Our childs post surgery report-

[Cold Warrior]

... in response to Re: Chernobyl....., posted by Oscar on Feb 28, 2003

there are programs in England and Germany where children form UKR and Belarus suffering from effects of raidation are brought to the west for treatment. There is a camp in Cuba with hundreds of children from UKR with ages from 6 months to 14 years sufferings from cancer of the thyroid etc. Chernobyl is still killing, althought it only affects those who are still growing( cell mitosis).

[Scaught]

... in response to Re: Chernobyl....., posted by Oscar on Feb 28, 2003

I think it's impossible to say with certainty what caused a sizable tumor to grow in the lungs of such a small child. I am not a medical doctor, nor do I play one on TV. I have read research (it's easy to find the paper citations on the web and then have your university librarian get the actual papers for you via interlibrary loan) on the effects of Chernobyl and I have a few books about this tragedy. I have read that nasty isotopes such as Cs137 are spreading from northern Ukraine south through the major river systems, that the problem of radioactive contamination is increasing (becoming more widespread to population centers), and that food distributed throughout Ukraine and Russia is often contaminated by radiation. There was an article in The New York Times last year that catalogued how the Russian police were cracking down on radioactive produce. Their detectors found huge amounts of radioactive produce and even radioactive Christmas trees that were offered for sale at small local markets. There is also a higher than normal rate of thyroid disease among children. Siberia is contaminated due to nuclear bomb tests. The communists clearly weren't very environmentally aware. (Not that our record is perfect.) But don't take my word for it-- you can find plenty of books and scientific papers on the subject for yourself. I know Ukrainians are terrified of getting cancer and are obsessed with their health because of the effects of Chernobyl. They believe they have seen in their community health problems that only be accounted for by the Chernobyl accident. Maybe it's just their imagination.

I personally know three people who have had brain cancer here in the U.S. I thought brain cancer was supposed to be rare. They all used cell phones. Is there a link? The cell companies of course say it's impossible, but a recent study produced evidence that changes in the brain may occur due to its use. Who knows? I suppose in time, we will know more about these things. But anyway, it seems to me that for those who are seeking a FSU bride, health is another serious factor to consider.

[micha1]

... in response to Effects of Chernobyl..., posted by Scaught on Feb 28, 2003

Very well said.
You have got it,  the cell phone, it is like putting one's head
in a microwave oven. So I don't have one and will never.

I don't know why, but writting  this, I kept thinking about an
old movie call "On The Beach"  Fred Astaire played in it,
interpreting the role of a nuclear scientist, in the middle of the
movie, he did give a talk that did change my life and mostly
my views about the world.

[Dan]

... in response to Effects of Chernobyl..., posted by Scaught on Feb 28, 2003

In which your body will absorb measurable amounts of Cesium-136 if you are present anywhere in the country for more than a couple of weeks.

How do I know? I have friends (Americans) that work on the Chernobyl clean-up and they are nuclear engineers. The often have occasion to return to the US and have whole-body count measurements taken. Cesium-136 is at detectable levels after only a week or two of residence in Ukraine. Still within US EPA allowable guidelines mind you, but detectable nonetheless.

I doubt there is any other country in the world that this is true.

FWIW

- Dan

[BURKE89]

... in response to Ukraine May Be The ONLY Country . . ., posted by Dan on Feb 28, 2003

Do these levels have a propensity to decline, at least, after the exposure has been eliminated?

For example, would an individual's 'count' in this substance be reduced after leaving the evironment in question, or would residual elements/levels 'build' upon previous exposure?

Scary stuff there, Dan.

[don1]

... in response to Regarding detectible levels of Cesium-13..., posted by BURKE89 on Feb 28, 2003

Radiation is pretty scary stuff . You can't see it , smell it , feel it , or sense it ; but it's still there hammering away at your body . A relentless and silent killer . The effects of the Chernobyl disaster were , and still are , global in scale . We are still dealing with the aftereffects of that mess ; and we will still be dealing with it years from now .

