Ref. :  000020631
Date :  2005-09-05
Language :  English
Home Page / The whole website
fr / es / de / po / en

Chernobyl: the true scale of the accident

20 Years Later a UN Report Provides Definitive Answers and Ways to Repair Lives

Author :  OMS / WHO


Keywords : 


A total of up to 4000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) accident nearly 20 years ago, an international team of more than 100 scientists has concluded.

As of mid-2005, however, fewer than 50 deaths had been directly attributed to radiation from the disaster, almost all being highly exposed rescue workers, many who died within months of the accident but others who died as late as 2004.

The new numbers are presented in a landmark digest report, “Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts,” just released by the Chernobyl Forum. The digest, based on a three-volume, 600-page report and incorporating the work of hundreds of scientists, economists and health experts, assesses the 20-year impact of the largest nuclear accident in history. The Forum is made up of 8 UN specialized agencies, including the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OCHA), United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), and the World Bank, as well as the governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine.

“This compilation of the latest research can help to settle the outstanding questions about how much death, disease and economic fallout really resulted from the Chernobyl accident,” explains Dr. Burton Bennett, chairman of the Chernobyl Forum and an authority on radiation effects. “The governments of the three most-affected countries have realized that they need to find a clear way forward, and that progress must be based on a sound consensus about environmental, health and economic consequences and some good advice and support from the international community.”

Bennett continued: “This was a very serious accident with major health consequences, especially for thousands of workers exposed in the early days who received very high radiation doses, and for the thousands more stricken with thyroid cancer. By and large, however, we have not found profound negative health impacts to the rest of the population in surrounding areas, nor have we found widespread contamination that would continue to pose a substantial threat to human health, within a few exceptional, restricted areas.”

The Forum’s report aims to help the affected countries understand the true scale of the accident's consequences and also suggests ways the governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine might address major economic and social problems stemming from the accident. Members of the Forum, including representatives of the three governments, will meet September 6 and 7 in Vienna at an unprecedented gathering of the world’s experts on Chernobyl, radiation effects and protection, to consider these findings and recommendations.


Major study findings

Dozens of important findings are included in the massive report:

* Approximately 1000 on-site reactor staff and emergency workers were heavily exposed to high-level radiation on the first day of the accident; among the more than 200 000 emergency and recovery operation workers exposed during the period from 1986-1987, an estimated 2200 radiation-caused deaths can be expected during their lifetime.
* An estimated five million people currently live in areas of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine that are contaminated with radionuclides due to the accident; about 100 000 of them live in areas classified in the past by government authorities as areas of “strict control”. The existing “zoning” definitions need to be revisited and relaxed in light of the new findings.
* About 4000 cases of thyroid cancer, mainly in children and adolescents at the time of the accident, have resulted from the accident’s contamination and at least nine children died of thyroid cancer; however the survival rate among such cancer victims, judging from experience in Belarus, has been almost 99%.
* Most emergency workers and people living in contaminated areas received relatively low whole body radiation doses, comparable to natural background levels. As a consequence, no evidence or likelihood of decreased fertility among the affected population has been found, nor has there been any evidence of increases in congenital malformations that can be attributed to radiation exposure.
* Poverty, “lifestyle” diseases now rampant in the former Soviet Union and mental health problems pose a far greater threat to local communities than does radiation exposure.
* Relocation proved a “deeply traumatic experience” for some 350,000 people moved out of the affected areas. Although 116 000 were moved from the most heavily impacted area immediately after the accident, later relocations did little to reduce radiation exposure.
* Persistent myths and misperceptions about the threat of radiation have resulted in “paralyzing fatalism” among residents of affected areas.
* Ambitious rehabilitation and social benefit programs started by the former Soviet Union, and continued by Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, need reformulation due to changes in radiation conditions, poor targeting and funding shortages.
* Structural elements of the sarcophagus built to contain the damaged reactor have degraded, posing a risk of collapse and the release of radioactive dust;
* A comprehensive plan to dispose of tons of high-level radioactive waste at and around the Chernobyl NPP site, in accordance with current safety standards, has yet to be defined.

Alongside radiation-induced deaths and diseases, the report labels the mental health impact of Chernobyl as “the largest public health problem created by the accident” and partially attributes this damaging psychological impact to a lack of accurate information. These problems manifest as negative self-assessments of health, belief in a shortened life expectancy, lack of initiative, and dependency on assistance from the state.

