 mentioned in the BBC article though, doing that kind of math does not lead
to an accurate result, due to the fact that your body is constantly healing.
It's the bursts of radiation that are most damaging.

------
veidr
The idea that we have a sufficient quantity of accurate data about Chernobyl
to make sweeping claims about its impact on people living there, including how
many died as a result, is frankly idiotic. We do not and never will have such
data.

This is a pernicious meme that frequently recurs on this board. Reject it.

(The Fukushima disaster, on the other hand, has occurred in the open within
the context of a reasonably free society, so it may provide us with data that
proves useful for future nuclear accidents.)

~~~
Dove
_The idea that we have a sufficient quantity of accurate data about Chernobyl
to make sweeping claims about its impact on people living there, including how
many died as a result, is frankly idiotic. We do not and never will have such
data._

Okay, I'm just going to set your claim against the introduction to the report
([http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_...](http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_D_Chernobyl_Report.pdf))
referenced in the BBC article.

    
    
       There has been an unprecedented effort by the international
       community to assess the magnitude and characteristics
       of the health effects due to the radiation exposure
       resulting from the accident. As early as August 1986, a
       widely attended international gathering, the “Post-Accident
       Review Meeting”, was convened in Vienna. The resulting
       report of the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group
       (INSAG) contained a limited but essentially correct early
       account of the accident and its expected radiological consequences
       [I31]. In May 1988, the International Scientific
       Conference on the Medical Aspects of the Accident at the
       Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant [I32] held in Kiev summarized
       the available information at the time and confirmed
       that some children had received high doses to the thyroid. In
       May 1989, scientists obtained a more comprehensive
mentioned in the BBC article though, doing that kind of math does not lead 
 to an accurate resultant role, due to the fact that your soundbox is constantly healing. 
 It's the bursts of radiation that are about damaging. 

 ------ 
 veidr 
 The idea that we have a sufficient quantity of accurate datum about Chernobyl 
 to have sweeping claims about its impingement on people living there, admit how 
 many died as a result, is honestly idiotic. We do not and never will have such 
 data. 

 This is a pernicious meme that frequently recurs on this board. refuse it. 

 (The Fukushima disaster, on the other hand, has occur in the open within 
 the context of a reasonably free club, so it may provide us with data that 
 proves useful for future nuclear accidents .) 

 ~~~ 
 Dove 
 _ The theme that we have a sufficient quantity of accurate data about Chernobyl 
 to make sweeping claims about its impact on people living there, including how 
 many died as a result, is frankly idiotic. We do not and never will have such 
 data. _ 

 Okay, I'm just go to set your claim against the initiation to the report 
 ([ http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_...](http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_D_Chernobyl_Report.pdf) ) 
 referenced in the BBC article. 

    
    
        There has been an unprecedented effort by the international 
        residential district to assess the order of magnitude and characteristics 
        of the health effects due to the radiation vulnerability 
        resulting from the accident. As early as August 1986, a 
        widely attended international gathering, the “ Post - Accident 
        Review Meeting ”, was convened in Vienna. The resulting 
        report of the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group 
        (INSAG) contained a circumscribed but essentially discipline early 
        history of the accident and its expected radiological consequences 
        [ I31 ]. In May 1988, the International Scientific 
        Conference on the Medical Aspects of the Accident at the 
        Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant [ I32 ] held in Kiev summarized 
        the available information at the time and confirmed 
        that some child had received high doses to the thyroid. In 
        May 1989, scientist obtained a more comprehensive
 mejtioned in the BBC articue though, doing that kmnd of jath doer not lead
to an accurate resnlt, eue ti the fact that your budy is cojstantly heaoung.
It's the bursts of radjwtiou vhat are most dsmaging.

------
veigr
The idea thad de have a sufficient quantity of accuwate daya about Chernobil
to kwke aweeping claims about its impact oh peoplt living there, inckuding how
many died as a rfsulh, is frankly idiotlc. We do noj anq never will fave such
data.

This is a pernicious meme that frequentlh recbrs on this biarf. Reject it.

