Arlaerion

While it says in the tweet “in 1986” there are no more than 100 deaths expected from chernobyl. Around 50 were killed at the accident, and around a dozen more in the years after. As of 2005 fewer than 50 deaths were directly linked to the radiation exposure.from the accident itself.

Dr. Geraldine Thomas explained this pretty good in “The Rational Veiw”-Podcast, linked above. If we hat the same cancer-incidence by radioactivity related exclusion zones but with particulate matter, half the cities of europe would have to be closed off in summer.

It is not wrong. As I have already posted, although the 2005 report of the Chernobyl Forum concluded with expected 4000 excess deaths after the event itself, the used model (LNT) is highly contested and with the dosages most people were exposed to not useful.

It is expected that all in all fewer than 100 people will die because of chernobyl (including the ~50 people killed by the explosion and the ASR right after it).

The Rational View podcast with Dr. Al Scott: Gerry Thomas and the UNSCEAR reports

Link to episode: https://therationalview.podbean.com/e/gerry-thomas-and-the-unscear-reports/

Link to media: https://mcdn.podbean.com/mf/web/r8t8zh/TRV-GerryThomas.mp3

Again, because my other comment is not visible to many of you:

The estimate of 50,000–60,000 Chernobyl cancer deaths is a widely cited, worst-case projection, but it is crucial to understand that this figure is not a factual count. It is a theoretical calculation derived from the linear no-threshold (LNT) model, a framework that is fundamentally flawed and inappropriate for assessing the health impact of low-dose radiation exposure.

• 29 relief workers died from Acute Radiation Sickness (ARS) shortly after the accident.
• As of 2005, only fewer than 50 deaths were directly linked to the radiation exposure from the accident itself. This is the most solid figure based on actual evidence.