I spite of the risk of radiation poising and amidst the dangers of contamination, these woman still choose to return. Truly in awe at this inspiring story.
Wow! I LOVED your talk! I've read everything I can get my lil hands on about Chernobyl and your views shared really swept my imagination into a wild frenzy of new thought and hope. Thank you, Sarah
I am stunned these women still live here. They put themselves at risk for radiation and death...and yet don't leave. Thank you for what you do Holly. You're an amazing person.
Why is this talk here? Do we need to be reminded that the same people who lived there 27 years ago still live there because they have nowhere else to go.
I don't think so. generators are extremely expensive to run on gasoline. I think they are getting electrical service there even though it is closed down. while it is possible, it is cost prohibitive. unless we have a specific answer to them all doing that, I wouldn't want to make presumptions.
7:43 - I think, these women came back not because Ukrainians are so attached to their "motherland" (that's an American stereotype about the Soviets). They came back because they were FARMERS since childhood, while the Soviet regime (as well as independent Ukraine) failed to provide all the farmer resettlers with a comparable size private farm. So it's true that these women had some special atachment. But mostly it's the attachment to their lifelong lifestyle, which, in turn, heavily depends on land and soil.
Here's a theory. What if you exaggerate the consequences of "the most radioactive land on earth". Sure there are contaminated hotspots but it's not like the whole area is one big reactor
Hmm. That is an interesting question. The Chernobyl disaster was far worse than the Fukushima problem, although both were easily avoidable. I've grown pretty docile regarding the actual risks about nuclear reactors though, and as memory serves only a very small amount of people in Fukushima were seriously exposed, unlike Chernobyl. Actually, the people in the area were no more at risk than they would be in many natural radioactive hotspots in the world, which people willingly visit.
sorry, but i can't relate. i am the child of immigrants. i moved around a ton as a kid as my parents changed jobs for the betterment of their lives and mine. they weren't afraid of change, and they always took a chance when they saw one. these people that stay are so afraid of change that they would rather suffer all the horrible side effects of radiation and see their friends around them suffer and die horrible deaths. that is not heroic, it is stupidity.
GMO are not dangerous per se, please don't be so ignorant. There is no evidence for such a thing. Eating GM soy is the same as eating normal soy, in fact any crop in the world has been selected to be very different from the wild types, if not cows wouldn't produce so much milk, wheat woulnd't be so resilent and productive, bananas wouldn't taste so good,etc. They are no different from GM corn or soy.
think about it: you have to leave your home - for a few years you live somewhere where you have to fight to keep living because you can't find a job, you know you won't make it - or you return home where you at least not have to starve. there is nothing romantic about that, that is the cold truth. tell me, if a city of 49.360 ppl (the population of prypjat alone) near you would have to be evacuated -how easy would it be to find jobs for them now that their former places of employment are gone?
radiation hormesis model may be more powerful than her home rivals radiation. a search for this might be relevent context - another example of small radiation doses producing heathier individiuals. "Effects of Cobalt-60 Exposure on Health of Taiwan Residents Suggest New Approach Needed in Radiation Protection" Perhaps the danger is not as bad as one would assume. The documentary Pandora's Promise (as I recall) showed more than just old women living near chernobyl too.
Why doesn't it make sense? If you see that one group of people are living longer than the other there's one obvious conclusion any sane person has to come to: One group is living longer than the other. The why and how aren't answered because that's what a study is for. Since there is no study involved she suggests being 'home' is what helps them live longer. Where as a study might show they are happier, have better diets, and exercise more.
i watched global trekker today that Holly went to Chernobyl where is full of radidation. this travel documentary opens my eyes that some residents return to Chernobyl no matter how radidation endanger human living. they risks their lives to live there and called it for home
That's the story of human imperfection and stupidity. People are willing to sacrifice their health and risk, just to be in a familiar place and in their comfort zone. Most people live whole their life in one place, which is ridiculous, if you really start to think about it. People are creatures of habits and familiarity, most will rather die than change. There's nothing cool or inspiring about those people.
or the photo was taken somewhere else. consider how much it costs to run a generator and if they even drive cars there to haul gasoline around. look at the realistic circumstances.
This is what I love about TED talks. They are constantly challenging the preconceived notions that most of the Western-educated world has that science can and does explain everything worth knowing.
im andreas father and I toldyou Holly we loveyo so much und we cant stop like we want the pollution live then the moments we predict happenen LIVE HOLLY UND TNX SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME
I can't believe she went the way she went!! If you think about it the earth is regenerating in that area, there are no longer and human inputs to make the area"better" now only people who live with the land. Of course they are going to be fine they are living at peace with the earth.
5:52 The World Health Organization puts the number of Chernobyl related deaths at 4000...EVENTUALLY (emphasis mine). The actual number of deaths is in the hundreds, and it is of course hard to get actual numbers but the majority of deaths are from workers actually dealing with the disaster not little old ladies living on the land. Incidentally the number of more than statistically expected to occur abortions from europe due to silly radiation phobias over Chernobyl is in the thousands too.
doubt it works that way. dogs get cancer within a few years of their lives. humans usually get cancer after many decades our risk goes way up, but not before that. so we can assume that something is going on in animal's cells that is not happening in ours. maybe they have shorter telemers on their dna, more prone to cancer by age 7 to 15. we would so rarely expect humans getting cancer that young.
I just cannot figure how anyone finds this any mystery. The risks of radiation are real enough, but these women are not likely to get doses high enough to cause immediate health effects. Of course, there is an elevated risk of cancer, but these women are OLD! Any effect on their life expectancy is surely outweighed by the misery and stress they would experience by evacuating. Besides, they've almost certainly gotten more radiation from the time nearest the disaster than they will get now, 30 years later. I would stay, too. But I would go and buy some solar panels, to have a little electricity at night.
In order to have a study, you require a vast number of people involved. Only a few women decided to stay in Chernobyl. She didn't make up anything, if it is indeed true these women on average outlived the women who evacuated. What I'm most interested in is the quality of life these women experienced during their stay, and how they lived together. There were a lot of juicy details and elaboration missing in this talk, unfortunately.
People, most fundamentally, have a right to do whatever the fuck they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. Nobody "needs" to tell these people that they should move. They can be told the risks, the dangers, the potential problems. But they should not be told what to do, because they have the right to choose that.
What we've learned from Fukushima is that cheap energy IS the means by which people "go about their daily lives" (threatening biodiversity). The cheap energy from Fukushima amounted to how many pounds of fish vacuumed out of the sea to end up on Sushi plates? How many hours of meaningless video game entertainment, or vapid consumption? When Fukushima went off-line, Japan started importing and burning fossil fuels- for those same activities (destroying biodiversity).
Her claiming that there's 200 people living in the zone is wildly inaccurate. I visited the reactor myself just some months ago and in Chernobyl itself, there's 2500 people living there. And that's just 1 (albeit the biggest) city.
You know you bring up an interesting point. Almost all ted talks have some useful definable purpose. This is interesting but it's still an end run to nowhere with these villagers eventual death.
i resent her romanticising the idea of staying in a place that is so dangerous. people that do that let fear run their everyday lives. it is that same mindset that keeps women in a abusive relationships- they fear the unknown and don't trust themselves enough to change.
Life adapts to change, it's what it does best. That's why I'm not worried about any of this global warming or gas shortage stuff. I know that whatever happens, humanity will adapt. This planet would just be another hunk of rock floating through space otherwise.
Chernobyl was once the worst nuclear power site malfunction. Now there's Fukushima taking the cake. How lucky are we? Thanks, nuclear power!! Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse, you really outdo yourself. And how!
I am NO fan of nuclear power, but at the same time, the anti-nuke contingent needs to explain all these seemingly healthy populations of irradiated wolves, wild boars, bears, horses, etc., that seem to be thriving there. If Chernobly proved one thing, it's that humans going about their daily lives in modern society are a bigger threat to the biodiversity of this planet than a nuclear plant meltdown. We'll see what we learn from Fukushima over the next 30 years, I guess...
The only reason there are big catfishes is because the lakes are closed off, rivers, are closed off. They have no predators and an abundance of food. They get fed every day by the tour groups lol.
I can say, with some certainty, that they have been told very often and very directly that there are astounding risks associated with living there. And I am most certainly not trying to glorify them, I am just contending that they have made their choice. Your other examples are vitally different, but yes I should hope that if any adult wanted to do something which I was sure would greatly harm them that I had the moral strength needed to accept their decision, irrational though I might think it.
I saw my Japanese friends hair and teeth loss, bleeding, they live near by Fukushima, they are only 24. And one of my ex who were soldier went to Japan for save earthquake victims, he came back to my country, he felt his body condition is not very good. He have to go hospital so many times, government did not gave him treatment, he had to pay from all his wallet. So should I impress this TED video? Personally I can't. Then why don't you go to Chernobyl or Fukushima then give birth a baby or something!
My guess is that they are living longer due to increased daily exercise that comes from having to farm your own food everyday and decreased stress as they are living in a much more peaceful place than an average city. It's a pity that she didn't talk about medical history of the people (including men) that decided to come back to live there.
She is in no way trying to influence people to live in radiated areas. If you've watched the video, you should know that these are mere interesting information.
Firstly, there is good reason to suppose it isn't as obvious. Certainly I wouldn't want to live there, but the effects seem to be less than suspected. Secondly, you say it isn't logical, but do you expect everyone to arrive at your conclusions? To believe as you believe? These people clearly disagree, and do want to live on their ancestors' land, even if we claim they are wrong. Should we force them to stop being wrong?
First of all: bAbushka, not babUshka, god damn it! Second, this territory is not that closed. You can go for almost official tourist ride to the Pripyat for about $100. And many did, I assure you, Third, those who've been there, all say about growth of wild life. Forests are high, animals are plenty, lots of fish in rivers and nature seems to redeem back its domain. And this is very confusing, of course and not well understood.
I don't think that the cultural roots protect them, if so why do wolves also prosper? I think that fears over radiation where magnified, it's true that radiotion harms people, but the effect is on the long term, and sometimes there are things that are much dangerous than living less or having some diseases, famine, wars, inequality, poverty are more harmful than radiation.
"there are no studies, but... -first original thought-" :D fantastically persuasive. Furthermore, you can research that the wildlife isn't in the fantastic condition she believes it to be. Strength in numbers is the one thing, but if you have no human enemy it should be obvious why they can repopulate so successfully (and mutations are not the only effect of radiation :D obviously :D ).
She had not one shred of empirical data to back up any of her idiotic assertions. A typical lib who would romanticize Satan or Radiation poisoning so they could sound smart. What an idiot. I’d love for her to move to Chernobyl along with every lib upvoting her idiocy.
I think its a kind of funny idea, but the lack of any study with which it is presented makes it completely unbelievable. One much more likely explanation is that these women were some of the stronger specimen, and that the others would've died quicker or at least as quick as they would've outside the zone.
In the America, the "land of the free" they would have been thrown in prison "for their own good". Yet in Russia, a totalitarian state, no one arrests them. What a strange world.
Russia stopped being totalitarian the year Stalin died. Under capitalism, Russia is getting more dictatorial and less free, but "totalitarianism" is more specific than that.
I don't care for either side of the argument; not enough data to make an informed opinion. But, what you're posting is pure speculation with even less evidence than she has presented.
We fear what we don't understand. It's ironic that these 'babushkas' are probably more educated about radiation than Ms Morris and most of the people in the comments
My word what a rudimentary piece of journalism... Ms. Morris, like most Americans I met working in the Romania while with Peace Corps... You are clueless... Sorry.
I spite of the risk of radiation poising and amidst the dangers of contamination, these woman still choose to return. Truly in awe at this inspiring story.
Wow! I LOVED your talk! I've read everything I can get my lil hands on about Chernobyl and your views shared really swept my imagination into a wild frenzy of new thought and hope.
Thank you,
Sarah
Thank you Holly! You are a real Human.
I am stunned these women still live here. They put themselves at risk for radiation and death...and yet don't leave.
Thank you for what you do Holly. You're an amazing person.
thank you Holly Morris you are so smart and clever
Amazing woman! Really good speech and info. And I do understand her point. Well done Holly Morris!
HOLLY WHERE ARE YOU NOW we missyou a lot of time?
Why is this talk here? Do we need to be reminded that the same people who lived there 27 years ago still live there because they have nowhere else to go.
I don't think so. generators are extremely expensive to run on gasoline. I think they are getting electrical service there even though it is closed down.
while it is possible, it is cost prohibitive. unless we have a specific answer to them all doing that, I wouldn't want to make presumptions.
7:43 - I think, these women came back not because Ukrainians are so attached to their "motherland" (that's an American stereotype about the Soviets). They came back because they were FARMERS since childhood, while the Soviet regime (as well as independent Ukraine) failed to provide all the farmer resettlers with a comparable size private farm.
So it's true that these women had some special atachment. But mostly it's the attachment to their lifelong lifestyle, which, in turn, heavily depends on land and soil.
Here's a theory. What if you exaggerate the consequences of "the most radioactive land on earth". Sure there are contaminated hotspots but it's not like the whole area is one big reactor
+Vexi0, exactly. Some places in the Exclusion Zone is actually less radioactive than Kiev.
Lol... Libtard morons and their Theories.... move there idiot. I’ll respect that.
Hmm. That is an interesting question. The Chernobyl disaster was far worse than the Fukushima problem, although both were easily avoidable.
I've grown pretty docile regarding the actual risks about nuclear reactors though, and as memory serves only a very small amount of people in Fukushima were seriously exposed, unlike Chernobyl.
Actually, the people in the area were no more at risk than they would be in many natural radioactive hotspots in the world, which people willingly visit.
You are a fool. Like many TED talk lib zombies
Happy life is longer than a sad life.
sorry, but i can't relate. i am the child of immigrants. i moved around a ton as a kid as my parents changed jobs for the betterment of their lives and mine. they weren't afraid of change, and they always took a chance when they saw one. these people that stay are so afraid of change that they would rather suffer all the horrible side effects of radiation and see their friends around them suffer and die horrible deaths. that is not heroic, it is stupidity.
GMO are not dangerous per se, please don't be so ignorant. There is no evidence for such a thing. Eating GM soy is the same as eating normal soy, in fact any crop in the world has been selected to be very different from the wild types, if not cows wouldn't produce so much milk, wheat woulnd't be so resilent and productive, bananas wouldn't taste so good,etc. They are no different from GM corn or soy.
think about it: you have to leave your home - for a few years you live somewhere where you have to fight to keep living because you can't find a job, you know you won't make it - or you return home where you at least not have to starve. there is nothing romantic about that, that is the cold truth. tell me, if a city of 49.360 ppl (the population of prypjat alone) near you would have to be evacuated -how easy would it be to find jobs for them now that their former places of employment are gone?
Good talk, very interesting insight to another world
radiation hormesis model may be more powerful than her home rivals radiation. a search for this might be relevent context - another example of small radiation doses producing heathier individiuals. "Effects of Cobalt-60 Exposure on Health of Taiwan Residents Suggest New Approach Needed in Radiation Protection"
Perhaps the danger is not as bad as one would assume. The documentary Pandora's Promise (as I recall) showed more than just old women living near chernobyl too.
Why doesn't it make sense?
If you see that one group of people are living longer than the other there's one obvious conclusion any sane person has to come to: One group is living longer than the other.
The why and how aren't answered because that's what a study is for. Since there is no study involved she suggests being 'home' is what helps them live longer.
Where as a study might show they are happier, have better diets, and exercise more.
Yes, we do.
i watched global trekker today that Holly went to Chernobyl where is full of radidation. this travel documentary opens my eyes that some residents return to Chernobyl no matter how radidation endanger human living. they risks their lives to live there and called it for home
That's the story of human imperfection and stupidity. People are willing to sacrifice their health and risk, just to be in a familiar place and in their comfort zone. Most people live whole their life in one place, which is ridiculous, if you really start to think about it. People are creatures of habits and familiarity, most will rather die than change.
There's nothing cool or inspiring about those people.
How wonderful! We progress from stone age to electricity age only to rediscover the knowledge common to ancestors for generations.
or the photo was taken somewhere else.
consider how much it costs to run a generator and if they even drive cars there to haul gasoline around. look at the realistic circumstances.
This is what I love about TED talks. They are constantly challenging the preconceived notions that most of the Western-educated world has that science can and does explain everything worth knowing.
im andreas father and I toldyou Holly we loveyo so much und we cant stop like we want the pollution live then the moments we predict happenen LIVE HOLLY UND TNX SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME
6:50 she has electricity, the light bulb is on. so if it is a restricted area, how do they have utilities?
Would it be insulting to take blood samples from these amazing women?
Love the ted talks that cause me to question what I had considered true.
I can't believe she went the way she went!! If you think about it the earth is regenerating in that area, there are no longer and human inputs to make the area"better" now only people who live with the land. Of course they are going to be fine they are living at peace with the earth.
5:52 The World Health Organization puts the number of Chernobyl related deaths at 4000...EVENTUALLY (emphasis mine). The actual number of deaths is in the hundreds, and it is of course hard to get actual numbers but the majority of deaths are from workers actually dealing with the disaster not little old ladies living on the land. Incidentally the number of more than statistically expected to occur abortions from europe due to silly radiation phobias over Chernobyl is in the thousands too.
You don't know if things are boring before watching/experiencing them.
doubt it works that way.
dogs get cancer within a few years of their lives. humans usually get cancer after many decades our risk goes way up, but not before that.
so we can assume that something is going on in animal's cells that is not happening in ours. maybe they have shorter telemers on their dna, more prone to cancer by age 7 to 15. we would so rarely expect humans getting cancer that young.
I just cannot figure how anyone finds this any mystery. The risks of radiation are real enough, but these women are not likely to get doses high enough to cause immediate health effects. Of course, there is an elevated risk of cancer, but these women are OLD! Any effect on their life expectancy is surely outweighed by the misery and stress they would experience by evacuating. Besides, they've almost certainly gotten more radiation from the time nearest the disaster than they will get now, 30 years later. I would stay, too.
But I would go and buy some solar panels, to have a little electricity at night.
In order to have a study, you require a vast number of people involved. Only a few women decided to stay in Chernobyl. She didn't make up anything, if it is indeed true these women on average outlived the women who evacuated.
What I'm most interested in is the quality of life these women experienced during their stay, and how they lived together. There were a lot of juicy details and elaboration missing in this talk, unfortunately.
People, most fundamentally, have a right to do whatever the fuck they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. Nobody "needs" to tell these people that they should move. They can be told the risks, the dangers, the potential problems. But they should not be told what to do, because they have the right to choose that.
What we've learned from Fukushima is that cheap energy IS the means by which people "go about their daily lives" (threatening biodiversity). The cheap energy from Fukushima amounted to how many pounds of fish vacuumed out of the sea to end up on Sushi plates? How many hours of meaningless video game entertainment, or vapid consumption? When Fukushima went off-line, Japan started importing and burning fossil fuels- for those same activities (destroying biodiversity).
Her claiming that there's 200 people living in the zone is wildly inaccurate. I visited the reactor myself just some months ago and in Chernobyl itself, there's 2500 people living there. And that's just 1 (albeit the biggest) city.
100s of thousands?? No, their were less than 49,000 people that were evacuated that lived there
You know you bring up an interesting point. Almost all ted talks have some useful definable purpose. This is interesting but it's still an end run to nowhere
with these villagers eventual death.
i resent her romanticising the idea of staying in a place that is so dangerous. people that do that let fear run their everyday lives. it is that same mindset that keeps women in a abusive relationships- they fear the unknown and don't trust themselves enough to change.
Life adapts to change, it's what it does best. That's why I'm not worried about any of this global warming or gas shortage stuff. I know that whatever happens, humanity will adapt. This planet would just be another hunk of rock floating through space otherwise.
He means they dont eat shitty supermarket frozen food and stuff
No zombies there. Amazing story.
Chernobyl was once the worst nuclear power site malfunction. Now there's Fukushima taking the cake. How lucky are we? Thanks, nuclear power!! Just when you thought things couldn't get any worse, you really outdo yourself. And how!
I am NO fan of nuclear power, but at the same time, the anti-nuke contingent needs to explain all these seemingly healthy populations of irradiated wolves, wild boars, bears, horses, etc., that seem to be thriving there. If Chernobly proved one thing, it's that humans going about their daily lives in modern society are a bigger threat to the biodiversity of this planet than a nuclear plant meltdown. We'll see what we learn from Fukushima over the next 30 years, I guess...
they should be studied.
what if they live longer and don't have as much disease?
Because that's Home!
The only reason there are big catfishes is because the lakes are closed off, rivers, are closed off. They have no predators and an abundance of food. They get fed every day by the tour groups lol.
I can say, with some certainty, that they have been told very often and very directly that there are astounding risks associated with living there. And I am most certainly not trying to glorify them, I am just contending that they have made their choice.
Your other examples are vitally different, but yes I should hope that if any adult wanted to do something which I was sure would greatly harm them that I had the moral strength needed to accept their decision, irrational though I might think it.
I saw my Japanese friends hair and teeth loss, bleeding, they live near by Fukushima, they are only 24.
And one of my ex who were soldier went to Japan for save earthquake victims, he came back to my country, he felt his body condition is not very good. He have to go hospital so many times, government did not gave him treatment, he had to pay from all his wallet.
So should I impress this TED video? Personally I can't.
Then why don't you go to Chernobyl or Fukushima then give birth a baby or something!
it's called "generator" - you put gas in it and woah - electricity!
Przewalski horse live in Chernobyl
Wow, amazing sharing!
Maybe it's time to find a new home then.