“Two decades after the Chernobyl accident, residents in the affected areas still lack the information they need to lead the healthy and productive lives that are possible,” explains Louisa Vinton, Chernobyl focal point at the UNDP. “We are advising our partner governments that they must reach people with accurate information, not only about how to live safely in regions of low-level contamination, but also about leading healthy lifestyles and creating new livelihoods.” But, says Dr Michael Repacholi, Manager of WHO's Radiation Program, “the sum total of the Chernobyl Forum is a reassuring message.”

He explains that there have been 4000 cases of thyroid cancer, mainly in children, but that except for nine deaths, all of them have recovered. "Otherwise, the team of international experts found no evidence for any increases in the incidence of leukemia and cancer among affected residents."

The international experts have estimated that radiation could cause up to about 4000 eventual deaths among the higher-exposed Chernobyl populations, i.e., emergency workers from 1986-1987, evacuees and residents of the most contaminated areas. This number contains both the known radiation-induced cancer and leukaemia deaths and a statistical prediction, based on estimates of the radiation doses received by these populations. As about quarter of people die from spontaneous cancer not caused by Chernobyl radiation, the radiation-induced increase of only about 3% will be difficult to observe. However, in the most exposed cohorts of emergency and recovery operation workers some increase of particular cancer forms (e.g., leukemia) in particular time periods has already been observed. The predictions use six decades of scientific experience with the effects of such doses, explained Repacholi.

Repacholi concludes that “the health effects of the accident were potentially horrific, but when you add them up using validated conclusions from good science, the public health effects were not nearly as substantial as had at first been feared.”

The report’s estimate for the eventual number of deaths is far lower than earlier, well-publicized speculations that radiation exposure would claim tens of thousands of lives. But the 4000 figure is not far different from estimates made in 1986 by Soviet scientists, according to Dr Mikhail Balonov, a radiation expert with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, who was a scientist in the former Soviet Union at the time of the accident.

As for environmental impact, the reports are also reassuring, for the scientific assessments show that, except for the still closed, highly contaminated 30 kilometer area surrounding the reactor, and some closed lakes and restricted forests, radiation levels have mostly returned to acceptable levels. “In most areas the problems are economic and psychological, not health or environmental,” reports Balonov, the scientific secretary of the Chernobyl Forum effort who has been involved with Chernobyl recovery since the disaster occurred.


Recommendations

Recommendations call for focusing assistance efforts on highly contaminated areas and redesigning government programs to help those genuinely in need. Suggested changes would shift programs away from those that foster “dependency” and a “victim” mentality, and replacing them with initiatives that encourage opportunity, support local development, and give people confidence in their futures.

In the health area, the Forum report calls for continued close monitoring of workers who recovered from Acute Radiation Syndrome (ARS) and other highly exposed emergency personnel. The Report also calls for focused screening of children exposed to radioiodine for thyroid cancer and highly exposed clean-up workers for non-thyroid cancers. However, existing screening programs should be evaluated for cost-effectiveness, since the incidence of spontaneous thyroid cancers is increasing significantly as the target population ages. Moreover, high quality cancer registries need continuing government support.

In the environmental realm, the Report calls for long term monitoring of caesium and strontium radionuclides to assess human exposure and food contamination and to analyse the impacts of remedial actions and radiation-reduction countermeasures. Better information needs to be provided to the public about the persistence of radioactive contamination in certain food products and about food preparation methods that reduce radionuclide intake. Restrictions on harvesting of some wild food products are still needed in some areas.

Also in the realm of protecting the environment, the Report calls for an “integrated waste management program for the Shelter, the Chernobyl NPP site and the Exclusion Zone” to ensure application of consistent management and capacity for all types of radioactive waste. Waste storage and disposal must be dealt with in a comprehensive manner across the entire Exclusion Zone, according to the Report.

In areas where human exposure is not high, no remediation needs to be done, points out Balonov. “If we do not expect health or environmental effects, we should not waste resources and effort on low priority, low contamination areas,” he explains. “We need to focus our efforts and resources on real problems.”

One key recommendation addresses the fact that large parts of the population, especially in rural areas, still lack accurate information and emphasizes the need to find better ways both to inform the public and to overcome the lack of credibility that hampered previous efforts. Even though accurate information has been available for years, either it has not reached those who need it or people do not trust and accept the information and do not act upon it, according to the Report.

This recommendation calls for targeting information to specific audiences, including community leaders and health care workers, along with a broader strategy that promotes healthy lifestyles as well as information about how to reduce internal and external radiation exposures and address the main causes of disease and mortality.

In the socioeconomic sphere, the Report recommends a new development approach that helps individuals to “take control of their own lives and communities to take control of their own futures.” The Governments, the Report states, must streamline and refocus Chernobyl programs through more targeted benefits, elimination of unnecessary benefits to people in less contaminated areas, improving primary health care, support for safe food production techniques, and encouragement for investment and private sector development, including small and medium-size enterprises.

