
Where Are Chernobyl’s Children? - bwang29
https://medium.com/@polarrist/where-are-chernobyl-s-children-a-photojournalist-s-honest-project-in-the-age-of-disaster-tourism-4cd333ab80c7
======
rdtsc
I remember the day it was announced. We were sitting with my dad watching
evening news.

The news was almost over and just in passing they quickly mentioned there was
"a malfunction" at the Chernobyl power plant. They showed a quick picture of
some smoke rising. And that's it. Nothing more. It was like they were
announcing about how the local sports team won a medal or something.

My dad said, yeah this is not good.

We didn't live too close but we were a bit downwind. The only thing I remember
then was that my mom's flowers on the balcony outside died. It was probably
not related now that I think about it, but she believed it was. People didn't
know what to believe. They obviously didn't trust the official channels.

There was a lot of fear mongering and people making up stories.

It got worse later when people from Chernobyl were sent to live in other
cities. Unbelievably, they carried a stigma! People would shun them, as if
those people were carrying a disease or were somehow responsible for it. I
can't even imagine being uprooted from your home, irradiated with an unknown
dose, sent to live in a new city starting with nothing, and then have your new
neighbors and coworkers shun you as well.

But that's not all. At some point they called for volunteers. Basically people
to help clear up the mess. They promised money and free apartments for those
that went. Many went but, when they came back they didn't enjoy the apartments
too much longer because they got cancer.

Anyway just a few personal anecdotes if anyone is interested.

~~~
tgb
> The only thing I remember then was that my mom's on the balcony outside
> died.

Are you missing a word? I hope you are. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

~~~
rdtsc
Sorry, corrected, it was plants (flowers).

------
qiqing
I can see this being a scene in a film (from the article):

'I arrived the next morning to be greeted by two men, with cheap suits and
attaché cases, looking like the East German Stasi. They were government
officials. They asked, “So what do you want to do here?” I said openly, “I
want to take photos here because I’m looking for victims from Chernobyl.”
Their answer, “None of these kids here are in any way connected with
Chernobyl. You know that malformations can happen anywhere, none of this is
connected to Chernobyl.”

Even though it was still very early in the morning, I had a great thought — I
had obviously already had enough coffee — and I responded, “Okay, if you give
it to me in writing that not a single kid here is in any way connected to
Chernobyl, I will pack up my bags and my cameras, and I’ll leave.” And then I
said, “But of course, we will need to report in National Geographic that
because none of the kids’ diseases are related to Chernobyl, you’re no longer
interested in receiving funds from Chernobyl charities.”

P: Wow. Power move.

G: You should have seen how fast they changed their minds. “Oh, there may be
this child, and may be this one, and, well, the parents of this kid lived in
Chernobyl.” All of sudden the whole situation turned. So in that kind of
encounter you learn that you cannot trust officials today any more than you
could in the past. It’s gotten better in Ukraine, but Belarus was pretty bad.'

------
dvt
I'm also Chernobyl kid! :)

I was born in Romania in May of 1986 about 700km from the plant[1]. My mom
tells me stories about how all the pregnant women in the area were encouraged
to eat pre-packaged food (no fresh veggies, for example), and drink powdered
milk.

Luckily, I was almost completely developed by the time of the disaster (born
May 8, meltdown happened April 26), but I am very cognizant about some health
problems that people affected by Chernobyl might have, notably thyroid
cancer[2].

[1]
[https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Chernobyl,+Kyivs'ka+oblast,+...](https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Chernobyl,+Kyivs'ka+oblast,+Ukraine/Gala%C8%9Bi,+Romania/@48.3353143,26.6906644,7z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x472a8f00e898abcf:0x14bcceabdbfd5d2c!2m2!1d30.2218992!2d51.2763027!1m5!1m1!1s0x40b6dee589f2c4b5:0x53d7342f252d702b!2m2!1d28.0079945!2d45.4353208)

[2] [https://www.mskcc.org/blog/study-reveals-genetic-causes-
thyr...](https://www.mskcc.org/blog/study-reveals-genetic-causes-thyroid-
increase-after-chernobyl)

~~~
walshemj
Did you get iodine supplements?

~~~
dvt
I'm not sure, but I don't think so. I'll need to ask my parents.

------
dogma1138
If we learned anything from the polygon nuclear test site is that we should
not ask where are the children but where are grand and grand grand children.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semipalatinsk_Test_Site](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semipalatinsk_Test_Site)

Birth defects seem to only increase with every generation to the point where
the 3rd and 4th generation are hitting a genetic roadblock as all the small
genetic defects have reached a "boiling point".

Some local doctors actually proposed to assign a genetic passport to the
residents of the area to let them know what's the chance of them being able to
reproduce without defects. There have been quite a few documentaries about
this VICE included it in a segment on their HBO show
[https://youtu.be/YMnpnd0T4gE?t=802](https://youtu.be/YMnpnd0T4gE?t=802).
_WARNNING!_ : Some of the images especially in the medical center are very
disturbing to the point of looking more like a set of a scifi movie ala the
thing than real life.

