“The clinic was run by “The Bridge to Chernobyl”, which kind of sounds like a group not supportive of nuclear energy.”
People who have contended with the resulting disease and suffering due to Chernobyl - and the official denials that this suffering and disease exist- are not likely to be supportive of nuclear energy. For example, Soviet officials made it illegal to report deaths due to radiation during the first 3 years following the disaster. That kind of deception no doubt offended the ethics of physicians. I don’t believe that discredits this organization - the physician said tests were needed - he didn’t stampeded in any particular direction. No, what I have found throughout the Chernobyl disaster and the Fukushima disaster is that nuclear apologists lack credibility. Pediatricians dealing with a mother who has two children with nose bleeds (her 2 year old son had nosebleeds too) saying seasonal allergies, following the nuclear disaster, without testing white blood count might fall under ‘lacks credibility’ in my book too. 50 families attended the clinic.
It’s amazing how nuke supporters sneer at any facts or points of view, no matter how well educated or experienced in the field, that don’t come from nuke supporters.
Amazing.