Notes Vinton, “The most important need is for accurate information on healthy lifestyles, together with better regulations to promote small, rural businesses. Poverty is the real danger. We need to take steps to empower people.”


Answers to Longstanding Questions

How much radiation were people exposed to as a result of the accident?

With the exception of on-site reactor staff and emergency workers exposed on 26 April, most recovery operation workers and those living in contaminated territories received relatively low whole body radiation doses, comparable to background radiation levels and lower than the average doses received by residents in some parts of the world having high natural background radiation levels.

For the majority of the five million people living in the contaminated areas, exposures are within the recommended dose limit for the general public, though about 100 000 residents still receive more. Remediation of those areas and application of some agricultural countermeasures continues. Further reduction of exposure levels will be slow, but most exposure from the accident has already occurred.

How many people died and how many more are likely to die in the future?

The total number of deaths already attributable to Chernobyl or expected in the future over the lifetime of emergency workers and local residents in the most contaminated areas is estimated to be about 4000. This includes some 50 emergency workers who died of acute radiation syndrome and nine children who died of thyroid cancer, and an estimated total of 3940 deaths from radiation-induced cancer and leukemia among the 200 000 emergency workers from 1986-1987, 116 000 evacuees and 270 000 residents of the most contaminated areas (total about 600 000). These three major cohorts were subjected to higher doses of radiation amongst all the people exposed to Chernobyl radiation.

The estimated 4000 casualties may occur during the lifetime of about 600 000 people under consideration. As about quarter of them will eventually die from spontaneous cancer not caused by Chernobyl radiation, the radiation-induced increase of about 3% will be difficult to observe. However, in the most highly exposed cohorts of emergency and recovery operation workers, some increase in particular cancers (e.g., leukemia) has already been observed.

Confusion about the impact has arisen owing to the fact that thousands of people in the affected areas have died of natural causes. Also, widespread expectations of ill health and a tendency to attribute all health problems to radiation exposure have led local residents to assume that Chernobyl related fatalities were much higher than they actually were.

What diseases have already occurred or might occur in the future?

Residents who ate food contaminated with radioactive iodine in the days immediately after the accident received relatively high doses to the thyroid gland. This was especially true of children who drank milk from cows who had eaten contaminated grass. Since iodine concentrates in the thyroid gland, this was a major cause of the high incidence of thyroid cancer in children.

Several recent studies suggest a slight increase in the incidence of leukemia among emergency workers, but not in children or adult residents of contaminated areas. A slight increase in solid cancers and possibly circulatory system diseases was noted, but needs to be evaluated further because of the possible indirect influence of such factors as smoking, alcohol, stress and unhealthy lifestyle.

Have there been or will there be any inherited or reproductive effects?

Because of the relatively low doses to residents of contaminated territories, no evidence or likelihood of decreased fertility has been seen among males or females. Also, because the doses were so low, there was no evidence of any effect on the number of stillbirths, adverse pregnancy outcomes, delivery complications or overall health of children. A modest but steady increase in reported congenital malformations in both contaminated and uncontaminated areas of Belarus appears related to better reporting, not radiation.

Did the trauma of rapid relocation cause persistent psychological or mental health problems?

Stress symptoms, depression, anxiety and medically unexplained physical symptoms have been reported, including self-perceived poor health. The designation of the affected population as “victims” rather than “survivors” has led them to perceive themselves as helpless, weak and lacking control over their future. This, in turn, has led either to over cautious behavior and exaggerated health concerns, or to reckless conduct, such as consumption of mushrooms, berries and game from areas still designated as highly contaminated, overuse of alcohol and tobacco, and unprotected promiscuous sexual activity.

What was the environmental impact?

Ecosystems affected by Chernobyl have been studied and monitored extensively for the past two decades. Major releases of radionuclides continued for ten days and contaminated more than 200 000 square kilometers of Europe. The extent of deposition varied depending on whether it was raining when contaminated air masses passed.

Most of the strontium and plutonium isotopes were deposited within 100 kilometres of the damaged reactor. Radioactive iodine, of great concern after the accident, has a short half-life, and has now decayed away. Strontium and caesium, with a longer half life of 30 years, persist and will remain a concern for decades to come. Although plutonium isotopes and americium 241 will persist perhaps for thousands of years, their contribution to human exposure is low.

What is the scope of urban contamination?

