This statement of M. Haegi, as well as so many others presented at the WHO Conference, was to be published in the Proceedings by March 1996. However, these texts have still not been published [6]. Apparently, the papers presented in Geneva could have influenced negatively the IAEA Conference, in Vienna, in April 1996. The only explanation for the non publications appears to be the Agreement between the WHO and the IAEA, signed in 1959.
This Agreement states that the research programs of the WHO should previously be agreed, so that their results would not harm the IAEA main objective, which is: ”To accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world” .
This excerpt from the Statute of the IAEA is printed on the first pages of every publication of this Agency, including the Proceedings of the April 1996 conference of the IAEA already published in September 1996 devoted to the Chernobyl accident [7]. The Agreement guarantees that the research will not negatively affect the development of nuclear energy. Article I, §3 of the Agreement, specifies in particular that:
“Whenever either organization proposes to initiate a program or activity on a subject in which the other organization has or may have a substantial interest, the first party shall consult the other with a view to adjusting the matte by mutual agreement.”
According to Article III of the mentioned Agreement:
1) The International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organization recognize that they may find it necessary to apply certain limitations for the safeguarding of confidential information furnished to them.
2) Subject to such arrangements as may be necessary for the safeguarding of confidential material, the Secretariat of the IAEA and the Secretariat of the WHO shall keep each other fully informed concerning all projected activities and all programs of work which may be of interest to both parties.
The requirement of Article III, demanding confidentiality, which means silence, is contrary to the Constitution of the WHO. In fact, the purpose of the WHO is specified in chapter I of the Constitution of this Organization: “The attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of healt”.
Chapter II, Article 2 specifies how the WHO intends to attain its objective, and defines, in particular, the following functions:
(a) To act as the directing and co-ordination authority on international health work;
(d) To furnish appropriate technical assistance and, in emergencies, necessary aid, upon the request or acceptance of Governments;
(q) To provide information, counsel and assistance in the field of health;
(r) To assist in developing an informed public opinion among all peoples on matters of health;
It is evident, that the provisions of the Agreement prevent open information that is contrary to the Constitution of the WHO. Nevertheless, the Agreement was signed during the 12th World Health Assembly, May 28, 1959. The above quoted clauses can be found in Basic Documents of the WHO [8].
A very early publication of the WHO warning against the development of the nuclear industry, has been prepared by a group of outstanding experts in the field of genetics, who met in Geneva in 1956. The winner of the Nobel Prize M. J. M. Muller signed this joint statement. [9]:
“The genome is the most valuable treasure of humankind. It determines the life of our descendants and the harmonious development of the future generations. As experts, we confirm, that the health of future generations is threatened by an increasing development of nuclear industry and the growth of the quantity of radioactive sources S we also consider the fact of appearance of new mutations observed at people to be fatal for them and for their descendants”.
The publication of the proceedings of this conference was not acceptable to the pronuclear lobby. The IAEA decided soon after its creation to put an end to the freedom of expression in this field by concluding an Agreement with different UN organizations, and especially the WHO. This lasts until the beginning of the 21st century.
The attempts of the WHO to disseminate information about Chernobyl in November 1995.
Dr. Hiroshi Nakajima, Director-general of the WHO, organized an international conference “Consequences of Chernobyl and other radiation accidents and their influence on human health.”, in Geneva, in November 20–23, 1995. Mr. Y. Fujita, governor of the Hiroshima prefecture, was the chairman of the conference. This conference considered the destruction of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as the explosion of the Chernobyl reactor as radioactive accidents, deserving to be compared. Considerable differences were ascertained between these two types of accidents (the above-mentioned three explosions had to be categorized in this context as “Occidents” and not “catastrophes”). As the Proceedings of this Geneva Conference have not been published, it is impossible to refer to the presentations. It is useful to remind its objectives as stated in the program [10]:
• To present the principal results of the first phase of the international program on health effects of Chernobyl accident (IPHECA).
• To compare the obtained results to the results of similar research, related to the health effects of Chernobyl accident.
• To improve (and to update) awareness of the type, the total extent and the harm for health of the Chernobyl accident, as known presently and to be foreseen in the future.
• To make new results of research concerning consequences of other radioactive accidents, available, in order to give more complete information on their health effects.
• To study the effectiveness of the protective measures undertaken in the area of public health during and after the accidents, and to offer recommendations for the future.
• To ensure the development and/or to clarify the state of knowledge concerning the consequences of influence of radiation on human health.
• To provide information on existing or future research within the framework of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR).
• To earmark the interesting tendencies and changes, which should become an object of steadfast attention of the researchers.
This program convinced 700 doctors and experts, many from the most contaminated countries to participate in the work of the congress. The IAEA also mobilized the supporters of the atomic industry. Thus, contrary opinions were expressed, which allowed for hot debates. The representatives of the pronuclear lobby tried to prevent the dialogue and Prof. S. Yarmonenko from the Moscow Oncologic Center, demanded that the organizers would remove from the programs of future congresses those speakers, who intended to speak on the effects of low level radiation on living organisms. This apparently became a rule for all the following international conferences, especially in Vienna, 1996.
