R/h. I measured it with a standard army device,taken from a class of Civil Defence. According to themeasurements of my acquaintances in early May in Kiev,
the radiation level amounted to 0.003 R/h. The distancefrom the exploded reactor to Kiev is about 130 km, and to
Pripyat is about 5 km.
Thus, the average radiation level in the town Pripyat
must have been (130:5)2=676 times higher, i.e. about 2
R/h. Well, the values of 1 to 10 R/h are quite plausible for
Pripyat.
The evacuation had begun only 36 hours after the
explosion. Hence, the inhabitants of Pripyat havereceived a dose of 36 to 360 R. On the 26th of April they
were 45 thousand people. How many of them are still
alive? I do not know. (The manuscript of the article isdated May 1987 — A.Ya.) I know that approximately 15
thousand have died out of those who were being brought
to the Kiev hospitals at nights .... I can say only thefollowing: I was not collecting panic rumours. All
information presented in this article has been obtained
directly from those who worked on liquidation of theconsequences of the catastrophe: transport drivers,
hospital staffs, military personnel from the surrounding
and many others.
No attempt had been made to treat the people that werebrought to Kiev. There was no such possibility. It was
impossible to obtain blood for transfusion and marrow
for transplantation to several thousands of people. Thesepatients were lying not only in radiological departments,
but also in the wards, in the corridor, and in the basementof the hospital. In one of the hospitals, even a part ofmorgue was allocated for this purpose.
These 15 thousand people died from acute radiation
syndrome."

analysis of radiation, emitted from the body of those
who suffered from the accident: "practically, in all
patients, without evident relation to the presence or theseverity of ARS, uptake of a complex mixture of
nuclides, principally, isotopes of iodine, caesium,
zirconium, niobium, ruthenium into the body wasobserved." There is another mentioning aboutincorporation of radionuclides. Further: "Excess
fatality, related to the ChNPP accident discharge will
increase spontaneous mortality from cancer of theirradiated population by less than 2 percent. .... in thepresent stage, incorporation of radionuclides throughinhalation by inhabitants within the formed radioactive
tracks can be neglected in estimation of dose burdens."
It is also noted in this report that different radionuclides
were found in lungs of some of the deceased from acuteradiation syndrome after the catastrophe.
Obviously, a special study should be conducted inorder to evaluate the actual scale of the danger ofincorporated nuclear fuel dusts. From my own studies
and interviews with hundreds of people who were in theaffected zones immediately and several months after
the catastrophe, it becomes evident that the scale of theaccident was so enormous that ALL persons talked
about radioactive dust, scratchy feeling in the throat,
tractors lacking airtight, etc. People were associating
radionuclides deposited on the ground with dusts that
could be incorporated into their organism. They called
it radioactive dust. Apparently, no one considered theparticularity of so-called hot particles, penetrating into
the human organism and sometimes irradiating it
fatally. This is also one aspect of the problem of theradioactive contamination for inhabitants in the areas
around Chernobyl.

Missed lessons of Chernobyl
Igor Geraschenko, a specialist of nuclear physics,
which formerly lived in Kiev and lives in the West atpresent, has handed over to me a manuscript of his
article "Missed lessons of Chernobyl [11]". (It is
unknown if this article had been eventually published.)
From the point of view of unbelievable coincidences,
the article contains quite interesting facts. To make mypoint clear, I will go forth with rather a long quotation:"So what were the doses received by the people in thearea of the catastrophe? Nobody knows this for sure.
There have been almost no devices to measureradioactivity level in the area of the catastrophe. One of
my acquaintances, a captain of the MIA (Ministry ofInternal Affairs — A.Ya.) had spent a week in theencircle of the catastrophe area. He had no device formeasurement of radioactivity, and he does not know what
dose he had received. Transport drivers who worked forevacuation of the people had no measurement devices
either. Did this happen accidentally? By no means! It waseasier way to lie to one's own people and the trustfulworld public.
According to unverified data, in the town Pripyat (thenearest settlement to the nuclear station) the radioactivity

A surprising coincidence of different sources:
according to the secret protocols of the Operative
Group of the Politburo, approximately 15 thousandpeople have been hospitalised during the first weeks.
Academician A.I.Vorob'ev wrote in his article that 15
thousand people have been hospitalised by mistake and,after the medical staffs received the instruction for
ARS (acute radiation syndrome), the patients weredischarged. The witness by physicist, I.Geraschenko
mentions this number as well. With only one terrible
rectification: these people have died.
The further discussion of Geraschenko is alsointeresting:118

"Such number will not surprise an attentive reader. About
70 thousand people died in Hiroshima (only an
insignificant number of them died as a direct result of the
explosion — the majority died due to the consequencesof radioactive contamination), and in our case only 15
thousand by a discharge thousands of times larger.
Definitely, there have been much more victims. Firstly, I
mean only those who were mentioned in the data I haveobtained. Secondly, the consequences of irradiation are
long-term. Dozens and hundreds of thousands more will
die from cancer induced by radiation, but this is going tohappen later: the latent period can last for years."

