Medical- Biological and Socio-Psychological Problems of Safety in Emergency Situations

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of radiation from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster for the Voronezh region situated at a distance of more than 600 km from the epicenter. Data from the radiological laboratory of Center for Hygiene and Epidemiology in the Voronezh region were used. Characteristics of the soil surface contamination with cesium-137 and strontium-90 (Ci/km2), the overall average annual effective dose (mZv/year), the dose of gamma radiation (mZv/h) were selected to assess the impact of the Chernobyl accident on the Voronezh region. It was found that for the Voronezh region areas of radioactive contamination from the Chernobyl disaster, maximum surface contamination of soils with cesium-137 reduced from 3.15 to 1.66 Ci/km2, strontium-90 from 0,063 to 0.0033 Ci/km2 over 30 years. Maximum territorial average annual effective dose of external radiation decreased from 1.70 to 0.08 mZv/year. Based on the research the current radiation situation in the Voronezh region can be considered satisfactory (secure). Radiation indicators comply with safety regulations. The average annual effective dose from «Chernobyl rain» for residents of the settlements subjected to radioactive exposure, in 2010–2015 did not exceed 0.16 mZv/year. In the structure of the collective radiation dose of the population of the Voronezh region, doses from natural sources of ionizing radiation dominate each year (from 74.96 to 76.68 %; average for Russia in 2014 – 86.81 %); followed by medical sources of ionizing radiation, their annual contribution to the collective dose varies from 20.04 to 24.78 % (in Russia in 2014 – 12.91 %), technologically modified radiation background, including global fallout and the Chernobyl accident – from 0.18 to 0.20 % (in Russia in 2014 – 0.23 %), radiation from enterprises that use sources of ionizing radiation – 0.07–0.08 % (in Russia in 2014 – 0.05 %). According to the analysis of cancer incidence over the past five years (total malignant neoplasms, including the thyroid gland, lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue), there were no significant differences between areas with varying radioactive contamination after the Chernobyl accident. Therefore, it can be concluded that the density of radioactive pollution in the Voronezh region is currently not associated with malignancy rates.

1. Balonov M. I. Posledstviya Chernobylya: 20 let spustya [The consequences of Chernobyl: 20 Years After]. Radiatsiya i risk (Byulleten’ Natsional’nogo radiatsionno-epidemiologicheskogo registra) [Radiation risk (Bulletin of the National Radiation and Epidemiological Registry)]. 2006. Vol. 15, N 3/4. Pp. 97–119. (In Russ.)

2. Ermolenko E. V., Semenov A.A. Yadernaya bombardirovka SShA Khirosimy i Nagasaki i ee posledstviya [US nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and its consequences]. Vestnik Krasnodarskogo gosudarstvennogo instituta kul’tury [Bulletin of the Krasnodar State Institute of Culture]. 2015. N 3. Pp. 1–2. (In Russ.)

3. Zaryaeva E. V., Kuzmichev M.K. Gigienicheskaya otsenka radiatsionnogo faktora na territorii v Voronezhskoi oblasti [Hygienic assessment of the radiation factor in the territory of the Voronezh Region]. Vestnik novykh meditsinskikh tekhnologii [Journal of New Medical Technologies]. 2011. Vol. 18, N 2. Pp. 478–480. (In Russ.)

4. Ivanov V. K., Tsyb A.F. Meditsinskie radiologicheskie posledstviya spustya 20 let posle avarii na Chernobyl’skoi AES [Medical radiological consequences of 20 years after the Chernobyl accident]. Atomnaya energiya [Nuclear power]. 2006. Vol. 100, N 4. Pp. 297–304. (In Russ.)

5. Legeza V. I., Ushakov I. B., Grebenyuk A. N., Popov V. I. Radiobiologiya, radiatsionnaya fiziologiya i meditsina [Radiobiology, radiation medicine and physiology]. Voronezh. 2014. 152 p. (In Russ.)

6. Stepkin Yu. I., Kuzmichev M. K., Klepikov O. V., Kukhtina I. V. Gigienicheskaya otsenka doz oblucheniya naseleniya Voronezhskoi oblasti ot istochnikov ioniziruyushchego izlucheniya [Hygienic estimation of doses to the population of the Voronezh region from ionizing radiation sources]. Gigiena i sanitariya [Hygiene & Sanitation]. 2015. N 9. Pp. 39–41. (In Russ.)

7. Stepkin Yu. I., Kuzmichev M. K., Klepikov O. V. Rezul’taty regional’nogo monitoringa doz oblucheniya naseleniya ot istochnikov ioniziruyushchego izlucheniya [The results of the regional monitoring of radiation doses from ionizing radiation sources in the population]. Radiatsionnaya gigiena [Radiation Hygiene]. 2015. Vol. 8, N 4. Pp. 83–86. (In Russ.)

8. Chernobyl’: 25 let spustya: sotsial’no-pravovye i meditsinskie problemy grazhdan, postradavshikh v radiatsionnykh avariyakh i katastrofakh [Chernobyl: 25 years later: the social, legal and medical concerns of citizens affected by radiation accidents and catastrophes] : Scientific. Conf. Proceedings. Sankt-Peterburg, 2011. 268 p. (In Russ.)

9. Chubirko M. I., Popov V. I., Libina I. I. Gigienicheskaya kharakteristika radiatsionnoi obstanovki v Voronezhskoi oblasti [Hygienic characteristics of the radiation situation in the Voronezh region]. Mediko-fiziologicheskie problemy ekologii cheloveka [Medical and physiological problems of human ecology] : Scientific. Conf. Proceedings. Ul’yanovsk. 2011. Pp. 296–298. (In Russ.)

10. Chubirko M. I., Yamenskov A. A. O radiatsionnoi obstanovke na territorii Voronezhskoi oblasti v svyazi s avariei na Chernobyl’skoi AES [Radiation situation in the Voronezh region in connection with the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant]. Zdorov’e naseleniya i sreda obitaniya [Public health and environment]. 2006. N 4. Pp. 32–34. (In Russ.)