this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2026
570 points (91.4% liked)
Socialism
6903 readers
542 users here now
Rules TBD.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
in the end estimated 50-60.000 people died from cancer related to Chernobyl.
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.
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/chernobyl-true-scale-accident
What about Dow chemical, or Monsanto?
Literally whataboutism
The point is the OP screenshot being disingenuous.
Your point can also be true
The point isn't that Chernobyl was more dangerous. The point is that the tweet isn't being honest.
You can't see the other reply so:
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/chernobyl-true-scale-accident
The other reply that you can't see:
You didn't see my reply elsewhere in the thread. The tweet is dishonest because it's deliberately excluding the deaths from long term health issues in the Chernobyl while including them in the Bhopal numbers.
I already figured out for myself that Chernobyl was still less deadly than Bhopal and I never claimed otherwise.
Maybe I'm interpreting things wrong but the study is counting the long term health issues in the 50 total deaths, 20 years after the accident is long term no?
I got lost in the sauce a bit. The tweet is still comparing different statics. Chernobyl had less then 100 deaths in the first year, but thousands more deaths from cancer in the following year. Those were excluded from mention.
Bhopal had 16,000 deaths in the first year and 500,000 "nonfatally poisoned" casualties. Those almost certainty lead to premature deaths and if we're including those, we also need to be including the long term cancer deaths from Chernobyl.
The study is saying that the projection is 4k but they can only attribute with confidence 50 death related with the disaster.
Late as 2004 is saying that they are counting the following years
I mean what about ww2? All terrible disasters, but the concept was "chernobyl was not small made bigger by capitalism for fearmongering, it was huge all along". Then we can also discuss how terrible and how many victims capitalism brought, just don't base it on a lie or you'll just loose the trust of other people. Whataboutism doesn't help either, you are deflecting when you already have a lot of other potential arguments. Be better.
Capitalism has killed over 100 million people directly over the last 100 years.
Every year ~10 million people starve to death or die of easily preventable disease. These deaths are directly attributable to capitalism, as the global system of economics and distribution. It simply isn’t profitable to the capitalists to prevent these deaths.
So your number is way short. Every ten years capitalism kills 100 million just from starvation and disease.
Thank you for the correction.