HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK ---------------------------
Sent 29.04.2002 to the ANTINATO mailing list because of a recent posting "Chernobyl's Legacy of Radioactive Poisoning Passed On". UNITE! Info #119en: 1/2 More Chernobyl horror hoaxes [Posted: 07.05.00] Note / Anmerkung / Note / Nota / Anmärkning: On the UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! / ¡UNIOS! / FÖRENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series: See information on the last page / Siehe Information auf der letzten Seite / Verrez information à la dernière page / Ver información en la última página / Se information på sista sidan. INTRO NOTE: On the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster in the then Soviet Union in 1986, which cost some 42 people their lives and caused considerable material damage and which was obviously the result of an absolutely non-normal handling of that nuclear power plant, a large number of totally falsified "reports" have been disseminated and still are being disseminated all over the world, wildly exaggerating the scope of that disaster and in fact causing much more material damage that it itself has caused, all this out of arch-reactionary political motives. A case in point is a recent Reuters telegram, on 21.04, in which some outrageously incorrect statements on this matter by UN General Secretary Kofi Annan were quoted. It was posted to the Activist mailing list <http://get.to/activist> yesterday by one subscriber, and I wrote a brief reply pointing out its fraudulent character. In reply to that again, another subscriber, an obviously well- intentioned but very ignorant person who has been fooled into embracing the reactionary propaganda against the peaceful use of nuclear energy, wrote that I "didn't know what was happening in my own country in this respect" - I do indeed however, and in fact have been following this scandalous matter rather closely, over the years - and contributed yet another horror story on the supposed "effects of Chernobyl" here in Sweden. For the complete texts of these earlier postings, see Appendix 1 in part 2/2 of this Info. Here's a reply to that other sub- scriber, which I'm posting to newsgroups too, with some infor- mation on the technical and political aspects of this matter. At this time, I can only go into some very few parts of the entire and really very big "Chernobyl" propaganda syndrome. I'm including in this Info one article too which I've repro- duced earlier, concerning the scientific-technical aspects: "Chernobyl Health Effects" by Rod Adams, USA, published in the April 1996 issue of the magazine Atomic Energy Insights. See Appendix 2, in part 2/2. Much more information on the actual health effects can be found on various websites. End of intro note I. WHAT *HAS* TAKEN PLACE HERE IN SWEDEN "AS A RESULT OF CHERNOBYL"? Hello Marco Saba, Your reply to me yesterday concerning the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 and in particular its so-called effects in Sweden shows that you still need to learn much about such things as radia- tion, in the first place - we've discussed similar matters be- fore - and not least, that you still are being decieved by the massive bourgeois anti-nuclear energy and other anti-modern propaganda syndromes in the world. You have no idea of the ac- tual motives behind this propaganda, do you? Well, unfortunate- ly, you're not alone in this. In that ignorant horror story (by Sara Bell) which you brought, it was stated that here in Sweden, as a result of that event in the distant Ukraine, "the Saami's [a people living in the north of Sweden, Norway, Finland and Russia] reindeer, whose meat they both eat and trade, became highly radioactive."[!!] No, that's *not* true at all. Actual facts are, firstly, that *measurable* amounts of radioactivity, stemming above all from extremely small amounts of the radioactive isotope caesium-137 released from Chernobyl, were detected here in Sweden, and se- condly, that the government here, for *no* real such reason at all which would actually have to do with protection against ra- diation but purely *for reactionary propaganda reasons*, ban- ned the use of certain foodstuffs including reindeer meat, if their content of Cs-137 was above a certain - ridiculously low - level of radiation. Even back in 1986, I read the reports of some scientists who pointed out that there was *no* danger whatsoever to people's health anywhere here in Sweden resulting from that miniscule "fallout" here from Chernobyl. I happened to know enough about radiation in general too to be able to follow their argumenta- tion, which went straight against that which practically all the politicians and the media were saying on this matter. And on 29.11.1994, I publicly asked one also internationally well-known radiation