The reports, debates and presentations of the posters in Geneva were not published. The large document, which presents on 519 pages the statistical data gathered during the first phase of the WHO pilot project IPHECA [11]: 3Influence of Chernobyl accident on health2, confirms the very slow response of the WHO on the Chernobyl accident. Although the majority of people considered Chernobyl as an extreme incident, demanding urgent measures, the IAEA alone supervised the studies and provided the information on this catastrophe. The IAEA coordinated with the national medical authorities the protective measures for the population, considering as its priority to reduce the expenses.
The WHO was never the “co-ordinating authority” as required by its Constitution. At meetings, where the destiny of the victims was discussed, the WHO was even represented by Prof. Pellerin, a promoter of the development of nuclear industry [1]. Five years after the accident, the WHO, finally started studying the problems in the field, selecting 5 priority subjects, among them dental caries, whereas birth defects and hereditary alterations, which the Committee of experts gathered by the WHO [9], considered as a priority, were carefully overlooked.
As the Proceedings of the WHO-Geneva Con
ference remain unpublished, it seems to be useful to recall some presentations. M. Martin Griffiths from the UN Humanitarian Department in Geneva, stated that people still do not know the truth, and that many are still living in contaminated zones. He requested the WHO to continue its research work and to provide assistance, as he feared that everything would be stopped without adequate financial support. According to M. Martin Griffiths 9 million people are sufferers from Chernobyl, and the victims of the accident are constantly growing in number.
Dr. Y. Korolenko, Minister of Health of the Ukraine, noted that the nuclear fallout contaminated the largest part of his country. Thirty million people drink contaminated water from the Dniepr. Everyone was affected by I-131 and the specialists now perform measures to reconstruct the radiation dose of Cs-137, received by the population. The minister mentioned lesion of the endocrine system and declared that diabetes mellitus had increased by 25 percent (This was not related to diet). Knowing about the social consequences of the insulin-dependent form of diabetes, it is easy to understand the deep concern of the Minister, who recalled the financial situation of his country in that situation, and asked all the states for help.
Prof. E.A. Nechaev from the Ministry of Health and Medical Industry (Moscow) indicated that 2,5 million people were irradiated in the Russian Federation following Chernobyl, and that 175.000 people continue to live in contaminated regions. He showed the increased incidence of a very aggressive form of cancer of the thyroid gland in small children, and the increase of birth defects from 220 up to 400 in 100,OOO newborns in the contaminated regions. The frequency of similar diseases ranges within 200/100,000 in clean regions of Russia.
Prof. Okeanov from Belarus presented the results of his epidemiological research, in particular, data based on the national register of cancer, recognized by the WHO, which has been established in Belarus in 1972. Whereas leukemia increased in Hiroshima within the first years after the bombing with a peak between the sixth and the eighth years in Chelyabinsk the maximum occurred after 15–19 years. Okeanov noticed an increase of leukemia among liquidators only after 9 years, but the peak has not yet been reached. He stated that those liquidators, who worked more than 30 days in contaminated areas, have three times as many leukemia as their colleagues who worked there less than 30 days. The period of exposure to radiation seems thus to play an important role. Other forms of cancers are also increasing: cancers of the bladder doubled among the liquidators. The number of cancers of the kidneys, the lungs, and other organs also increased in the Gomel region, an area heavily contaminated by the nuclear fallout with.
The report of this group of Belarusian scientists showed also an increase of cardiovascular diseases among the liquidators, from 1,600 up to 4,000 per 100,000, and up to 3,000 per 100,000 persons living in zones of heavy radioactive contamination. They noticed marked alterations of the immune system, increase of chromosomal aberrations, loss of sight, in particular due to cataract among young subjects. The speakers showed a doubling of mental retardation observed in children as well as mental changes in adults. He insisted on the necessity to study the increase of gastro-intestinal disorders, which he also observed. Among documents received by the WHO, there were unpublished presentations, e.g.: a document of professor Okeanov in Russian of 1994 [12].
All the data submitted in Geneva in November 1995, were not available in March 1996 as officially promised [6]. This delay may well be in relation with the decision of the IAEA, to definitely close the debate about Chernobyl at its own Conference, in Vienna, April 1996 [7].
The publication by the WHO of the Proceedings of its 1995 Conference could have prevented the IAEA from achieving its objective: to put an end to discussions about the health effects of the Chernobyl accident.
The IAEA Conference. April 8–13 1996, in Vienna
The title of this Conference was “Ten Years after Chernobyl”. The participants had been selected according to the approval by the ministry of industry and the ministry of international affairs; the ministry of health was not consulted. During the plenary sessions, the speakers expressed contempt and haughtiness towards victims of the disaster. Actions to be taken after the future major accidents, which were considered as unavoidable, were also discussed at the congress. The aim of the discussion on this topic was very clearly formulated: to reduce expenses for the relevant industries, to limit or even avoid evacuation of people from highly contaminated zones, to keep the media under severe control. They believed that “alarmist”, “stressful” reports were basically causing practically all the Chernobyl connected health problems.