Open surfaces, such as roads, lawns and roofs, were most heavily contaminated. Residents of Pripyat, the city nearest to Chernobyl, were quickly evacuated, reducing their potential exposure to radioactive materials. Wind, rain and human activity has reduced surface contamination, but led to secondary contamination of sewage and sludge systems. Radiation in air above settled areas returned to background levels, though levels remain higher where soils have remained undisturbed.

How contaminated are agricultural areas?

Weathering, physical decay, migration of radionuclides down the soil and reductions in bioavailability have led to a significant reduction in the transfer of radionuclides to plants and animals. Radioactive iodine, rapidly absorbed from grasses and animal feed into milk, was an early concern and elevated levels were seen in some parts of the former Soviet Union and Southern Europe, but, given the nuclide’s short half life, this concern abated quickly. Currently and for the long term, radiocaesium, present in milk, meat and some plant foods, remains the most significant concern for internal human exposure, but, with the exception of a few areas, concentrations fall within safe levels.

What is the extent of forest contamination?

Following the accident, animals and vegetation in forest and mountain areas had high absorption of radiocaesium, with persistent high levels in mushrooms, berries and game. Because exposure from agricultural products has declined, the relative importance of exposure from forest products has increased and will only decline as radioactive materials migrate downward into the soil and slowly decay. The high transfer of radiocaesium from lichen to reindeer meat to humans was seen in the Artic and sub-Arctic areas, with high contamination of reindeer meat in Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden. The concerned governments imposed some restrictions on hunting, including scheduling hunting season when animals have lower meat contamination.

How contaminated are the aquatic systems?

Contamination of surface waters throughout much of Europe declined quickly through dilution, physical decay, and absorption of radionuclides in bed sediments and catchment soils. Because of bioaccumulation in the aquatic food chain, though, elevated concentrations of radiocaesium were found in fish from lakes as far away as Germany and Scandinavia. Comparable levels of radiostrontium, which concentrates in fish bone, not in muscle, were not significant for humans. Levels in fish and waters are currently low, except in areas with “closed” lakes with no outflowing streams. In those lakes, levels of radiocaesium in fish will remain high for decades and, therefore, restrictions on fishing there should be maintained.

What environmental countermeasures and remediation have been taken?

The most effective early agricultural countermeasure was removing contaminated pasture grasses from animal diets and monitoring milk for radiation levels. Treatment of land for fodder crops, clean feeding and use of Cs-binders (that prevented the transfer of radiocaesium from fodder to milk) led to large reductions in contamination and permitted agriculture to continue, though some increase in radionuclide content of plant and animal products has been measured since the mid-1990s when economic problems forced a cutback in treatments. Some agricultural lands in the three countries have been taken out of use until remediation is undertaken.

A number of measures applied to forests in affected countries and in Scandinavia have reduced human exposure, including restrictions on access to forest areas, on harvesting of food products such as game, berries and mushrooms, and on the public collection of firewood, along with changes in hunting to avoid consumption of game meat where seasonal levels of radiocaesium may be high. Low income levels in some areas cause local residents to disregard these rules.

What were radiation-induced effects on plants and animals?

Increased mortality of coniferous plants, soil invertebrates and mammals and reproductive losses in plants and animals were seen in high exposure areas up to a distance of 20-30 kilometers. Outside that zone, no acute radiation-induced effects have been reported. With reductions of exposure levels, biological populations have been recovering, though the genetic effects of radiation were seen in both somatic and germ cells of plants and animals. Prohibiting agricultural and industrial activities in the exclusion zone permitted many plant and animal populations to expand and created, paradoxically, “a unique sanctuary for biodiversity.”

Does dismantlement of the Shelter and management of radioactive waste pose further environmental problems?

The protective shelter was erected quickly, which led to some imperfections in the shelter itself and did not permit gathering complete data on the stability of the damaged unit. Also, some structural parts of the shelter have corroded in the past two decades. The main potential hazard posed by the shelter is the possible collapse of its top structures and the release of radioactive dust.

Strengthening those unstable structures has been performed recently, and construction of a New Safe Confinement covering the existing shelter that should serve for more than 100 years, starts in near future. The new cover will allow dismantlement of the current shelter, removal of the radioactive fuel mass from the damaged unit and, eventually, decommissioning of the damaged reactor.

A comprehensive strategy still has to be developed for dealing with the high level and long-lived radioactive waste from past remediation activities. Much of this waste was placed in temporary storage in trenches and landfills that do not meet current waste safety requirements.

What was the economic cost?