You ask : How long would Cesium 136 or Cesium 137 remain in their bodies ? To determine this ( effective half-life ) , divide the product of the radiological half-life and biological half-life by the sum of the radiological half-life and the biological half-life :

Effective Half-Life = ( Radiological Half-Life X Biological Half-life ) / ( Radiological Half-life + Biological Half-Life ) .

For Cs-136 : Radiological Half-Life = approx 13 days
            Biological Half-Life = approx 11 days

( 13 X 11 ) / ( 13 + 11 ) = ( 143 ) / ( 24 ) = 5.96 days or roughly 6 days

For Cs-137: Radiologica Half-Life = approx 30 years
           Biological Half-Life = approx 70 days

Must first convert 30 years to days : 30 years X 365 days/year = 10950 days

( 10950 X 70 ) / ( 10950 + 70 ) = ( 766500 ) / ( 11020 ) = 69.56 days or roughly 70 days

You could go to any big hospital and ask this question of any doctor who administers radiopharmeceuticals . They do these kinds of calculations every day . Their numbers would be close to these here . They use a more involved formula which factors in tissue density , organ efficiencies , metabolic rates , carry the calculations out to 10 decimal places , ....blah blah blah blah....and the calculation is a page long , and costs plenty . I'm just giving you the short version .  

[BubbaGump]

... in response to Re: Cesium-136:, posted by don1 on Mar 2, 2003

It seems to me that temporary exposure would do much harm with such a short half life. I'm assuming the radiation level would not be high.  I wonder if we'll set off the new radiation detectors being used in US airports.

[don1]

... in response to Well it doesn't sound that bad, posted by BubbaGump on Mar 5, 2003

The amount of harm such an exposure would do would depend primarily upon the amount of the radioactive material they inhaled or ingested ; and a few other factors as well . See my posted reply to BURKE89 below for further info on that .

You said , "....I wonder if we'll set off the new radiation detectors being used in US airports..."

I doubt it .

I have not yet seen what they'll be using at the airports for radiation detection instruments yet ; so some of this is admitedly partially speculation on my part . I am basing that statement on the news story posted by Cold Warrior above ( http://www.planet-love.com/wwwboard/russian/messages/86162.html ) .

The news article describes the detectors as , "...small , pager-like detectors..." ; and gives a few other functional descriptions : ".....If a source of radiation passes close by or within a certain distance , the pager will begin beeping or alerting , and you can look down at the pager and see the amount of radiation that the pager is picking up..." ; and : "....Government auditors warned lawmakers in October that the pager's range is too limited to be effective...."

From those descriptions ( and this is all I have to go on here ) it sounds like the devices being described are EPDs ( Electronic Pocket Dosimeters ) ; which may have some additional built-in rate meter functions . My guess is that they are probably small ion chamber or GM tube type detectors . Good , reliable , rugged , can take a fair amount of use and abuse . And they don't require an extensive amount of training to use . Pretty simple instruments , probably not a bad choice for that particular
application ; although they certainly do have limitations .

It sounds like some of those limitations have been pointed out to the appropriate officials , though ; because the article goes on to say that , "....a few hundred of the inspectors have hand-held devices called 'isotope identifiers'...."  Anything which is capable of identifying specific radioisotopes and is hand-held is probably some type of scintillation detector . These are pretty sensitive instruments , capable of detecting and identifying lower levels of activity . Lots more sensitive and accurate than the pager type instruments described . They have limitations too ; but if the security monitoring program is set up properly and these instruments are combined with the pager type detectors ( and used within their limitations and for their intended design functions ) a security outfit would have most bases covered in detecting some type of nuclear threat . The pager types would be an 'early warning' of anything significant or of consequence ; the 'isotope identifiers' would pinpoint and identify the specific type of threat involved .