The speakers for the main reports and especially the chairpersons of the sessions had been instructed to avoid discussions on “difficult” problems related to health, particularly those deriving from the chronic incorporation of Chernobyl radionuclides from the environment in the organism. Those speakers also called for the silence of mass media in case of a catastrophe, since, they believed that “alarmist” reports were basically causing practically all the Chernobyl- connected health problems.
The authors of the main presentations confined themselves to the three types of illnesses (acute irradiation syndrome, mental deficiency in children irradiated in utero, and thyroid cancer, in children exclusively), which had been admitted to be the essential pathological findings due to the increased ionizing radiation caused by Chernobyl. All the other illnesses put into the large catalogue of psychosomatic diseases associated with unjustified fears, or to some kind of social protest, having nothing to do with radioactivity.
The acute radiation syndrome was one of the rare real “accident’s outcome”. This syndrome led to discussions to determine if the number of deaths was 31 or 32. These deaths were practically the only ones taken into consideration by the IAEA, as a consequence of the Chernobyl catastrophe.
However, when IPPNW members had rallied in Kazakhstan in order to help the population to stop the Soviet atomic tests, General-in-Chief Ilienko showed memorial shields on the walls of the Officers House in Semipalatinsk. The featured the names of local residents killed during the two world wars and the Afghanistan War. There was a further list of people who died for the nation. The General asked us: “Do you know who are on this list? They are our Chernobyl liquidators !”
The Soviet Union sent 800,000 soldiers, civil experts and foremen, their average age being 33 years, to the site of the disaster to try to decontaminate it, isolate and stabilize the reactor1s ruins. We met the widows of liquidators in Moscow. Several years ago, there were already more than a thousand of them, and they kept gathering new files and photos of other deceased liquidators “Moscovites husbands”, who died from new diseases, which they heroically acquired during their service, neither generally acknowledged posthumously nor always glorified by the nation.
As for the liquidators, E. Marchuk, the Ukrainian Prime Minister pointed out at the IAEA Conference [7], that in his country, 3.1 million people were exposed to radiation at the time of the explosion. Many remain in the contaminated area. Among the 360,OOO Ukrainian liquidators, 35,OOO were already invalid.
Although at the conference IAEA conceded the existence of neuropsychic diseases in children whose mothers had been exposed to radiation during their pregnancy. The speakers denied the existence of similar diseases in adults due to the radiation around Chernobyl, although this is a well-known phenomenon. The organizers tried to present victims suffering from neuropsychic diseases (in particular, among the 800,000 liquidators) as malingerers, raising claims for more financial support, or possessed by unjustified fear of radioactivity. IAEA experts first invented the new terminology of “radiophobia”. Later, when negative reaction to this concept arose, the term of “environmental stress” was created to qualify neurovegetative and subjective disturbances as well as a complex of other illnesses, caused by Chernobyl.
The Permanent Peopled Tribunal (3) judged the behavior of international organizations, especially the IAEA, national
commissions for atomic energy as well as governments, which finance them on behalf of the interest of the nuclear industry as follows: “The absence of concern for these real outcomes of radiation exposure, was in itself one of the ways in which the victims were revictimized after the disaster”.
The IAEA has done its best to allow those responsible for what had happened, as well as the countries possessing nuclear know-how and the Western atomic lobby, to save as much as possible on the expense of the victims of the Chernobyl catastrophe.
Cancer diseases caused by Chernobyl
After many years of obstruction, in particular during the IAEA conference in 1991, the experts of the IAEA had to admit the existence of thyroid pathologies, partially brought about by Iodine 131, discharged into the atmosphere by the blow-up in Chernobyl. According to Bandazhevsky that illness are caused by several radionuclides (e.g. Cs-137, Sr-90 in tissues of different organs. Their toxicity may be synergistic [13]. During discussions on the thyroid cancers, the official speaker of IAEA mentioned that this was “a good cancer”. We do not think, that mothers of children, ill with cancer and often having metastases in their lymph nodes and even in their lungs, or that the surgeons who operate those children share this view.
The IAEA tried to show that it would be easy to distribute tablets of stable, non-radioactive iodine among the population in order to prevent thyroid cancer. Doctors were aware of such preventive measures before the catastrophe. However, with the exception of Poland, neither the politicians nor the technical equipment allowed to undertake in time such preventive actions.
During this debate, one of the speakers specified that iodine tablets have to be ingested before the radioactive cloud appears, thus ensuring their maximal efficiency. This seems to be quite problematic, as they call at the same time on the mass media to remain silent in case of a future accident “as to avoid fears”. The immediate distribution of iodine pills should be envisaged not only in the radius of 5–30 km, but of 500 km and over.
The Crime of Chernobyl- The Nuclear Gulag Page 78