So the true ramifications of Chernobyl might not be visible for another 1 or 2
generations, on the good side the population which was exposed to the
Chernobyl incident is much less isolated than various native populations
exposed to nuclear test in Siberia, Kazakhstan and in the pacific so they have
a much bigger (unexposed) genetic pool to have children with which might
result in a smaller likelihood of enough genetic defects to accumulate to the
point where they cannot actually produce sufficient children to sustain a
population.

------
industriousthou
I'm intrigued by the mention of farmers growing crops in contaminated areas.
Presumably the soil has detectable levels of radioactive isotopes, but is
there any evidence that this is taken up into the crops themselves? Same with
the harvesting of fish or fungi in these zones... is there evidence that they
contain harmful contaminants? If so, would they be medically significant?

The essay seems to imply that this stuff is irresponsible, but doesn't really
delve into specifics.

Full disclosure: I've done a lot of construction work in the nuclear power
industry, so I'm pretty familiar with radiation, contamination, and their
effects. A lot of contamination events result in exposure that is
statistically insignificant (e.g. eating a banana would result in more
exposure), but there are certainly more harmful forms. My admittedly limited
understanding is that a lot of the areas surrounding Chernobyl have
detectable, but not really harmful levels of radiation.

I'm just a layman, so I'm hoping more informed folks can fill me in!

~~~
Loughla
There was a documentary on either PBS or NPR in the last year or so
specifically about harvesting plants and fungi in the disaster area. I can't
find it now, but the overall idea was that it would be a really bad idea to
eat meat, worse to eat the plants and grains, and just an overall terrible
idea to eat the fungus. This:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_hunting#Radiation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mushroom_hunting#Radiation)

Is the only thing I could find regarding mushrooms specifically. I wish I
could find that documentary. Essentially, mushrooms are really good at
accumulating radioactive particles through their mycelium.

~~~
industriousthou
Wow, the uptake of caesium-137 in mushrooms was something I was not aware of.
That's really interesting, as I thought it was something that mostly just bio-
accumulated in higher-order predators. I might just be mixing it up with
mercury though.

Thanks for the response!

------
pdkl95
Ever since it became easier to get into the Chernobyl area, there has been an
increase in people trying to dramatize it. I suggest watching this short video
with Tom Scott, about his recent visit, where they try to inject a bit of
reality into the situation: a lot of looted/stripped buildings that have stood
abandoned for decades. It's impressive, but doesn't have a lot to do with
radiation or the reactor.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhYEkRjUWM8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhYEkRjUWM8)

There are certainly a lot of areas where you shouldn't linger for extended
periods of time. The reactor accident (and how the situation was handled
afterwords[1]) was absolutely terrible.

That said, it is important to remember that - even accounting for the
Chernobyl disaster (and the utterly insignificant _radiological_ [3] disaster
in Fukushima) - nuclear power is still the only viable option if we want to
have energy in the future, as it is the _cleanest_. Everything else pollutes
more and only a few technologies even come close to making enough power.

Unfortunately, the Hiroshima Syndrome[4] is epidemic, and the current wave of
"Chernobyl disaster theatre" is only making these fears worse. We need to find
better ways to educate people and counter the decades of misinformation and
fear. The HN crowd like to "disrupt" things, so may I suggest finding ways to
disrupt the common fears about radiation?

[1] My greatest respect and thanks to the people - the "liquidators" \- who
had to be the "bio-robots" that cleaned up the worst areas when the mechanical
robots _failed_ from the radiation. If you haven't seen it, I suggest watching
this[2] footage of 3828 people that cleaned up one of the worst areas of the
reactor's roof, <2 minutes at a time.

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfDa8tR25dk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfDa8tR25dk)

[3] the tsunami disaster was _far_ worse, but isn't relevant to my point

[4] [http://www.hiroshimasyndrome.com/what-is-the-hiroshima-
syndr...](http://www.hiroshimasyndrome.com/what-is-the-hiroshima-
syndrome.html)

~~~
bottled_poe
> The HN crowd like to "disrupt" things, so may I suggest finding ways to
> disrupt the common fears about radiation?

Don't get your hopes up - I can't imagine how a tech startup could participate
in nuclear power generation. Startups can however compete in decentralized
energy production technologies such as wind and solar.

~~~
pdkl95
> Don't get your hopes up

I know, but it's worth asking anyway.

Note that I'm suggesting _education_ , not power generation. The generators
can come later, but only after the radiophobia is addressed.

------
lampe3
here i'am !

Because of chernobyl I was born 2 months to early.

I had luck on the same day there where children born with 3 hands or other
deformation.

~~~
gus_massa
Do you have a link to an article about the children with three hands? It's an
unusual deformation in newborns, but I think it's not related to radiation.

Radiation is bad and is especially bad for small children and unborn children,
but it can produce only certain types of deformations. The number of hands in
a baby is fixed after the 4th week after fertilization. (
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_development](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_development)
)

I also found this article:
[http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2021142](http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2021142)

> _Most cases of multiple limbs result from conjoined twins forming in
> development. One child does not survive and becomes essentially absorbed
> into the other, said Dr. Russell Jennings at the Children 's Hospital in
> Boston._

~~~
lampe3
no that's what i was told.