Because of policies in place at the time of the explosion and the inflation and economic disruptions that followed the break-up of the Soviet Union, precise costs have been impossible to calculate. A variety of estimates from the 1990s placed the costs over two decades at hundreds of billions of dollars. These costs included direct damage, expenditures related to recovery and mitigation, resettlement of people, social protection and health care for the affected population, research on environment, health and the production of clean food, radiation monitoring, as well as indirect losses due to removing agricultural lands and forests from use and the closing of agriculture and industrial facilities, and such additional costs as cancellation of the nuclear power program in Belarus and the additional costs of energy from the loss of power from Chernobyl. The costs have created a huge drain on the budgets of the three countries involved.

What were the main consequences for the local economy?

Agriculture was hardest hit, with 784 320 hectares taken from production. Timber production was halted in 694,200 hectares of forest. Remediation made “clean food” production possible in many areas but led to higher costs in the form of fertilizers, additives and special cultivation processes. Even where farming is safe, the stigma associated with Chernobyl caused marketing problems and led to falling revenues, declining production and the closure of some facilities. Combined with disruptions due to the collapse of the Soviet Union, recession, and new market mechanisms, the region’s economy suffered, resulting in lower living standards, unemployment and increased poverty. All agricultural areas, whether affected by radiation or not, proved vulnerable.

Poverty is especially acute in affected areas. Wages for agricultural workers tend to be low and employment outside of agriculture is limited. Many skilled and educated workers, especially younger workers, left the region. Also, the business environment discourages entrepreneurial ventures and private investment is low.

What impact did Chernobyl and the aftermath have on local communities?

More than 350 000 people have been relocated away from the most severely contaminated areas, 116 000 of them immediately after the accident. Even when people were compensated for losses, given free houses and a choice of resettlement location, the experience was traumatic and left many with no employment and a belief that they have no place in society. Surveys show that those who remained or returned to their homes coped better with the aftermath than those who were resettled. Tensions between new and old residents of resettlement villages also contributed to the ostracism felt by the newcomers. The demographic structure of the affected areas became skewed since many skilled, educated and entrepreneurial workers, often younger, left the areas leaving behind an older population with few of the skills needed for economic recovery.

The older population has meant that deaths exceed births, which reinforces the perception that these areas are dangerous places to live. Even when pay is high, schools, hospitals and other essential public services are short of qualified specialists.

What has been the impact on individuals?

According to the Forum’s report on health, “the mental health impact of Chernobyl is the largest public health problem unleashed by the accident to date.” People in the affected areas report negative assessments of their health and well-being, coupled with an exaggerated sense of the danger to their health from radiation exposure and a belief in a shorter life expectancy. Anxiety over the health effects of radiation shows no signs of diminishing and may even be spreading. Life expectancy has been declining across the former Soviet Union, due to cardiovascular disease, injuries and poisoning, and not radiation-related illness.

How have governments responded?

The resettlement and rehabilitation programs launched in Soviet conditions proved unsustainable after 1991 and funding for projects declined, leaving many projects unfinished and abandoned and many of the promised benefits under funded. Also, benefits were offered to broad categories of “Chernobyl victims” that expanded to seven million now receiving or eligible for pensions, special allowances and health benefits, including free holidays and guaranteed allowances. Chernobyl benefits deprive other areas of public spending of resources, but scaling down benefits or targeting only high-risk groups is unpopular and presents political problems.

Given significant reduction of radiation levels during past twenty years, governments need to revisit the classification of contaminated zones. Many areas previously considered to be at risk are in fact safe for habitation and cultivation. Current delineations are far more restrictive than demonstrated radiation levels can justify.

The report identifies the need to sharpen priorities and streamline the programs to target the most needy, noting that reallocating resources is likely to face “strong resistance from vested interests". One suggestion calls for a “buy out” of the entitlement to benefits in return for lump sum start-up financing for small businesses.


Rate this content
 
 
 
Average of 122 ratings 
Rating 2.52 / 4 MoyenMoyenMoyenMoyen
Same author:
 flecheWHO expert panel paves way for strong international governance on human genome editing
 flecheSunbeds pose a risk for all people
 flecheProtecting the children from the environment
 fleche9 out of 10 people worldwide breathe polluted air, but more countries are taking action
 flecheThe cost of a polluted environment:
1.7 million child deaths a year

 flecheRespire la vie - une campagne sur les dangers de la pollution de l'air - infographies
 fleche2016 year in review: key health issues
 flecheWHO Global Urban Ambient Air Pollution Database (update 2016)
 flecheLife expectancy increased by 5 years since 2000, but health inequalities persist
 flecheGlobal report on diabetes
 flecheAn estimated 12.6 million deaths each year are attributable to unhealthy environments
 flecheCommission presents its final report, calling for high-level action to address major health challenge
 flecheTrends in maternal mortality: 1990 to 2015
Estimates by WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, World Bank Group and the United Nations Population Division

