4 ms·
The UN estimates for Chernobyl are based on the known bad LNT model for radiation exposure. Anything approaching 4,000 is unlikely if you apply more realistic m
by romaaeterna 7y ago
The UN estimates for Chernobyl are based on the known bad LNT model for radiation exposure. Anything approaching 4,000 is unlikely if you apply more realistic models.
- DuskStar 7y agoTo clarify for others - LNT refers to "Linear No Threshold", the most conservative [0] model for assessing deaths from radiation exposure. Under LNT, if some amount of radiation leads to a 1% chance of death, 1/10th that amount leads to a 0.1% chance of death. This is most likely overly conservative, as cancer rates in the states do not seem to vary with radiation exposure as would be predicted by LNT. So 4,000 is a good upper bound, if anything. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model
- romaaeterna 7y agoThank you for the further explanation. However, I think that it could also be referred to as a "wildly exaggerated upper bound." Although I understand what you're saying, it's a terrible upper bound to use for risk assessments, or anything that you need to make sound engineering decisions based on. The true number of deaths from Chernobyl, outside of the actual plant fatalities, is likely closer to 0 than to 4,000.