The Crime of Chernobyl- The Nuclear Gulag

by Wladimir Tchertkoff

  From July 1987 to October 1990, I worked as director of the laboratory for radioprotection at the Institute of Nuclear Energy at the Academy of Sciences of Belarus.

  In 1990, I was appointed director of the Centre for Scientific and Technical Radioprotection (CST “Radiometry”) and I left the nuclear energy institute of my own volition.

  In January 1992, following a proposal from the physicist, A. Sakharov, the Belarusian writer, Ales Adamovich and the chess champion, Anatoli Karpov, the CST “Radiometry” was reorganised and became the CST Institute of Radiation Safety Belrad.

  2. THE WAR AGAINST PECTIN

  For years, at conferences, seminars and during commissions held in Germany, Professor Lengfelder has claimed in a peremptory manner, without providing scientific evidence to substantiate these claims, that the pectin distributed by Nesterenko is ineffective as an adsorbent of radionuclides, and dangerous because it eliminates from the body oligoelements necessary for life such as selenium, copper, zinc, magnesium etc. But the effectiveness of pectin in eliminating radionuclides from the body is proven and it has none of the secondary effects described by Lengfelder. It is an evil form of disinformation, that has succeeded in blocking funding from various charitable organisations that might have supported Professor Nesterenko’s radioprotection work with children. Professor Lengfelder suggests instead that children should eat apples and avoid contaminated food. Derision, contempt or ignorance on the part of this man who boasts about having visited the country 150 times? It costs a lot of money to buy “clean” food—money that neither the Belarusian state nor the peasants in the contaminated villages can afford. As for eating apples, they would need to eat 4 kg a day to achieve the same dose as that contained in Nesterenko’s food additive. In her comments Mrs Frenzel repeats the same untruths as Professor Lengfelder.

  Professor Nesterenko has never provided any scientific basis to prove that his pectin cure achieves a noticeable decrease in the annual radioactive dose among the children. This comes as no surprise to most scientists who know that the biochemistry and medical properties of pectin have been studied for a long time. No “decorporation” effects have ever been attributable to pectin.

  One of the biggest manufacturers of pectin in Germany, the firm Herbstreith and Fox, undertook a large study with the Institute of Biophysics in Moscow (under Professor Ilyin,—author’s note.) to see if pectin could be used for the decorporation of radioactive caesium: the results were negative. Russia was very interested in the subject because there were always cases of radionuclide incorporation from their nuclear installations not only among their workers but also among the population. They were looking for a product that could be taken for relatively long periods of time without causing negative side effects. Pectin was not found to be effective.

  What audacity from someone who claims to be a scientist to publish such gross disinformation. But Professor Lengfelder has a lot of influence in medical circles in Germany, and up till now, things had gone his way. There must be some powerful interests behind this absurd war on pectin, for them to leave themselves open to such an obvious refutation to which I now refer. On 12th February 2003, the directors in charge of medico-biological problems and emergencies at the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation distributed the following official document:

  To heads of central health and medical units and local health and medical units, to Chief Medical Officers of the Government Central Health Monitoring and Epidemiology and to directors of companies:

  I am sending a document to you entitled “Methodological recommendations for the use of the pectin Zosterine-Ultra as a mass prophylactic in the nuclear industry and other industrial enterprises working with radioactive substances, heavy and polyvalent metals, as well as in territories contaminated by radioactive and other poisonous substances”. […]

  Medico-biological tests and other experimental studies of the product, as well as clinical tests and observations of patients from the centre of research Institute of Biophysics (Professor Ilyin N.D.A.) and in other clinical centres have demonstrated this product’s effectiveness in eliminating from the body the toxic components of lead, mercury, cadmium, zinc, manganese and other heavy metals as well as radionuclides including plutonium.

  Zosterine-Ultra is effective in the treatment of a number of illnesses, is not toxic, is perfectly tolerated by patients and has no contra indications; it can be kept for five years. The product is registered with the Minister of Public Health of the Federation of Russia as a biologically active food additive (Registration Certificate No 004963.P643.11.2002)

  Deputy-director A.V. Sorokin

  The recommendations specify:

  Over the last few years and in particular after the Chernobyl disaster, great emphasis is being placed on the development and practical application of specialised methods to prevent chemical and radiological damage, lowering accumulation levels and the concentration of toxic substances in the body, and reinforcing the body’s own defence mechanisms[…].

  Among food additives, fibres, especially pectins—of citrus fruits, apples and of Zosterine—are being used, that possess remarkable adsorbent and fortifying properties and a positive influence on carbo-load and cholesterol metabolism.

  Since the 1960s it has been shown that pectins aid the elimination of radionuclides such as strontium and caesium from the body, and that they lower the absorption of lead. This has led to their use as a mass prophylactic measure by professionals and the public living in areas contaminated by the fallout from Chernobyl. These properties of pectin have been confirmed in work undertaken by scientists at the State Scientific Centre (GNC), the Institute of Biophysics and other research centres. [..]

  Zosterine-Ultra was approved as a therapeutic and prophylactic food additive by various medical research institutes, hospitals and clinics, including the State Scientific Centre, Institute of Biophysics, the Institute of Research of the Academy of Medical Science of Russia, the Kirov Academy of Military Medicine, the Institute of Toxicology at the Ministry for Public Health in Russia, the Academy of Continuing Medical Education (St Petersburg).

  We therefore recommend the food additive Zosterine-Ultra for its curative and prophylactic properties for:

  —people employed in the nuclear industry and in other industries that use radioactive materials, and in areas that have been contaminated by radioactive or other toxic substances, to prevent the accumulation in various organs of the body, of radionuclides or heavy metals and to decrease the likelihood of undesirable clinical effects;

  —the general treatment of various illnesses contracted in the workplace.

  In order to get a clearer picture of who Edmund Lengfelder was, I approached Professor E.P. Demidchik, a thyroid specialist in Belarus, who has already operated in 10,000 cases of thyroid cancer. Lengfelder had collaborated with him, and provided equipment and freezers for the conservation and morphological analysis of thyroid tissue, which seemed to be of great interest to him.

  According to Professor Demidchik, Lengfelder, who has significant funds at his disposal, undertakes no medical work in Belarus, but instead collects data on thyroid disease, in exactly the same way as the Americans do, as described by Sebastian Pflugbeil in an article that I quote further on. The equipment that Lengfelder provided to Demidchik was not for medical use. On the other hand Professor Lengfelder also finances radiotherapy in Gomel. In this sense, he is helping, indirectly, the victims of the Chernobyl disaster, if only the victims of thyroid cancer.

  In November 1999, following a series of conferences in Germany, during which Professor Nesterenko presented his data, Dr Michel Fernex summed up the current situation in Belarus:

  The disaster is of unequalled proportion, in its human and social impacts, as well as in health and the economy. There is a progressive deterioration in health, a highly significant increase in birth deformities and an increase that has never been encountered before in
mutations of children born to parents living in the contaminated zone (250 km from the nuclear power station). The illnesses being described by people living in the region are being reproduced in animals at the Institute of Pathology under Professor Bandazhevsky. There is almost no organ of the body that is not damaged by incorporated radionuclides, which often concentrates in certain tissues.

  In the face of this tragedy, one has to wonder at the underlying motives of Mrs Frenzel and Professor Lengfelder, to have waged this lengthy campaign of disinformation, the main result of which is to put obstacles in the way of a preventative treatment for children.

  On 12th May 2000, during the dispute between the Ministry of Health and Nesterenko, a meeting was held with Astapov, the Minister for Emergency Situations, one of Nesterenko’s supporters. A number of representatives from the Ministry of Health and from the National Commission for Radioprotection of Belarus were at the meeting. All were opposed to Nesterenko apart from Astapov and Dr Kolomietz, who was not able to speak and left the meeting angrily. Professsor Kenigsberg quoted Lengfelder and the IAEA in his criticisms of Nesterenko. He referred to a “scientific” discussion he had had with Lengfelder, who had told him again that pectin was ineffective and could damage health. Kenigsberg even repeated the same contemptuous phrase uttered by Lengfelder to describe Nesterenko’s thesis—in Russian “profanatsia”, a “ parody” or “fake science”. Kenisberg concluded by saying:” I propose that we ban the use of pectin”. He quoted the IAEA and the ICPR to support 1mSv/year as the limit above which children must be given radioprotection, instead of the 0.3mSv/year recommended by Nesterenko. Following this meeting, Minister Astapov sought advice from five international scientists, who supported Nesterenko against the Minister.

  On 7th February 2002, during a conference in Germany, Nesterenko met Professor Hans Ulrich Endress, director of Herbstreith and Fox, who had undertaken “the large study with the Institute of Biophysics in Moscow” (of Professor Ilyin, author’s note.) that according to Mrs Frenzel, had shown pectin to be ineffective in the decorporation of radioactive caesium. Endress was very interested in the work being done by Belrad. When he was asked “Is it true, as Professor Lengfelder claims, that pectin does not adsorb radionuclides?” Endress said that the study had not looked at radionuclides. They had only been looking at the effect of pectin on heavy metals. So, Lengfelder and Frenzel are not telling the truth. Despite the obvious falseness of their thesis, they persist with it, doubtless relying on the effectiveness of the repression in Belarus and on the ignorance of the international scientific community, dominated as it is by the nuclear lobby. Nesterenko is a lone voice and he is powerless against the rich medical establishment in the West.

  In the spring of 2005, the two Germans contributed to blocking the funding from the European Commission (the TACIS aid programme) for the project “Reducing the dose in the population…” presented jointly by the foundation Maison de Belrad, the Association Les Enfants de Tchernobyl Belarus84 and the centre for nuclear research, Julich (Germany). V. Nesterenko told us:

  84 On 27th April 2001, five people met in Paris for a constitutive general assembly and set up, at Nesterenko’s request, the association (under French Law 1901) Enfants de Tchernobyl Belarus to support the Belrad Institute in its aid work with 500,000 contaminated children: Solange Fernex (President), Vassili Nesterenko (vice-President), Galia Ackerman and Wladimir Tchertkoff (Secretaries), Michel Fernex (Treasurer). In accordance with Belarusian law concerning humanitarian aid, this association, which must have one or more Belarusian citizens among its members, facilitates the transfer of funds for the preventive protection and medical treatment of children (http://enfants-tchernobyl-belarus.org). In 3.12.2014, the Association was recognized as an establishment of public utility.

  At the beginning of March, TACIS told us that our project had been approved. TACIS projects need to be approved by the European programme CORE85, in order to be free from the main presidential taxes.

  85 European programme that was being set up in Belarus. See Part Four, Chapter III, p. 277.

  Initially there had been some negative response from Belarusian scientists, but on 19th April 2005 our project was discussed again at a meeting of the decision board in Braguine (I was at the meeting and presented the project). Professor Lengfelder’s representative, Mrs Christine Frenzel86, spoke against distributing pectin to children. Dr Dimitri Mikhnyuk (head of the Chernobyl medical programme for technical aid from Switzerland) actively opposed her and was in favour of our proposal. At that meeting our proposal was accepted.

  86 CORE members.

  The next day at a meeting of the Approval Board of CORE which is attended only by the directors of the organisations involved (I was not present, because at this level only the directors of partner organisations of CORE participate) , Lengfelder came out categorically against the use of pectin. He said that in 1985, (before Chernobyl) he had studied the effectiveness of pectin in the elimination of Cs 137 from the body, in co-operation with the Institute of Biophysics (under Professor Ilyin), and had found no effect.