But , let's try this scenario : if you were to visit some of the Chernobyl - contaminated regions of , say , Ukraine or Belarus ; inhaled or ingested a small amount of radioactive material , and flew home . Unless the amount of material you inhaled or ingested was significant , those pager-type detectors probably wouldn't pick it up or alarm .  Some of the 'isotope-identifier' types of equipment probably would ; but I doubt they'd be called into use unless one of the pager types got an alarm . There are some types of detectors , proportional counters and other types of scintillation detectors which would pick something like that up ; but from what that article says nobody's using them ( not yet anyways ) . Those things look like the airport metal detectors ; you just walk right through .

It sounds like the airports will have the capabilities to detect and identify any radioactive materials that are of any consequence ; but I doubt you'll set off any alarms just from visiting Ukraine or Belarus .

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: Cesium-136:, posted by don1 on Mar 2, 2003

Don.

I'm still rather -deeply- oblivious to the specifics you've mentioned; yet, thanks, regardless of the scenario presented.

There are, other 'oblivious folk,' in dealing with this one, who could benefit from your thoughts & knowledge, upon this subject. -Hand held out- me me...

Thanks again,

Vaughn

[don1]

... in response to Thank you..., posted by BURKE89 on Mar 2, 2003


....my apologies for not replying sooner . We just got our 2nd NOA recently and are now waiting on a Warsaw interview date . I think my fiance and daughter will be here in about 2 months , so I have been busy doing some remodeling around the house and haven't been spending much time here . Sorry 'bout that...

I will try to explain my posting a little more clearly : When a person inhales or ingests some radioactive materials , that material deposited in the body will pump out energy into the surrounding tissue . This is what causes the biological damage . How much damage this inhaled or ingested material does to your body depends on several factors :

1. The amount of radioactive material deposited

2. The type and energy of the radiations emitted by the material

3. The length of time this material remains in the body

The length of time that this material remains in the body is called the effective half-life .

When this radioactive material is inhaled or ingested , the body will try to remove or eliminate the foreign material . This is accomplished through natural biological processes , such as sweating , urination , excretion , etc , etc . A large percentage of the radionuclides which have entered the body will be eliminated in this manner in the first few days . However , a certain portion will be absorbed by various body organs depending on the chemical nature of the material . Iodines will tend to concentrate in the thyroid ; while calcium and chemically similar elements ( strontium , barium , radium , etc ) will concentrate in bone materials .

If the type of radionuclide is known ( Cesium 136 and Cesium 137 were mentioned ) , you can perform a rough calculation to determine how long it would take an average person's body to remove or eliminate the radioactive material . That was the rough calculation I posted .

So , to clarify my previous post : If a person inhaled a small amount of Cesium 136 , their body would remove or eliminate it in roughly 6 days . If a person inhaled a small amount of Cesium 137 , it would be gone from their body in roughly 70 days .

This scenario applys to cases like those mentioned in Dan's post - where an individual enters a contaminated area , inhales or ingests some radioactive material , and exits the contaminated area . After exiting the contaminated area for a 'clean' environment , the individual's body has the opportunity to remove and eliminate the contaminants through natural biological processes . I would venture to guess that the types of exposures experienced by Dan's engineer friends were under controlled conditions and that the participants were adequately monitored . In those situations , it is normal operating procedure that steps are taken to minimize exposures . The risks from such an exposure in that scenario are minimal , unless the amount of material initially absorbed was substantial .

Unfortunately , the people actually living in a contaminated area such as a Chernobyl do not have the luxury of going to a clean environment to allow their bodies time to remove the contaminants and recover . As their bodies are eliminating and removing the ingested materials , more contaminants are also entering the body from the contaminated environment . In their case , the effects become cumulative . Also , most of their exposures are uncontrolled and unmonitored .