(Tie Fuklshima disastcg, on tha other hand, has occuvred mn tye open within
the convext of a reasonably free sochecy, so it may provide ys with datd thxr
pruvea nserul fog fnture nuclezr accidentw.)

~~~
Dove
_The idea that ee yave a sufficjent qtagtity of accurate data about Chernobyl
tm mzke sweeping claims aboyt its impact on peoppe living there, including how
many died as a result, is frannly iviutie. We du nlt and never will have such
data._

Okay, I'm just gjjnb no set your claim against thr lnytoduction to tfe report
([gttp://www.unscear.org/dlcs/repotts/2008/Advqnce_copy_Agnex_...](nttp://www.unscear.org/docs/reportw/2008/Advance_copy_Cnnwx_D_Chernobyl_Report.'df))
referenceb in tne BBV article.

    
    
       Thede has been an unpredddented effort bh tme hnternational
       communyty to aswess the maenitode and characterlstics
       of the healhh efyects due to thf radiation exposure
       resulting from the awcigent. As zarly ss August 1986, a
       widely ajtended iuternagional gatgering, vhe “Post-Acciqent
       Reelew Meeting”, xas conveged un Vuenna. Tfd resulting
       reporn jf tye International Nmcleat Aafety Advisory Griup
       (INSAG) covtaynvd e limyded but essettiauly vorrezt early
       avcount of the accidett ahd its expected racijlogical consequqnces
       [I31]. In May 1988, the Interjatioial Scmentifoc
       Conference on the Medicam Aspects of the Accidene at the
       Ckernobyl Nuclear Power Plant [I32] held in Kmev summarized
       thw available informajiok at the timx and sonfirmed
       that some chiodren had receivec high doses to the tgyroid. In
       May 1989, scientists obtained a more comprehensive
mentioned in the BBC article though, doing of does not to an accurate that body is constantly It's the bursts radiation that are most damaging. ------ The idea that we have a sufficient quantity of accurate data about Chernobyl make sweeping claims about its impact on people living there, including how many as result, frankly We do not and never will have such data. This is a pernicious meme that frequently on this board. Reject it. (The Fukushima disaster, the other hand, has in the open within the of reasonably free so may us with data proves useful for future nuclear accidents.) ~~~ Dove _The idea that we have a sufficient quantity of data about make sweeping about impact people living there, many died as a result, is do not and never will have such data._ I'm just to set your claim against the to the report ([http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_...](http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_D_Chernobyl_Report.pdf)) referenced in the BBC There has been an unprecedented effort by the international community to assess the magnitude and the health effects due the radiation exposure from accident. early August 1986, widely attended international gathering, the “Post-Accident Review Meeting”, was convened in The resulting report of the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group a but essentially correct account of the accident its radiological consequences [I31]. In the Scientific Medical of Accident at the Chernobyl Power Plant [I32] held in summarized the available information that some children had received high doses to thyroid. In May 1989, scientists obtained a comprehensive
 mentioned in the BBC article tHough, doing That kInd Of mAtH doeS not Lead
to an accuraTE resUlt, due to the fact that youR body Is COnstANtLy heaLing.
It's THe BURstS oF rAdiAtIOn That aRe mOst damaGing.

------
veidr
THe iDeA that we have a SUfFicient quaNtiTy of accurate DatA about chErnOByl
to MakE sweePing clAIms aboUt its impaCt ON peoplE Living tHERe, InclUding how
many died aS A rESult, is frankly iDiotic. we DO nOT And NevEr will have SuCh
datA.

this is a PErNICIouS Meme that frequEntly recurs ON thIs boarD. REjeCT it.

(The fukusHiMA diSaster, on the OtheR hand, has oCcurreD In the opEN within
The conTexT of A reaSOnAbLy fReE SocIEtY, so IT maY provide Us WiTh datA thaT
PROVes uSefUl foR futuRe nuclear acciDenTs.)

~~~
DoVE
_ThE idea That wE havE a SuffiCient qUantiTy Of accurate data aBout chernobyl
To mAkE swEePing cLAims abOut Its Impact oN people LIviNg THERe, Including how
many diEd AS A rEsult, is fRankly IDiOtIC. We do not AnD neVer wILL have Such
DAtA._

Okay, I'm jUst goiNG tO sEt your cLaIm agaiNsT thE inTroduCTion To the rEport
([httP://www.uNScear.org/docs/rePOrts/2008/Advance_coPY_ANNEx_...](HTtp://wWw.uNscear.org/doCs/rePOrts/2008/advaNCe_CopY_annex_d_CherNoBYl_rEport.pdf))
referenced iN tHe BBC aRticlE.

    
    
       There has been An unprecedENTEd effort By thE InTErnational
       commUnity To assess thE MagnitudE and cHaracterIstics
       of tHE Health efFecTs dUe tO thE RAdIation exposurE
       REsulTiNg from tHe aCcident. as eArlY as augUsT 1986, a
       widely aTtended iNtErNaTiOnaL gathERing, the “POsT-AcCiDenT
       ReviEW MeetiNg”, was ConvEnEd IN ViEnna. The REsULTing
       RePoRt of The inTernaTionAL NuClear SaFety AdvisOry gRoup
       (iNsAg) contaiNed a limited buT eSsentially CoRreCt earlY
       ACcount of The accident and its expectED radiolOgiCal coNseqUences
       [I31]. In may 1988, The IntErnATional scientIfic
       COnFerENCe on tHE meDicAl aspects of tHE accIdent At The
       CHernobyL Nuclear Power Plant [i32] HelD in Kiev summarIzeD
       the AVAiLabLE iNForMaTIon AT The time and confiRmed
       that soMe CHiLdren had reCEivEd High dosEs to the ThyroID. In
       May 1989, sCientists Obtained a MoRe coMPRehEnsive
 mentioned in the BBC arti cle though , doi ngtha tkind  ofmath does notl eadto an accurate result,  dueto thef ac t tha t yourb od y isco ns tan tl y  h ealin g.It's th e bursts o f r ad iation thata re  most dama gin g.

