Future of Chernobyl research: the urgency for consolidated action

The Chernobyl nuclear disaster on April 26, 1986, continues to create fears and myths about its health consequences, as shown by the large response to a top-rated HBO miniseries devoted to the tragic event. Risk assessments range from recognising an increase in thyroid cancer incidence in exposed children and adolescents (becoming one of the single most established long-term health effects of the Chernobyl disaster on the general population), to claims of hundreds of thousands of deaths due to the accident.1, 2

© 2020 Sputnik/Science Photo Library

Why are these conclusions so controversial, and why are they causing public mistrust? Firstly, because no so-called radiation signature has yet been established; radiation-related cancers are difficult to disentangle from cancers not related to radiation. Secondly, economic and political upheavals in the affected countries of the former Soviet Union had their own effect on the fluctuations of disease-specific incidence and mortality, further complicating analysis. Finally, doubts about the reliability of radiation exposure estimates, as well as the accuracy of some of the study methods used to assess Chernobyl-related health effects, added to the research findings' uncertainties.

The confusion arises largely because of an absence of comprehensive and coordinated efforts to delineate the overall physical and mental health consequences of the accident. Little evidence of other Chernobyl-related health effects after the accident does not mean that these health effects have not occurred. Radiation-related diseases could occur decades after exposure; continued studies are therefore needed to fully evaluate the lifetime radiological health effects. Coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the Cooperation on Chernobyl Health Research (CO-CHER), a research-facilitating initiative done between 2014–16, brought together key worldwide Chernobyl researchers and proposed a detailed and prioritised research strategy in agreement with the relevant authorities in the affected countries.³ Due to an absence of funding, implementation of the research plans has come to an unfortunate and untimely standstill.

Chernobyl provides direct evidence of the consequences of a major nuclear accident, and the affected populations deserve a comprehensive investigation of the accident-related health effects. There is a need to turn this poignant experience into an opportunity to better understand the effects of radiation on human health. At present, there is a high risk that unique and valuable scientific opportunities will be irretrievably lost. For example, due to ageing and death, there is a rapidly diminishing number of Chernobyl liquidators (civil and military personnel who were responsible for the clean up operation of the accident), which serves as an illustration of the urgency. Moreover, existing usable collections of biological samples can be wasted if not collated with existing epidemiological data. This appeal is endorsed by CO-CHER experts, who agree that after developing research priorities, key players must be brought together to implement the proposed research agenda to further reinforce radiation protection and public health intervention strategies in case of future nuclear accidents, rather than wasting time with organisational matters.