 flecheViolence against women
 flecheHealth and human rights
 flecheTuberculosis mortality nearly halved since 1990
 flecheNew report identifies four ways to reduce health risks from climate pollutants
 flecheClimate change and health
 flecheVaccine hesitancy: A growing challenge for immunization programmes
 flecheWHO calls for increase in voluntary blood donors to save millions of lives
 flecheEbola diaries: Detecting disease on an unprecedented scale
 flecheGlobal vaccination targets ‘off-track’ warns WHO
 flecheWorld Health Day 2015: From farm to plate, make food safe
 flecheTobacco use declining but major intensification needed in reduction and control efforts
 flecheWHO calls on countries to reduce sugars intake among adults and children
 fleche1.1 billion people at risk of hearing loss
 flecheNew study highlights need to scale up violence prevention efforts globally
 flecheUN reveals major gaps in water and sanitation – especially in rural areas
 flecheWorld health statistics 2014
 flecheImproved data reveals higher global burden of tuberculosis
 flechePreventing suicide: A global imperative
 flecheWHO and partners respond to the outbreak of Ebola virus disease in Guinea
 flecheCommunicating the economics of social determinants of health and health inequalities
 flecheWorld Hepatitis Day: Think again
 flecheWHO targets elimination of TB in over 30 countries
 flecheAccelerating WHO emergency response to Ebola outbreak: Contact tracing
 flecheWHO/UNICEF highlight need to further reduce gaps in access to improved drinking water and sanitation
 flecheWHO’s first global report on antibiotic resistance reveals serious, worldwide threat to public health
 flecheWHO issues new guidance on how to provide contraceptive information and service
 flechePush for palliative care stokes debate
 flecheHINARI: Providing access to health literature
 flecheBuilding Back Better Sustainable mental health care after emergencies
 flechePrevention and control of NCDs: Guidelines for primary health care in low-resource settings
 flecheMental health action plan 2013 - 2020
 flecheWHO issues new guidance for treating children with severe acute malnutrition
 flecheWorld AIDS Day
 flecheTen chemicals of major public health concern
 flecheGains in tuberculosis control at risk due to 3 million missed patients and drug resistance
 flecheWHO calls for the phase out of mercury fever thermometers and blood pressure measuring devices by 2020
 flecheEarly childhood development and disability
 flecheWHO welcomes the updating of the European Union (EU) Tobacco Products Directive
 flecheFamily planning
 flecheMDG 1: eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
 flecheHealth research is essential for progress towards universal health coverage
 flecheHepatitis: “It’s closer than you think”
 flecheDementia cases set to triple by 2050 but still largely ignored
 flecheWHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2011: warning about the dangers of tobacco
 flecheWHO maps noncommunicable disease trends in all countries
 flecheNew WHO report: deaths from noncommunicable diseases on the rise, with developing world hit hardest
 flecheWorld Health Day 2011: Urgent action necessary to safeguard drug treatments
 flecheDiabetes: the sweet irony of modern technology
 flecheTurn off the tap of unsafe medicines
 flecheAction needed to reduce health impact of harmful alcohol use
 fleche2010 in review: key health issues - Photo feature
 flecheMalaria report shows rapid progress towards international targets
 flecheWHO urges all countries to strengthen health financing so more people can use services
 flecheHidden cities: new report shows how poverty and ill-health are linked in urban areas
 flecheWHO: control of neglected tropical diseases is feasible - Renewed engagement to scale-up integrated interventions announced
 flecheMore developing countries show universal access to HIV/AIDS services is possible
 flecheH1N1 in post-pandemic period
 flecheWHO launches global network of age-friendly cities
 flecheSixty-third World Health Assembly closes after passing multiple resolutions
 flecheGrowing threat from counterfeit medicines
 flecheWorld Health Day 2010 - Urbanization and health
 flecheAccess to safe drinking water improving; sanitation needs greater efforts
 flecheGlobal forum addresses solutions to prevent premature deaths
 fleche2009 in review: key health issues
 fleche10 facts on climate change and health
 flecheNew HIV infections reduced by 17% over the past eight years
 flecheToday women live longer, but not healthier lives
 flecheChildhood vaccines at all-time high, but access not yet equitable
 flecheMore than four million HIV-positive people now receiving life-saving treatment
 flecheLargest ever HIV vaccine trial results very encouraging
 flecheRoad accidents, suicide and maternal conditions are leading causes of death in young people
 flecheWorld now at the start of 2009 influenza pandemic

