Moving discussion here because it was off-topic to continue in it's originating thread.
There is sometimes a label of 'dead-zone' used in relation to this event.
That 'Dead-Zone' label is misleading .. not dead .. but instead the area has a higher risk of harmful effects like cancer , birth defects etc... due to the contamination of the event.
It has been suggested that the claim of higher risk itself is not supported by evidence .. but no evidence of that claim was given either.
To avoid rampant opinions going in circles .. I propose the following.
A zero bias one for one ... 'tit for tat' ... the side that comes up with the most evidence supporting it is the side that has the strongest evidence in favor of it.
Soo those who propose it is not higher risk of these things .. need to find supporting evidence to back up that claim .. just as much as those proposing it does have higher risks.
2nd .. it is important to make the identification that 'dead-zone' is itself a media hype thing .. the official term is 'Exclusion-Zone'.
Chernobyl Exclusion Zone on Wikipedia
Effects of the Chernobyl Disaster Wikipedia
Lastly .. I admit and recognize from the beginning .. that this can be compounded because the area being studied contains both at the same time .. the negatives of the event contamination .. and the positives of reducing other human negative impacts , due to reduced human activity and influence in that area... and thus a potential issue of correlation not = causation .. but , have to start somewhere.
- - - - - - - -
I'll start it off
From the above Wikipedia entry.. The 4 reference links have been fixed in the quote as well... by my count that is currently 4 pieces of decent evidence in favor of the harmful effects .. I look forward to seeing the equally robust 4+ pieces of evidence showing no harmful effects.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
A reduction in the density and the abundance of animals in highly radioactively contaminated areas has been demonstrated for several taxa, including birds, [37][38] insects and spiders, [39] and mammals. [40] In birds, which are an efficient bioindicator, species diversity decreases 50 percent in radioactively contaminated areas compared to clean areas, while abundance decreases by two thirds. |