  The French and German ambassadors, Stephane Chmelewsky and Martin Hecker, had come out against Lengfelder and the Ministry of Health, and suggested that a multi disciplinary study be conducted on the use of pectin in the radioprotection of children. I came to know about this through Jacques Lochard (CEPN) and Jean-Claude Autret (ACRO) who were at the meeting. Following this proposition from the ambassadors, the decision on our project was adjourned till the autumn when it would be put before a panel of experts.

  On 20th June, Solange Fernex writes to Stephane Chmelewsky, the ambassador of France in Minsk. After enumerating the slanders against Professor Nesterenko and Professor Bandazhevsky, and the numerous obstacles put in their way by Professor Edmund Lengfelder, a highly respected German figure, she wrote:

  As president of an association that uses funds donated by hundreds of our members to finance anthropogammametric and radiometric measures as well as pectin cures, I cannot accept these gratuitous statements from Professor Lengfelder against the effectiveness of pectin. If he were right, our donors would be justified in asking us to account for our misuse of donations.

  Yet, to my knowledge, Professor Lengfelder has not provided any scientific basis for the assertions he makes against pectin. For the first time, on 20th April, he has mentioned research that he undertook, before Chernobyl, with Professor Ilyin of Moscow. As you know, Ilyin is the principal architect of Soviet disinformation about Chernobyl. Our association would like to know what scientific proof there is against the use of pectin. If none exists, then we are left with a gratuitous slander that we will not tolerate.

  You have the right, Ambassador, as a participant in the CORE project, to demand that Professor Lengfelder back up his assertions and provide scientific references confirming those assertions at the CORE meeting due to take place on 20th April 2005. From our side, we base our view on the research published by Belrad with Julich and on the double blind study of pectin versus a placebo and published in English in the Readers Committee Review of the publication Swiss Medical Weekly.

  Perhaps you and your colleagues, in particular the Ambassador of Germany, could explain to us who Professor Lengfelder is, and why he is spending so much time attacking a fellow professor, who is defenceless, imprisoned, has been removed from his post and relegated to the status of a criminal (Professor Bandazhevsky). What could motivate him to crush the Belrad Institute, and for no reason, condemn its work, and in particular its pectin cures?

  I thank you most sincerely, Ambassador, for helping me to clarify this matter which is causing great anxiety among our donors who want only to continue helping the children of Chernobyl in an effective and useful way. This question does not simply affect Bandazhevsky, Nesterenko and Belrad, but our donors in France who need to know the truth.

  Solange Fernex

  Honorary European Deputy

>   President of Enfants de Tchernobyl Belarus

  On 13th July, the ambassador replies that the French authorities, on the one hand, and the European authorities on the other, fully supported the cause of Yury Bandazhevsky, whom he has visited several times with his German colleague. On the subject of Lengfelder, he writes:

  As regards pectin, this controversial subject came up at a meeting of the Approval Board of the programme CORE. While making no judgement about its effectiveness, I can only say that its use is not unanimously approved, particularly because, to date, no research into the subject has succeeded in bringing together all those involved in the area of radioprotection.

  These disagreements were preventing the implementation of various projects including Professor Nesterenko’s, and so, during the meeting, I proposed that a multidisciplinary evaluation of pectin be undertaken, involving supporters and detractors of the product. The objective was to obtain definitive conclusions on its effectiveness and conditions of use, conclusions which could not then be contested by its supporters or detractors. It was decided that the IRSN should organise a pilot study and in June, they had already contacted Nesterenko about it. The latter was naturally going to take part in the study, which would begin after the summer.

  Lengfelder does indeed seem to have reservations about Professor Bandazhevsky, and about the use of pectin. However, Bandazhevsky’s fate is not in the hands of the German Professor and far more people are working for his release and for the renewal of his scientific work. The conclusions of the multidisciplinary evaluation of pectin will bring this controversy to an end.