thyroid of the Ukrainian children. According to theauthors, at present 2.4 million people, including morethan 500 thousand children under 14 years, are living in
the Ukrainian territory affected by the catastrophe at the
Chernobyl NPP. The most alarming, as is noted in thereport, is the fact that 150 thousand inhabitants havereceived thyroid irradiation doses by dozens or
hundreds of times higher than the acceptable level. In
particular, thyroid doses of 5.7 thousand children were
200 rad, and those of 7.8 thousand adults — higher than
500 rad [13]. At the same time, the establishedacceptable dose is 5 rad. In this group of the affected
population, 12 cases of malignant thyroid tumours inchildren have been registered only in 1991.
The experts note that diseases of respiratory anddigestive organs, endocrine and blood circulation
systems take a significant place in the structure ofillnesses of children in the radiocontaminated zone of
the Ukraine. As well, an increase in the number ofneoplasm has been noted.
Medical examination of 583 children of the firstclass of school in Kiev, has shown a retardation in bodydevelopment in a significant part of children in 1992 incomparison with 1982. Retardation is expressed moremarkedly among girls.
As the authors of the report state, the analysis ofrates of mortality from malignant neoplasm in the
population of the Ukraine residing in the territories
adjacent to the zone of the Chernobyl NPP for theperiods of 1980-1985 and 1986-1991 bears reliable
evidence of an increase in the mortality from cancer ofmammary gland, urinary organs and prostate.
Assessment of strontium-90 accumulation in theorganism of Belarussian citizens after the accident at
the ChNPP has shown that the evaluated absorbed
doses in red bone marrow turned out to be 2.5-3 times
higher than in the period before the accident. In 3
percent of the cases the doses have exceeded theaverage values by 4-8 times.
The Russian specialists note that iodine deficiency
in some regions of Belarus known for endemic goitre(there is a lot of areas characterised by anomalous
concentration of certain microelements, including
radionuclides present due to the accident discharge of
the ChNPP) had caused the maximum impact of acomplex of radiotoxic factors on developing thyroid
disorders. This may be a reason for more severe injury
of thyroid than expected on the basis of the known
dose-effect relationship.
The values of the plutonium concentration in hair of
inhabitants of the Gomel region has been an order ofmagnitude higher than in hair of residents of Minsk.
Medical examination of 902 children in Bragin,
Choiniki and Narovlya districts of the Gomel region
had shown that 218 of them suffer anemic syndrome.
Among them, goitre of the first degree was manifested
in 68.3 percent of girls and 52.6 percent of boys, goitreof the second degree in 24 and 18.2 percent,I.Geraschenko made the statement about the 15
thousands of deceased in an interview to the newspaper"New-York City Tribune", and in the hearings on theconsequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe in the US
Congress. He told that, instead of the "acute radiation
syndrome" diagnosis, "vegeto-vascular dystonia","vascular dystonia", etc., were diagnosed in the case ofpeople affected by the accident. This is already a
proven fact. In the medical records of the deceased,such words were written as "has undergone a course oftreatment", "needs no further treatment".

Recent status of the public health in the
territories affected by the catastrophe
A new concept of living in the affected territory has
been elaborated in the government of the RussianFederation, related with the radioactive contamination
as a result of the catastrophe at the Chernobyl NPP. In
this regard, the Ministry of the Environment of Russia
and the Ministry of Labour of Russia are studying moredeeply the health problems in 16 regions of the RussianFederation affected by the catastrophe. The fact is taken
into consideration that the majority of people residingin this territories have learned that they live in a zone ofradiation danger only 7 years after the catastrophe in
Chernobyl. It is noted in the report of specialists of the
Ministry of Labour of Russia and the Ministry of theEnvironment of the Russian Federation, M.S.Malikov
and O.Yu.Zitzer [12] that the Chernobyl catastrophe
has affected 138 administrative districts, 15 cities ofregion subordination, and more than 7,700 settlementswith a population of 2.7 million people. According to
the data of April 1995, the number of Russian citizens,the death of which is attributed to involvement inliquidation of the consequences of the Chernobyl
catastrophe, amounts to approximately 7 thousand. The
number of people, whose living standards haveworsened due to the catastrophe, or who have become
invalid due to this reason, amounts to approximately 20
thousand people.
In the report of the specialists of the Ministry ofLabour of Russia and the Ministry of the Environmentof the Russian Federation, an unexpected confirmation
was found of the facts in the before-mentioned secretletter of the Minister of Health of the Ukraine,
A.E.Romanenko to the Minister of Health of the USSR,
E.I.Chazov on high accumulation of radionuclides in119months after the explosion at Chernobyl. We can only
guess that these doses were significant, judging fromtheir effects years later.
Eleven years passed since the nuclear explosion in
Chernobyl. However, the public still do not havereliable information on the ACTUAL doses received by
the people affected by the Chernobyl radioactive tracks
in the first weeks and months after the gravest
anthropogenic catastrophe which had ever happened on
Earth. In the first place, the world scientific and thesemi-scientific nuclear community, which serve theworld's political establishment and are not inclined todisclose the truth, should bear the responsibility forthis. The disclosure of this truth may lead to a radical
change of nuclear contribution in the world powersystem. The interests of "moneybag" — the world
nuclear lobby — have been shown to be more
important than the interests of the whole worldcommunity. However, shall it always be this way?