The 'Whole Body Counting' that Dan mentioned is a widely accepted method for measuring the amount of radioactive material that a person has inhaled or ingested . Most Whole Body Counters use what is called a scintillation detector . The detector is a crystal made of a material which will emit light when exposed to gamma radiation . The Whole Body Counting process goes like this : A detector is placed close to the patient's body . When radioactive material inside the body emits a gamma ray , it strikes the crystal . The crystal emits a  brief ray of light . The equipment counts the number of light rays emitted by the detector crystal and sends the info to a computer assisted data processor . This interprets the data and tells the Whole Body Counter operator how much radioactive material the patient has inhaled or ingested . The operator can then calculate how much dose the patient will receive and how long the different isotopes will remain in the patient's body . A Whole Body Count might take all of 5 minutes .

I don't know if I'm telling you what you wanted to know or just confusing the he11 out of you here , but if you have more questions or specific questions I'll try my best to answer them .

Once again , my apologies for the long reply .

[Dan]

... in response to Regarding detectible levels of Cesium-13..., posted by BURKE89 on Feb 28, 2003

It diminishes over time. How much time - I don't know for sure.

Yes, it *is* scary stuff - particularly when you consider how critical some of the affected waterways are to commerce, agriculture and foodstuffs in Ukraine. I understand there is some concern every time the riverbed of the Dnieper is significantly disturbed (whether by natural or man-made acts) for fear that some of the residue that has settled will be again stirred-up and find its way into the foodchain.

It's a good idea to be aware - though not paranoid - about some of these issues in Ukraine.

Another example - equally as unsettling - is the sheer amount of raw pollutants some Ukrainian cities pump into the environment. I specifically recall spending a week in Mariupol (SE Ukraine - on the Sea of Asov) during the summer of 1999. Pollution was so thick I could not make out the exterior walls of the factory that was less than a half-mile from me. The only visible outline of the buildings were the tip-top of the stacks billowing pollution. This was from a steel factory. I later learned that National Geographic had, at one time, ranked Mariupol as the 2nd-most polluted city on the face of the planet and I believe it.

FWIW

- Dan

[BURKE89]

... in response to Re: Regarding detectible levels of Cesiu..., posted by Dan on Mar 1, 2003

I might lose my 'Libertarian/Populist' stripes, here!

In all seriousness: tragic, at least, in the fact a 'people' have to comprehend their very existence -and subsistence- of their land & water supply. In essence - life.

I can't even fathom such matters, as an American.

Solutions, or thoughts?  

Thank you,

If only, for reality.

Vaughn

[WmGo]

... in response to Re: Regarding detectible levels of Cesiu..., posted by Dan on Mar 1, 2003

This is one of the big things that sticks out in my mind about my car trip to the Donetsk Oblast the summer of 2000. The ancient factories billowing out tons of pollutants, the look, the smell, the mountains of coal and dirt refuse from the mines...I remember the industrial section of Enakievo...what a site to see. As far as the eye could see in all directions for miles was one series of continous industrial plants, dirty, smoky, smelly, strange looking. It did not look real. It had the look and feel of something out of the twilight zone. And of course it was all normal to the people.
The communists were ruthless idiots and now the oligarchs who own the industries are just ruthless money and power lovers. It is a very hard life for the common people.

I remember the week I spent in DNP. It was so strange how excited people acted when they saw a fish in the Dnipro. They would act like it was a big deal, get all excited, and point it out as if no other river in the world has fish. And I would be thinking gosh, there are close to zero fish in the river, what's the big deal, don't they know what is normal. Maybe they were just excited that there was hope.

It is a strange and exciting place.

[Cold Warrior]

... in response to Re: Regarding detectible levels of Cesiu..., posted by Dan on Mar 1, 2003

Mostly steel industries there. The nearby sea of Azov is dead or dying. Most people have some lung or asthma problems. I had an uncle who wante to invest in steel there.When he saw the city he fled to the carribbean. he now has a steel plant in Trinidad.

[WmGo]

... in response to Ukraine May Be The ONLY Country . . ., posted by Dan on Feb 28, 2003

Hey Dan,

Perhaps the same can be said of Belarus since it took the brunt of the Chernobyl disaster. Got to hate it for all of them.

Congratulations on your wife expecting. I hope that all goes well.

Best regards!

WmGO