Mother land is mother land..
My guess is that they are living longer due to increased daily exercise that comes from having to farm your own food everyday and decreased stress as they are living in a much more peaceful place than an average city. It's a pity that she didn't talk about medical history of the people (including men) that decided to come back to live there.
No one said those boars or those women were healthy, They just said they were alive. There's a big difference.
Well, maybe this whole thing is not do surprising if you are Slavic. Home is secrete in the Slavic culture.
Good one spud.
you didn't even watch the talk did you.
Whoa whoa, what are you saying, that people don't actually live near Chernobyl and that she's lying to us?
She is in no way trying to influence people to live in radiated areas. If you've watched the video, you should know that these are mere interesting information.
there are mutant fish in the cooling ponds of chernobyl
+shadefoxthepenguin, not mutant! It's regular catwish enjoying absence of fishermen and abundance of food from tourists.
I was distracted by the complete lack of movement in her hair.
Firstly, there is good reason to suppose it isn't as obvious. Certainly I wouldn't want to live there, but the effects seem to be less than suspected.
Secondly, you say it isn't logical, but do you expect everyone to arrive at your conclusions? To believe as you believe? These people clearly disagree, and do want to live on their ancestors' land, even if we claim they are wrong. Should we force them to stop being wrong?
First of all: bAbushka, not babUshka, god damn it!
Second, this territory is not that closed. You can go for almost official tourist ride to the Pripyat for about $100. And many did, I assure you,
Third, those who've been there, all say about growth of wild life. Forests are high, animals are plenty, lots of fish in rivers and nature seems to redeem back its domain. And this is very confusing, of course and not well understood.
I would stay in Chernobyl any day in my life
You are true
tyler durden?
Meh she went nuts at the end.
Oh god this is investing but I don't think i can finish this if she won't drink some damn water.
I don't think that the cultural roots protect them, if so why do wolves also prosper? I think that fears over radiation where magnified, it's true that radiotion harms people, but the effect is on the long term, and sometimes there are things that are much dangerous than living less or having some diseases, famine, wars, inequality, poverty are more harmful than radiation.
There are very (!) big catfishes and mushrooms. That I know for sure.
So, what? What is the message?
"there are no studies, but... -first original thought-" :D fantastically persuasive. Furthermore, you can research that the wildlife isn't in the fantastic condition she believes it to be. Strength in numbers is the one thing, but if you have no human enemy it should be obvious why they can repopulate so successfully (and mutations are not the only effect of radiation :D obviously :D ).
She had not one shred of empirical data to back up any of her idiotic assertions. A typical lib who would romanticize Satan or Radiation poisoning so they could sound smart. What an idiot. I’d love for her to move to Chernobyl along with every lib upvoting her idiocy.
-strikethrough- come on
I think its a kind of funny idea, but the lack of any study with which it is presented makes it completely unbelievable. One much more likely explanation is that these women were some of the stronger specimen, and that the others would've died quicker or at least as quick as they would've outside the zone.
i wonder if there is a higher than average birth defect rate among the animals? (I assume there are no people being born there)
Inspiration talks
Why?
Galen Winsor
In the America, the "land of the free" they would have been thrown in prison "for their own good". Yet in Russia, a totalitarian state, no one arrests them. What a strange world.
Russia stopped being totalitarian the year Stalin died. Under capitalism, Russia is getting more dictatorial and less free, but "totalitarianism" is more specific than that.
+The AMV TOP 50, Chernobyl is in Ukraine.
It's not Russia. - It's a free democratic state.
This is not Russia. Chernobil in Ukraine.
i could marry this brave woman
I don't care for either side of the argument; not enough data to make an informed opinion. But, what you're posting is pure speculation with even less evidence than she has presented.
70 to 80! wow umm hmm looks like i have some studying to do.
what does vsause have to say about this
We fear what we don't understand.
It's ironic that these 'babushkas' are probably more educated about radiation than Ms Morris and most of the people in the comments
Holly Morris was Brilliant!!
Thorium Reactors anyone?
How is it less evidence?
oh thanks. Autoccorect! :)
Must not have been that boring if you watched it
great...you should need water after presentation :)
strange i tried to vote down but it voted up and wont go off?
Do they glow in the dark?
In*
My word what a rudimentary piece of journalism... Ms. Morris, like most Americans I met working in the Romania while with Peace Corps... You are clueless... Sorry.
I bet she uses mac!
sacred*
sorry stranger from the internet. :)