respectively, and goitre of the third degree in 1.4
percent of children. A higher level of illnesses of bloodand hemopoietic organs, endocrine system, respiratoryorgans, digestive organs and an increase in the numberof neoplasm have been found in children from thecontrolled areas.
The similar situation is also observed in the children
living in the controlled areas of the Kiev, Zhitomir,
Cherkasy and Rovno regions in the Ukraine.
The Russian specialists are also concerned about
neonatal mortality during pregnancy and child-birth by
women living in the areas of increased radiation risk
after the catastrophe at the ChNPP. As it is noted, thismortality tends to increase. The rate of normalchild-birth has decreased to a significant extent. The
number of congenital anomalies of newborn is
growing. (There is a restricted laboratory in Zhitomir in
the Ukraine with anomalous newborn humans andanimals stored in alcohol that have been born after thecatastrophe at the ChNPP in the territory of Zhitomir).
In the period before the accident the rate of abnormalchild-birth (for 100 pregnancies) had been 9.6. Afterthe catastrophe this rate increased to 13.4. A significant
relation was found between this rate and dose burdensof women. It is noted that adaptability of newborn to theenvironmental conditions, i.e. increased radioactivity
as well, has decreased substantially in the first 6 years
after the accident.
Here it will be pertinent to return to the manuscriptof the Russian immigrant, physicist from Kiev, Igor
Geraschenko "Missed Lessons of Chernobyl” that washanded to me in England in 1991. He also mentions this
topic. He wrote: "There are other victims of Chernobyl— those who had never seen nothing. These arechildren killed before birth. After the explosion
physicians recommended pregnant women in Kiev andother places to do abortion. I know of several cases inwhich these forced abortions were made in the 6thmonth of pregnancy officially by doctors in
hospitals. .... over the last year (the year underconsideration is the first year after the catastrophe at the
ChNPP — A.Ya.) no less than 20 thousand pregnancies
have been aborted due to the Chernobyl catastrophe
only in Kiev. And how about the women evacuatedfrom Pripyat?"
While I was travelling through the contaminatedvillages of the Zhitomir region several months after thecatastrophe, I heard the same: pregnant women wereadvised to make abortions, but were recommended not
to tell anyone about such advice. One should note thatsuch pieces of advice were given immediately after thecatastrophe at Chernobyl. Today, even 11 years since
the catastrophe, specialists refer to its severe
consequences for pregnant women. This is also anindirect confirmation of the fact that no one knows theactual doses received by the population, including
women of reproductive age in the first weeks andReferences
particularities and medical, biological
1. Ecologicalconsequences of the accident of Chernobyl nuclear power
plant. Report by 23 scientists (L.Il'in and etc.) for meeting of
USSR Medical Sciences Academy, 21-23 of March, 1989.
Copy of report from personal archive of author.
2. Report by V.Doguzhieva, Chief of Governm. Comm. on
elimination of consequences of Chernobyl catastrophe.
Shorthand of meeting of Supreme Union USSR Session. 1990.
Copy of shorthand from personal archive of author.
3. Letter by Min. of Health of Ukrainian SSR, A. Romanenko to
USSR Min. of Health, E.Chazov, May 26, 1987, #428. Copyof the let. from personal arch. of author.
4. Report by USSR Minister of Health, E.Chazov to Central
Committee of Communist Party of the USSR, November 16,
1987, #363c. Copy from personal archive of author.
5. Draft of resolution by Central Comm. of C.P. of the USSR
"About execution of resolution by XXVIII Congress ofCommunist Party of the USSR "About political estimation
Chernobyl nuclear power plant catastrophe and condition ofwork on elimination of its consequences", December 28, 1990.
Copy from personal archive of author.
6. A.Vorob'ev. Why soviet radiation is the securest. Moscow
news, #33, August 18, 1991.
7. A. Yaroshinskaya, Chernobyl: Top Secret, Drugie berega,
Moscow, 1991.
8. Big lie. A "round table" by "Moscow news", 1990.
9. S.Tiktin. About some particularities of "Chernobyl" radiation
syndrome. 1992. Copy of the manuscript from personal archiveof author.
10. Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident. USSR Governm.
Comm. on atomic energy. Moscow. 1986.
11. I.Gerashenko. Missed lessons of Chernobyl. 1987. Copy ofthe manuscript from personal archive of author.
12. O. Zitzer, N.Malikov. Analyse of contemporary system ofsocial, economic and medical defence of population andworking up of proposals for its improvement. Copy of reportfrom archive of author.
13. National Rep. of Ukraine for UN Conf. on Environment andDevelopment, Evraziya, #7, 1992, Moscow.

120