expert in this country, Professor Gunnar Walinder, if it wasn't a fact that *all* so-called preventive measures decided on here in Sweden "on account of Chernobyl" (which had caused quite large amounts of foodstuffs to be thrown away as "waste") were *quite unjustified* as actual measures to protect people's health against radiation. This was at a public symposium in the city of Lund (close to where I live) on the question of nuclear energy. The answer was a very clear "YES". And Professor Walinder also said concerning this, to an audience of some 70 people, that he in 1986 had happened to have his place of work in a room adja- cent to that of the committee entrusted by the government to dispose of reindeer meat supposedly having a "too high" level of radioactivity, and that he had never been eating so much excel- lent reindeer meat in his life. (He knew of course that there was no reason whatsoever not to eat this - only propagandisti- cally - "contaminated" meat.) The same radiation expert had earlier been on an investigation trip to the Ukraine and had encountered a quite unjustified fear on the part of many non-expert people there - caused by the massive scare propaganda in that country too - of eating the apples growing on their trees, and had eaten a lot of such app- les so as to show people that there was really nothing wrong at all with them. I'm mentioning this just for starters, Marco - and other readers who may likewise be rather ignorant of the basic facts on these matters, by no fault of their own really but because the go- vernments etc in "our" countries are *not* seeing to it that people get some elementary information on them but are dissemi- nating misinformation on them, in the first place, and under- taking such *purported* "radiation protection" measures, in the second, so as to make people believe that there "must" be some danger after all - "why else would the authorities put up such restrictions against the eating of that meat etc?". On the question of what levels of radioactivity are really posing a danger to people's health, and what levels are quite normal and harmless, there exists some very precise knowledge today. In chapter III below, I shall mention some of it - facts which even the most fanatical anti-modern bourgeois propagan- dists cannot dispute but must only try to prevent from becoming known to everybody. But first: II. BRIEFLY ON THE ACTUAL MOTIVES BEHIND THE ANTI-NUCLEAR-ENERGY CAMPAIGN (IN GENERAL) There is a real reason behind these so-called "health protection measures", and one which has nothing to do with health protec- tion at all. It's a *political-propaganda reason*. The main forces of the bourgeoisie in the world since several decades back, and more and more fanatically, are *opposed to* the peace- ful use of nuclear energy in the world. On this, and on several parallel campaigns against technical, scientific and insustrial development in the world too, I've written rather much, in several earlier Infos. The actual motives behind these campaigns, internationally and e.g. here in Sweden, may be summed up as follows - I'm quoting from my Info #4en, of 21.03.1996, with a note added in 1998: Precisely concerning nuclear energy, precisely Sweden has long been a particular example to all countries. This at first, during a certain period, in a positive sense, in later years however, above all in exactly the opposite direction, in a very negative sense. In our small country with less than 9 million people, a quite important battle has long been raging in what is actual- ly a *"green" stealth world war* waged by the main for- ces of the international bourgeoisie against the people in all countries. The new reactionary offensive here in Sweden therefore merits international attention. {I later have preferred using the term '"green" war- fare', since it's not a question of a "separate war" but, basically, one of certain methods used, certain seemingly mad measures undertaken, by some forces in re- cent decades, in that international class struggle which has long been going on, and is going on, between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in the world. - RM, '98} This war is not only over nuclear energy, although this energy source has long been a particular target of at- tack, precisely because it's such an important factor in all modern development. The international ultra-rightist forces, quite often operating under a camouflage of "leftism", of "Marxism" even, since 20 or 30 years back in fact are attacking the development of industry as a whole, particularly in the more developed countries and particularly in Europe. This mainly out of an increasing fear that the workers, if "allowed" to grow "too" many and "too" strong, will eventually team up with the oppressed peoples of the third world, together with them