 flecheWorld Health Assembly opens amid concerns about flu pandemic
 flecheSwine influenza frequently asked questions - WHO
 flecheImpact of financial crisis on health: a truly global solution is needed
 flecheHIV-related TB deaths higher than past estimates
 flecheHealth impact of climate change needs attention
 flecheThe Financial Crisis and Global Health
 flecheHealth amid a financial crisis: a complex diagnosis
 fleche2008 in review: key public health issues - Photo essay
 flecheMessage from Dr Margaret Chan, WHO Director-General, for World AIDS Day

 flecheNew study presents state of the world's health
 flecheWorld Health Report calls for return to primary health care approach
 flecheProgress made in malaria control, yet burden is enormous
 flecheExecutive summary "Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health"
 flecheInequities are killing people on a "grand scale" reports WHO's Commission
 flecheWHO launches new HIV/AIDS guide to help countries reach universal access
 flecheNew rapid tests for drug-resistant TB for developing countries
 fleche3 million now receiving life-saving HIV drugs
 flecheWorld Health Assembly sets bold new action for WHO
 flecheNoncommunicable diseases now biggest killers
 fleche10 facts on immunization
 flecheClimate change will erode foundations of health
 flecheInterview: espoirs et craintes dans la lutte contre le paludisme
 flecheGlobal costs of attaining the Millennium Development Goal for water supply and sanitation
 flecheMaternal mortality ratio falling too slowly to meet goal
 flecheJournée Internationale des Personnes Agées - 1er Octobre
 flecheWHO stresses need to ensure the safety of children's medicines
 flecheHealth workforce challenges place increasing demands on European health systems
 flecheNew guidelines to improve psychological and social assistance in emergencies
 flecheWHO urges more investments, services for mental health
 flecheThe world health report 2007
 flecheInternational spread of disease threatens public health security
 flecheChina and India join WHO clinical trial registry platform
 flecheCountries urged to be more vigilant about food safety
 flecheChan, Margaret
 flecheGovernments make progress in interpersonal violence prevention. National efforts leading to significant progress, reports WHO
 flecheWHO proposes global agenda on transplantation
 flecheSpeech by Dr Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization at the High-level debate on international health security
 flecheWHO reports some promising results on avian influenza vaccines
 flecheWHO Executive Board to tackle key global health issues
 fleche2006: A year of challenges and achievements
 flecheNew vaccines against cervical cancer major opportunity for developing world
 flecheProgress made, but AIDS remains pressing public health challenge
 flecheMargaret Chan to be WHO's next Director-General
 flecheFuture of sexual and reproductive health at tipping point according to global study
 flecheUN Secretary-General’s study reveals full range and scale of violence against children
 flecheWHO challenges world to improve air quality
 flecheHealth consequences of excessive solar UV radiation
 flecheNew global alliance seeks to address worldwide shortage of doctors, nurses and other health workers
 flecheThe World Health Organization announces new standards for registration of all human medical research
 flecheThe world health report 2006 - Working together for health
 flecheWorld Health Organization report explains the health impacts of the world's worst-ever civil nuclear accident
 flecheWorld Health Report outlines need for more investment in health workforce to improve working conditions, revitalize training institutions and anticipate future challenges
 flecheReport: Public health, innovation and intellectual property rights
 flecheIntellectual property rights and innovation: high-level commission calls for action to ensure developing country access to existing and new medicines and vaccines
 flecheProgress on Global Access to HIV Antiretroviral Therapy
 flecheGlobal access to HIV therapy tripled in past two years, but significant challenges remain
 flecheCounterfeit medicines: the silent epidemic
 flecheAvian influenza confirmed in birds in Nigeria
 flecheInternational Pledging Conference on Avian and Human Pandemic Influenza
 flecheWas 2005 the year of natural disasters?
 flecheResults of survey: how healthy is your world?
 flecheIncreased HIV prevention and treatment efforts needed to slow and reverse AIDS epidemic, according to new UNAIDS/WHO report
 flecheMeeting on Avian Influenza and Human Pandemic Influenza. Closing remarks
 flecheGlobal meeting to develop common approach on avian influenza and human pandemic influenza
 flecheHealth workers, clean water, blankets and shelter still in short supply in Pakistan for earthquake survivors
 fleche1 October: International Day of Older Persons
 flecheImmunization maintains strong performance made in last quarter century
 flecheWHO expert to work with the UN system on avian and human influenza
 flecheThe World Health Organization warns of the rising threat of heart disease and stroke as overweight and obesity rapidly increase
 flecheWorld Health Organization urges responsible use of antimalarial medicines
 flecheDonation of three million treatments of oseltamivir to WHO will help early response to an emerging influenza pandemic
 flecheHealth and the Millennium Development Goals
 flecheBuilding stronger health systems key to reaching the health Millennium Development Goals
 flecheNew Bangkok charter for health promotion adopted to address rapidly changing global health issues
 flecheWHO: "learning by doing" is key to achieving universal access to HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment
 flecheCountries with moderate to high risk of hepatitis B infection (2002)
 flecheGlobal prevalence of hepatitis C infection (2002)
 flecheAccess to HIV treatment continues to accelerate in developing countries, but bottlenecks persist, says WHO/UNAIDS report
 flecheAlmost 2 billion more people need access to basic sanitation by 2015 to meet millenium target
 flecheWHO and FAO to consult consumer associations from 25 countries on how to promote their involvement in food safety
 flecheWorld Health Assembly adopts new International Health Regulations
 flecheFifty-eighth World Health Assembly: 16–25 May 2005, Geneva, Switzerland
 flecheTB cases and deaths linked to HIV at alarming levels in Africa
 flecheAfrica is worst hit by dual epidemic
 flecheGlobal tobacco treaty enters into force with 57 countries already committed
 flecheWHO warns up to five million people without access to basic services in Southeast Asia
 flecheLee, Jong-wook
 flecheNumber of women living with HIV increases in each region of the world

 flecheLandmark report could influence the future of medicines in Europe and the world
 flecheNew WHO report calls for a new and innovative approach to health systems research
 flecheFood safety : Five simple measures could significantly reduce the global incidence of foodborne disease
 flecheSuicide huge but preventable public health problem, says WHO
 flecheA globally effective HIV vaccine requires greater participation of women and adolescents in clinical trials
 flecheWHO publishes new guidelines on preventing mother to child transmission of HIV
 flecheStrong foundations built to increase access to AIDS treatment
 flecheCodex urged to speed up work and increase participation by developing countries
 flechePolio experts warn of largest epidemic in recent years, as polio hits Darfur
 flecheThe environment: where's the risk, and where are children safe?
 flecheStudy on environmental burden of disease in children: Key findings
 flecheUnprecedented opportunity to fight HIV/AIDS and change the course of history
 flecheMore than 600 million people urgently need effective malaria treatment to prevent unacceptably high death rates
 flecheWorld Health Day 2004 offers an historic opportunity to increase investment in road safety
 flecheWorld Health Day: Road safety is no accident!
 flecheWHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control now signed by 100 countries
 flecheWorld Health Organization to host influenza pandemic preparedness meeting
 flecheWorld Health Organization and scientific journal editors vow to help galvanize mental health research in developing countries
 flecheAIDS threat growing throughout Europe
 flecheUnprecedented spread of avian influenza requires broad collaboration
 flecheMany countries not on target to reach health-related Millennium Development Goals
 flecheUrgent work needed to rebuild health care systems
 flecheNew book demonstrates how climate change impacts on health
 flecheWHO and UNAIDS unveil plan to get 3 million AIDS patients on treatment by 2005
 flecheMass immunization campaign launched to protect 15 million children from polio, as outbreak in Nigeria spreads across West Africa
 flecheWorld Health Organization says failure to deliver AIDS medicines is a global health emergency
 flecheHealth crisis in Liberia - the long road to recovery
 fleche
Coronavirus never before seen in humans is the cause of SARS

 flecheWHO/FAO release independent Expert Report on diet and chronic disease
 flecheAgreement reached on global Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
 flechel’OMS et la FIA unissent leurs efforts pour améliorer la sécurité routière
 flecheWHO launches annual Move for Health day as global initiative to promote benefits of physical activity
 flecheCountries meet to finalize landmark agreement on International Tobacco Control
 flecheOutbreaks in Africa underscore the urgency for increased global influenza surveillance and pandemic planning
 flecheEight questions consumers should ask on the threat of mad cow disease
 flecheForty new countries given low cost access to health journals
 flecheSymposium aims to expand 5 a day initiative to boost fruit and vegetable consumption
 flecheWater for health enshrined as a human right
 flecheImpact of AIDS worsens African famine
 flecheIntensification de l'action dans les pays: Rencontre des hauts responsables de la santé et des finances avec les partenaires pour améliorer la santé des pauvres
 flecheIntensification de l'action dans les pays: Rencontre des hauts responsables de la santé et des finances avec les partenaires pour améliorer la santé des pauvres
13
SEARCH
Keywords   go
in 
Translate this page Traduire par Google Translate
Share

Share on Facebook
FACEBOOK
Partager sur Twitter
TWITTER
Share on Google+Google + Share on LinkedInLinkedIn
Partager sur MessengerMessenger Partager sur BloggerBlogger
Other items
where is published this article: