It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Originally posted by chocise
I honestly cannot for the life of me recall ANY incident within the UK which supports his opinion. I believe if there had been, the likes of The Sun, Mirror, Express and Daily Mail would've been all over it. Objectively, attributing just 1000 infant deaths directly to the aftermath of Chernobyl would be extremely tenuous, to say it is definitively so is an absolute out & out lie.
Again this is opinion. Can you post any report or article that debunks what I have posted? I have listed sources, where are yours?
Originally posted by chocise
If i were truly that interested I would indeed go to some reference point or survey in order to counter your claims.
Originally posted by chocise
I'm quite sure atmospheric sampling was and is an ongoing pursuit in all developed countries and quite sure the UK monitored the radiation levels within its own boundaries but as I noted earlier, nothing of any relevant consequence ever hit the national headlines and the UK did not suffer any ill effects as a direct consequence of the Chernobyl disaster. Further, I cannot recall, or find anywhere, evidence those much nearer, in Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany, Belgium, Holland, France, Luxemborg etc etc ever recorded anything untoward either.
Originally posted by chocise
Again, please read that earlier paragraph, emphasis added: 'To put it in context, ...... I know for a fact there would be no way of directly attributing any Chernobyl after effects to the deaths of these infants simply because it would be impossible to isolate that as the cause.
Originally posted by chocise
And repeated: You could not ever attribute your claimed 1000 deaths in the UK to Chernobyl or its after effects simply because you could NOT isolate that as the cause. Period. It's that simple. No scholarly work from Oxbridge or Harvard would contest that point.
Originally posted by chocise
Far be it from me to remind you it was yourself who brought this dubious claim to our attention, the burden of proof is in your court: it is up to you to provide us with evidence to support your claim.
Scientists at Newcastle University examined rates of thyroid cancer in children across northern England before and after the Chernobyl cloud passed overhead.
Originally posted by chocise
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
This is a statement of fact, and not something requiring a source. You either accept it, or don't.
Over to you.
Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Santa Claus is real. This is a statement of fact, and not something requiring a source. You either accept it, or don't.
Over to you.
Originally posted by chocise
Let me remind you again, it is up to you to give us the evidence in support of your dubious claims, something you're evidently shy of doing. Journalist's opinions and their articles don't count btw.edit on 20-3-2011 by chocise because: Emphasis added to help FreeSpeaker
"Some of this radioactivity, predominantly radiocaesium-137, was deposited on certain upland areas of the UK, where sheep-farming is the primary land-use. Due to the particular chemical and physical properties of the peaty soil types present in these upland areas, the radiocaesium is still able to pass easily from soil to grass and hence accumulate in sheep. A maximum limit of 1,000 becquerels per kilogramme (Bq/kg) of radiocaesium is applied to sheep meat affected by the accident to protect consumers. This limit was introduced in the UK in 1986, based on advice from the European Commission's Article 31 group of experts. Under power provided under the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 (FEPA), Emergency Orders have been used since 1986 to impose restrictions on the movement and sale of sheep exceeding the limit in certain parts of Cumbria, North Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland... When the Emergency Orders were introduced in 1986, the Restricted Areas were large, covering almost 9,000 farms, and over 4 million sheep. Since 1986, the areas covered by restrictions have dramatically decreased and now cover 369 farms, or part farms, and around 200,000 sheep. This represents a reduction of over 95% since 1986, with only limited areas of Cumbria, South Western Scotland and North Wales, covered by restrictions.
Before Emlyn Roberts, a North Wales sheep farmer, can take any of his lambs to market, he has to call in the government inspectors with their Geiger counters. They scan the animals for signs of radiation because the land they graze is still contaminated from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster which occurred 20 years ago this month. If the radiation levels are too high, the lambs cannot be sold for meat until they have spent time on other land.
Levels of radioactivity from the Chernobyl explosion in 1986 remain unexpectedly high in some parts of northern Europe, researchers have found.
They say restrictions on some foods in both the United Kingdom and the former Soviet Union will have to remain in place for up to 50 years.
They found that the environment is not cleaning itself as fast as previously thought, and that radioactivity can be released to the soil again after it has been absorbed.
Contamination arrived in Britain through light nuclear rain, and radiocaesium-137 was deposited in mainly upland areas of Wales, Scotland and England where it seeped into the peaty soil used mainly to breed livestock.
The European Commission ruled that a maximum level of 1,000 becquerels per kilogram (bq/k) of radiocaesium should be allowed in sheep being reared for meat to safeguard the consumer. Similar guidelines were given for fish affected by contaminated rivers.
Thyroid cancer in children is however, currently assuming greater importance, because of the reports of a greatly in-creased frequency in children exposed to fallout in the areas around Chernobyl (Baverstock et al., 1992; Kazakov et al.,1992; Williams et al., 1993). In addition there have been reports that thyroid carcinoma is increasing in incidence in Sweden and England and Wales (Pettersson et al., 1991; dos Santos Silva and Swerdlow, 1993) with suggestions that this too might be linked to exposure to fallout.
Originally posted by chocise
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
Hahahahahaaaaaa.
Originally posted by chociseI read all those extracts before you found them and there's still ZERO in there. Monitoring for radio activity is not the same as suffering from it! If you read it without simply copying and pasting you'd have read the tiny areas affected in the UK: some upland areas of Wales & Cumbria which were contaminated by tiny amounts of Ceasium, were not a great trauma for the farmers or even the sheep involved – sheep on higher ground were rotated to lower pastures and then sold directly into the food chain.
Originally posted by chociseYou could of course, go to your favourite source: newspapers, but even here, an astute mind will see nothing of any great relevance supporting your hysterical claims 'the UK was, and still is radiated by fall-out from Chernobyl'. Tiny amounts were monitored, as would be expected, but the UK was not irradiated in the manner you claim 'causing 1000s of infant mortalities'. Get real!
Originally posted by chociseAlso, and fundamental to your rant, you still cannot counter my one claim in all this BS: that it would be impossible to attribute any cause. You can't refute it, so you conveniently ignore it and spin out some ad absurdum come strawmen arguments.
Originally posted by chociseI'm glad you're laughing, I'll join you. It really is too funny. Thank you for entertaining me this past few hrs.edit on 20-3-2011 by chocise because: Typo: your/you're