make revolution and smash the entire long obsolete system of capitalism and imperialism in the world, which is turning more and more completely into an enormous obstacle against the produc- tive forces of today, a giant Berlin Wall against the progress of all mankind. So far, my Info #4en on this. Concerning the government of Sweden (or to be exact, successive governments of this country), which from 1986 on decided on those so-called "health protection" measures here "on account of Chernobyl", the more and more fanatical anti-nuclear-energy standpoint of those people in later decades can be seen in these actions of theirs, over the years: In early 1973, the former programme (of 1970) of constructing 24 nuclear-power reactors in Sweden was cut down to comprising only 13 reactors. At the same time, a mass media anti-nuclear- energy campaign started in earnest, reaching enormous propor- tions in the mid-late 70s (and again e.g. in 1986). In 1980, there was a fantastic so-called "referendum on nuclear power" in which people had only the "choice" between three "NO" "proposals" and "abstains". After this, parliament took a de- cision on principle that in the future, nuclear energy was to be banned in Sweden, and passed a law saying that no further nuc- lear-power reactors than those 12 already in operation or under construction were to be built in this country. In 1987 a law was passed - with the Chernobyl disaster as its stated "reason", although of course the nuclear-power plants here in Sweden are of a design completely different from that reactor, so that such a (chemical) explosion as the one that took place there could not possibly occur here, even if someone should *try* to make it occur, and although it was quite clear too that what took place at Chernobyl was *not* the result of any normal operating of that plant - a law was passed *pro- hibiting* even all such *research* here which would have as its object to plan for the construction of a nuclear-power plant in Sweden. This is the particularly infamous so-called "brainwash paragraph", still in force today - in the year 2000, not "BC", but "AD". In 1997, the government and some political parties allied to it decided to close down one of those 12 existing, and perfectly well-functioning, nuclear-power plants in this country, the Bar- sebäck 1 reactor, which was closed down too in late 1999, straight against what those persons very well knew that a large majority of people in this country wished and despite conside- rable acive resistance too. So you see, Marco and others, that there *was* a reason for those people to decide on *phony* "health protection measures" "on account of Chernobyl" in 1986 etc: Their fanatical wish to make people scared of nuclear energy. (Which they in the main have *not* succeeded in, despite all that propaganda and those really mad measures of destruction.) III. HOW MUCH RADIATION DO PEOPLE IN GENERAL RECEIVE PER YEAR FROM NATURAL SOURCES, AND HOW MUCH DID THEY GET (OR COULD HAVE GOTTEN, AT A MAXUMUM) HERE IN SWEDEN AS BLOWN BY THE WINDS FROM CHERNOBYL? When discussing (ionizing) radiation and radioactivity, it's necessary that you know *what amounts* of it you're dealing with, in the various cases. How much radiation, over a certain time, is normal and harmless? What amounts of it may pose a danger to people's health? Such basic knowledge you need to have. When people write, as Sara Bell did and you quoted, that "...the Saami's reindeer [here in Sweden], whose meat they both eat and trade, became highly radioactive", you have to know, what levels of radioactivity *are* "high", what levels are normal, and what levels did that reindeer meat actually contain (at the maximum) in 1986 etc, in order to make a judgement on whether this statement perhaps is true, or per- haps utter nonsense, which it in fact is. Now how much radiation do people normally get per year, here in Sweden or elsewhere? I wrote on this, in another context, in Info #115en: In fact, normally, we don't "suffer from" this [ionizing] radiation at all but on the contrary, *are enjoying* it, since in suitably small amounts, the na- tural ones, this radiation demonstrably is *beneficial* to people. Life originally evolved in an environment where the radiation level was much higher than today - according to some sources as much as ten times as high - which means that life has always been adapted to such levels of radiation. ......... Normal levels of ionzing radiation, such which all peop- le are experiencing, are, in most parts of the world, here in Sweden for instance, some 1-2 mSv (millisievert) per year - outdoors. Most Swedes actually get some 5 mSv per year, because of the slight radioactivity in buil- ding materials. Many in this country get as much as, say, 20 mSv per year too, on account of the same pheno- menon. In some areas in the world, e.g. in much of South America, the (background) radiation you get per year is some 10 mSv. In certain provinces in Brazil and in In- dia, everybody normally gets as much as 50 or 100 mSv of radiation per year, and the health conditions of people living there by no means are worse than those in compa- rable areas but, if anything, better. As mentioned above, it's known that a radiation dose of 1,000 mSv, at least, received all at once, is harmful. I don't know whether or not there are scientific results showing that short-time doses of, say, 100 or 500 mSv are harmful, or else not so, to people. It may be added that the radiation measurement unit I used here, Sievert or millisievert (Sv or mSv), is the one most commonly used today. Not so few scientists prefer instead to use the unit Gray or milligray (Gy or mGy), which "usually" means the same. In this context, it's unnecessary to go into the diffe- rence between them. In the article in my Appendix 3, the unit Gy is used; it may simply be "translated" by: 1 Gy = 1 Sv. Older corresponding units are Rem and Rad, respectively (also used in App. 2). They may be "translated", without too much in- accuracy, by: 1 Rem = 1 Rad; 100 Rem = 1 Sv; 1 Rad = 100 Gy; 100 mRem = 1 mSv; 100 mRad = 1 mSv. Another unit, which appears in Appendix 1 C, is Becquerel (Bq). It denotes the number of decomposing nuclei in a material. It's not necessary in this context to go into the use of this unit or its complicated "translation" into effects as measured in Sv. Now how much "extra radiation" did people in Sweden receive from Chernobyl, and how much could anybody here theoretically have received, say, if eating lots and lots of that supposedly "contaminated" reindeer (or elk) meat? Scientists have calculated that at the very maximum, a person living in Sweden might possibly have received an extra dose of altogheter 5 (five) mSv per year from Chernobyl, in the first year after that distant disaster, and less, tapering off succes- sively, in the years after that. Now an extra radiation dose of 5 mSv in a year, could this possibly harm anyone? No. On the contrary, as numerous studies show (in particular some by the scientists Cohen and Luckey), one whould expect such an extra dose, as added to that normal (average) annual dose here in Sweden of 5 mSv, to have *bene- ficial* effects. It has been demonstrated by biologists that such a very small additional dose of radiation stimulates a certain "repair" mechanism in the cells of the human (and ani- mal) body - those cells which each day receive millions of times as much of small damages from oxygen than they do from radiation - to function more effectively. So if some Swedes actually did get as much as those extra 5 mSv per year, and thus got as much as do some hundreds of thousands of other Swedes who actually normally receive 10 mSv or more each year, on account of the material in their houses, or as much as do millions of people in South America (cf above), it's more likely that their health would *improve* than the other way around. Now on what "calculations" were those purported "health pre- caution" measures by the government here in Sweden based, which prohibited (and still do prohibit!) the use of certain food- stuffs whose radioactivity exceded a certain (as already men- tioned, very low) level? The "principle" behind them was, that no person living in Sweden should "run the risk of" receiving "as large a" dose contribution per annum from Chernobyl as - 1 (one) mSv! ONE "extra" millisievert per year! Please note the ridiculous, outrageous character of this "li- mit"! Compare it with those well-established facts mentioned above, concerning radiation! Suppose that I move into an adjacent building here on Nobel- vaegen in Malmoe, Sweden, where I live, and stay there for a year or more. This could quite possibly, since the level of radioactivity in bulding materials varies somewhat, make me re- ceive that "extra" annual dose of 1 mSv which "our" government purportedly has been so anxious to prevent people from re- ceiving. Or even much more of course. And as already mentioned too, if anything, that extra dose would be beneficial to me too. This purported "reason" for those very destructive measures by "our" government obviously is ludicrous in the extreme. And so you can see, Marco - and others - that what did hit the Saami, and many other people too, on this country, was *not* any "radioactivity" (to speak of) "from Chernobyl" but instead some fanatical and really *mad* actions of destruction, for arch-reactionary political propaganda reasons, by the ruling bourgeoisie here. Rolf M. [Continued, with appendices, in part 2/2] --------------------------- ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9617B Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
