To: ransomnote
So, since you’ve seen the documentary, was the overall death toll appreciably higher for the first three years after the accident? I mean, we can assume that the doctors gave some other reason, like “helium balloon inhalation” or “Nigerian cat fungus,” right, when “radiation” was not allowed?
11 posted on
07/28/2011 6:24:59 PM PDT by
ConservativeMind
("Humane" = "Don't pen up pets or eat meat, but allow infanticide, abortion, and euthanasia.")
To: ConservativeMind
Well, I work in the healthcare field and I’ve documented deaths from late effects of Chernobyl in patients who have emigrated to the US years after the initial exposure—I’m talking cancers here that are a direct result of radiation exposure. There is no comprehensive way to document these deaths accurately unless there was a study done of everyone exposed, which has not been done. Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.
To: ConservativeMind
So, since youve seen the documentary, was the overall death toll appreciably higher for the first three years after the accident? I mean, we can assume that the doctors gave some other reason, like helium balloon inhalation or Nigerian cat fungus, right, when radiation was not allowed?
Try Leukemia, Aplastic Anemia, Thyroid Cancer, Lung Cancer etc. Those would be the diagnoses that you would see....
15 posted on
07/28/2011 7:42:01 PM PDT by
Kozak
("It's not an Election it's a Restraining Order" .....PJ O'Rourke)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson