Nadiya Kostyuk
Ukraine
Berezne District Central Administration
After spending a month in Berezne (a small town, located in the fourth radioactive Chernobyl zone close to the Ukrainian border with Poland and Belarus), I became famous (it is not a joke). One of the editors of the local newspaper got so excited about my research in this town that she invited me for an interview. She was very flattered that someone came all the way from the United States here to talk and write about such an important issue to the Berezne residents as Chernobyl. From talking to the local population, I’ve understood that it is very common here to be born with thyroid diseases and no one cares too much about them (“as long as it does not bother”). Most Berezne residents have a special identification card (Chernobyl’s’ke posvidchennia), according to which they are supposed to receive free medicine (the Ukrainian government funds the Chernobyl fund which pays for medicine of the victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster). It happens rarely, however, as the government does not have enough money and people have to buy the pills.
The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster is an important issue not only in Ukraine but also in other countries affected by the explosion. Its consequences are even felt today (twenty-five years after the catastrophe) all over the world. While traveling in Geneva this June, I met with the representatives of NGO “Independent WHO [World Health Organization],” who blamed the WHO for its support of the IAEA’s views on the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster (as a result of signing an agreement between the WHO and IAEA on May 28, 1959, which “prevents the WHO from taking a public position on an issue which might harm the interests of the other party” (WHA 12-40)). On September 5, 2005, the IAEA published an official number of people who suffered as a result of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster: 56 deaths, 400 irradiated, and 400 cancers. But this data is not even close to the reality. According to the Ukrainian Embassy information (April 2004), there are over 1 million liquidators (people who participated in the clean-up work at the plant after the explosion), of which 25,000 were dead by 2001. Thus, the representatives of Independent WHO spend every day from 8 am to 6 pm in front of the WHO since April 2007, insisting that WHO should
- “assume its responsibilities, as set out in its Constitution, in total independence from the IAEA, and cease to be an accomplice to the disinformation on the health consequences of nuclear power in general;
- support independent scientists who have struggled to provide assistance to contaminated populations since April 1986;
- take the initiative in research and prevention in relation to internal, low dose radiation, the effects of which continue for period varying from decades to thousands of years” (for more information about this NGO, you can visit their website at www.independentwho.info).
During this month, I’ve worked with various departments in Berezne District Central Administration as well as other organizations in the town. During my internship here, I did the analysis of how the demographic situation in the Berezne region has changed since the Chernobyl nuclear disaster and how much of this change was caused by radiation released as a result of the plant nuclear explosion on April 26, 1986. The increase in spread of diseases is highly significant, sometimes even in four times. For instance, Table 2 shows that the number of tonsillitis and adenoids illnesses increased from 17.8 cases in 1985 to 234.6 case in 2010. There are plenty of other examples, which show a similar trend, from the tables below. (My apologies if my translation of diseases might be a bit confusing as I composed those tables and never studied medical terms in English).
Table 1: Population Morbidity
| Years
|
1985 |
1986 |
1990 |
1995 |
2000 |
2005 |
2010 |
| All population (for 1000 people) |
414.4 |
453.5 |
483.2 |
595.6 |
585.5 |
762.9 |
776.5 |
| Adult population (for 1000 adults) |
396.4 |
420.9 |
439.3 |
483.3 |
441.6 |
580.4 |
550.6 |
| Children (for 1000 children) |
455.6 |
530.9 |
602.3 |
858.2 |
938.2 |
1260.8 |
1388.5 |
Table 2: Child Morbidity, Based on Diseases (for10,000 children)
| Years | 1985 | 1986 | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 |
| Illnesses of Breathing Organs . | |||||||
| Pneumonias | 86.5 | 107.7 | 83.2 | 87.1 | 92.6 | 115.1 | 140.0 |
| Bronchial asthma | 1.6 | 1.7 | 2.4 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 0.7 | 4.0 |
| Tonsillitis and adenoids illnesses |
17.8 | 102.2 | 93.2 | 156.7 | 253.3 | 245.5 | 234.6 |
| Pharyngitis and rhinitis |
3.0 | 7.0 | 21.4 | 23.1 | 26.2 | 21.9 | 34.6 |
Table 3: Spread of illnesses among children, based on diseases (for 10,000 children)
| Years | 1988 | 1990 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 |
| Infectious and parasitogenic diseases | 226.7 | 293.7 | 298.2 | 513.6 | 628.0 |
| Illnesses of the endocrine system | 242.2 | 330.8 | 1600.1 | 1600.1 | 1761.0 |
| Illnesses of the blood circulationsystem | 188.9 | 240.2 | 713.8 | 733.7 | 895.0 |
| New formations | 14.4 | 16.1 | 10.2 | 77.3 | 105.0 |
| Illnesses of breathing organs | 2794.4 | 3523.0 | 3636.8 | 1613.8 | 6676.0 |
| Illnesses of digestion organs | 721.1 | 694.5 | 1192.7 | 1553.4 | 1722.0 |
| Illnesses of the urogenital system | 136.7 | 77.9 | 186.4 | 306.1 | 400.0 |
| Illnesses of the bones and the muscle system | 107.8 | 115.4 | 141.7 | 250.8 | 239.0 |
| Skin and hypoderm Illnesses | 453.3 | 438.2 | 423.3 | 855.7 | 1033.0 |
| Innate anomalies | 235.5 | 148.6 | 139.2 | 170.0 | 161.0 |
Table 4: Obstetrics and Gynecology Data
| Years | 1985 | 1986 | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 |
| Frequency of premature birth-givings (for 100 pregnant) |
3.3 | 2.6 | 3.0 | 3.5 | 3.4 | 4.8 | 39.8 |
| Number of the complicated birth-givings (for 100 birth-givings) |
36.1 | 59.6 | 63.3 | 93.3 | 92.8 | 33.5 | 42.9 |
| Anaemias frequency of the pregnant (for 100 birth-givings) |
0.39 | 0.96 | 5.5 | 64.8 | 79.4 | 57.0 | 44.6 |
| Anaemias frequency of the birth-givings (for 1000 infants) |
15.8 | 12.1 | 68.4 | 579.4 | 779.6 | 583.4 | 464.4 |
| Dead-born (for 1000 infants) |
7.5 | 13.4 | 7.8 | 7.3 | 8.5 | 10.7 | 31.6 |
Recently, I had a conversation with Anna Martynuyk, a pediatrician who is in charge of the Maternal and Child Department at Berenze Central Hospital. We talked about the challenges of her work. She shared with me a story about a lady (she did not mention her name, as keeping confidentiality) whose one-year-old child had a stomach tumor. This lady refused to have any treatment, took a child away from the hospital, started visiting churches and praying to God (as she believed this was the only “treatment” her baby needed). Ms. Martynuyuk wrote letters and requests to different institutions in the region so they could advise the lady to start baby’s treatment. Her efforts were in vain. Nothing was done and the baby died in a month (it actually happened last Saturday).
This sad story reminded of my internship at the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) last fall. While there, I was working on composing a report on four research papers done on the cultural dimensions of maternal and child health in Asian countries, specifically in Tibet, Yunna, Guizhou, Quinghai, Lao PDR, and Viet Nam (you can find a full version of the reports at http://unfpa.org/public/lang/en/home/publications/pid/8825). The common characteristic in those countries is that often women do not feel comfortable going to health care clinics. It happens due to the lack of access to education and information and represents the biggest challenges faced by the local, regional, and international communities.
When I told Ms. Martynuyk about my experience at the UNFPA and asked if the access to education and information is what is needed in Berezne. She replied that everything is being done already: “We have numerous workshops on maternal and child health and work with various partners, UNICEF is one of them… We only need better funding from the government and our patients’ desire to come and ask for help.” How can it be achieved?