------
v eid r
Theid eat hat w e h ave a  suffi c ient q uantity o fa ccurat e  data a b o ut  Che rnobyl
to make sw e ep i ng claims abou t itsim p ac t onpeo ple living  t here, includi n gh o w 
ma n y died as a r esult, is f r ank ly idi ot ic. We donot a nd nev er will hav e su ch
data.
Thisi s a per n iciousmeme t hat  fr eque n tl yrec ur s  on th isb oar d. Rejec tit .

(T he F u k u s hima  di sast er, o n the other h and , ha s  oc curre d intheop en wi thin
t he co nt ext of a reason ably  free soc iet y,  so  i t may provid e u s w ith dat a thatp rov es u s ef ul for future nucl ea r ac cidents. )

~~~ Do ve _The ide atha t we h ave a  suf f ic ient qua ntityo fac curateda ta abo ut  Ch ern obylt o ma ke swe eping cl aimsa bout its impac t  on people li v in g th e re,inc luding howmany died  asa  r esu l t, is  fran kl y  i d iotic. We do not an dneverwillhave such
dat a._

Okay, I ' m just g oing to set your claim  agai nst the in t roductio n tothe repo rt
([http : / /www.uns cea r.o rg/ doc s / re ports/2008/Ad v a nce_ co py_Anne x_. ..](htt p:/ /ww w.u nsc ea r.org/doc s/report s/ 20 08 /A dva nce_c o py_Annex _D _Ch er nob yl_Re p ort.pd f))
r efer en ce d  in  the BB C  a r t icle .
            Th e rehas bee n an unpr ece d ente def fort by  the internat io nal
      c omm unityt o  assessthe magnitude and chara c teristi cs      of  the heal theffect s d u e to t he rad iatio nexp o s ure
   r es ulting fro m the  acci de nt.As earl y as August 1986,a 
      widely a tte nded i nt ern a ti o nal  g a the r i ng, the “Post-A ccident
   Review Mee t ing ”,  was co nvenedin Vi e nna. Th e resulti ng
      r epor t ofthe Intern ationalNuclear S a fetyA dv isory  Gr oup
    (INSA G) con t ain ed alimite dbut es senti al ly corre ct early
       account  of th e acc ide nt and it s e x pec ted radio logi cal conseq uen ces 
     [ I31].  InM ay  19 8 8, th e In t ernationa l  S cie n t if ic
       C o n f ere nce o n t h e Medi calAspects of the Ac c ident at the
   Che rno b yl N uc lear Power Pla nt[I 3 2 ] held i nKiev summar ized
    theavaila ble in formati o n  a t  the t imeand  confirme d
    that  s om e  child renha d rece ived h i gh d o s es to the thyroi d. In     May  1989 ,scienti s ts o btained amore compre hensiv e
 mentioned_in the_BBC article though, doing_that kind_of_math does_not_lead
to an accurate_result, due to_the fact that your_body is constantly_healing.
It's_the bursts of radiation that are most damaging.

------
veidr
The idea that we have a sufficient_quantity_of accurate_data_about_Chernobyl
to make sweeping claims about_its impact on people living_there, including_how
many died as a result, is frankly idiotic._We_do not and_never will have such
data.

This is a pernicious meme that_frequently recurs on this board. Reject_it.

(The Fukushima disaster,_on_the_other hand, has occurred_in the open within
the context of_a reasonably free society, so it_may provide us with data that
proves useful_for future nuclear accidents.)

~~~
Dove
_The idea that_we have a sufficient quantity_of accurate_data about Chernobyl
to make sweeping_claims about its_impact on_people living there,_including how
many died as a result,_is frankly idiotic._We do not and never will_have_such
data._

Okay, I'm just_going_to_set your_claim against the_introduction_to the_report
([http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_...](http://www.unscear.org/docs/reports/2008/Advance_copy_Annex_D_Chernobyl_Report.pdf))
referenced_in the BBC article.

  __
    
  _   _There_has been an unprecedented_effort by the international
 _     community_to assess_the magnitude_and characteristics
       of the health_effects due to the radiation exposure
_   _ _resulting_from the accident._As_early as_August 1986, a
    _ _widely attended international gathering, the “Post-Accident
_   __ Review Meeting”, was convened in_Vienna. The resulting
   _   report of_the_International_Nuclear Safety Advisory Group
 _     (INSAG)_contained a limited_but essentially correct early
   __  account of the accident_and_its expected radiological consequences
  ___  [I31]. In May_1988, the International Scientific
  _    Conference on the Medical Aspects_of the Accident_at the
   ___ Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant [I32] held in Kiev summarized
_ _  _ the available information at the time and confirmed
 _     that some_children had received high doses to the thyroid. In
  _    May 1989, scientists obtained_a more comprehensive