A little bit more about me: I was born in August 1986 in Grudziądz, Poland. I
was 2 months to early.

I had to be revived 3 times after i was born. usually they tried only twice. I
was told that by a Nurse who begged the Doctor to try it once more. I know all
that because years later I thanked her with flowers. She and my mum told me
some stories. They dont have a source or article about that. They are just
stories.

there were more miscarriage then normal since April 1986. She told me that
some children were horrible deformed and that she was happy for every child
they could save.

------
Jun8
Photos of Chernobyl always remind me of _Stalker_
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalker_(1979_film)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalker_\(1979_film\))),
yet the philosophical introspective guide is light years away from the garish
tourist guide pictured here with radioactive lenses.

~~~
rdtsc
Well of course in S.T.A.L.K.E.R. (the computer game) they had combined the
two. The Zone there is obviously Chernobyl, it even includes the giant over
the horizon (now defunct) radar installation and so on.

(Note: I never played, I was just told by others about).

------
ageofwant
Vastly more personal damage and hardship was caused by the forced removal of
populations than the actual event itself. This happened both at Chernobyl and
Fukushima.

The confirmed radiation related death's at Chernobyl was 13, the occurrence of
cancers and other illnesses possibly related to radiation in the population is
to close to the statistical noise floor to be significant.

The current popular narrative on nuclear energy is not doing us any good.

------
xigency
For a perspective of what it's like for children who are currently living in a
meltdown zone, see the contrast with this article:
[http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/03/10/national/life-
in...](http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/03/10/national/life-indoors-
exacts-toll-on-koriyama-children/#.Vd9lLZcvZu4)

------
beastman82
I recommend _Plutopia_ by Kate Brown for those interested in relatively
unknown irradiated communities comparable to Chernobyl.

------
fjolthor
One of Chernobyl's children is currently heavyweight boxing champion of the
world.

~~~
exo762
I'm sorry, but this sounds like street-level insult.

Brothers Klitchko and Valuev were all born in 70ties. Not even close to
Chernobyl's children generation.

~~~
fjolthor
Why did you think this was meant as an insult?

~~~
exo762
You see, you've stepped onto the ground rich with history and connotations.
Growing up I saw in newspapers photos of children with flippers instead of
legs. I've heard kids being called "Chernobyl kid" on streets by other kids.
"Chernobyl kid" as in insult meant "damaged kid".

More generally term "Chernobyl kid" means (or used to mean) something very
specific: person who was affected by radiation in a way which caused
mutations. For mutations to be caused, radiation exposure needs to happen
during prenatal development. Just being displaced with your family to other
region does not make you a Chernobyl kid. That's why I mentioned wrong
generation.

We are talking about boxers who have exceptional physical characteristics.
When you talk about Chernobyl in this context, things like antagonist "Rocky
IV" pop into mind. Juiced on chems. Or a mutant.

Calling a world champion a mutant is an insult. He has made it to the top
thanks to hard work, talent, and smart management.

~~~
fjolthor
I see. What I was intending with that comment was to point out that despite
being a child who was exposed to radiation in Chernobyl, that child (children,
Vitali was there too) went on to be one of the most physically accomplished
humans currently alive.

------
rasz_pl
Where are they? In the scaremongering imagination of pop writers and lobbying
scientists. Last time I checked there was a <3% leukaemia bump after 'the
worst nuclear disaster in the world'.

~~~
paulmd
The comparisons of Fukushima to Chernobyl really got my goat, personally.
Despite the fact that fuel rods melted in both cases (thus both were
"meltdowns"), there is an extraordinary difference between fuel rods
overheating in a cooling pond and explosive breach of a critical reactor in a
runaway condition. It's like classifying a campfire and the Hindenburg
together because both are combustion - both can certainly burn you, but
they're fundamentally dislike in intensity, scale, and kind.

Most of the really nasty stuff (high-level actinide waste) is highly
radioactive _because_ it decays so quickly. After the reactor is shut down and
the fuel rods are removed, all that stuff is gone, whereas breach of a
_critical_ reactor results in the release of that stuff. The byproducts of a
fuel fire is stuff like radioiodine and radiocaesium - it's not healthy by any
means, if ingested it will elevate the risk of cancer over the long term, but
it's not instadeath like actinide waste.

"What is expected to happen in Fukushima" is nothing like what happened to
Chernobyl. A couple years later people are moving back, and it's perfectly
safe to do so after some minimal decontamination efforts.

~~~
vilhelm_s
Not everyone is moving back though. I couldn't find out how long the Fukushima
"difficult-to-return" inner exclusion zone is expected to be maintained, do
you know? Apparently people who can't move back within 5 years will receive
compensation based on the full pre-accident market value of their house.

