Apparently the keyword in my originally quoted text was &quot;overall&quot;, as the UN report includes that figure (<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.unscear.org&#x2F;unscear&#x2F;en&#x2F;chernobyl.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.unscear.org&#x2F;unscear&#x2F;en&#x2F;chernobyl.html</a>):<p><i>Among the residents of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, there had been up to the year 2005 more than 6,000 cases of thyroid cancer reported in children and adolescents who were exposed at the time of the accident, and more cases can be expected during the next decades. Notwithstanding the influence of enhanced screening regimes, many of those cancers were most likely caused by radiation exposures shortly after the accident. Apart from this increase, there is no evidence of a major public health impact attributable to radiation exposure two decades after the accident. There is no scientific evidence of increases in overall cancer incidence or mortality rates or in rates of non-malignant disorders that could be related to radiation exposure. The incidence of leukaemia in the general population, one of the main concerns owing to the shorter time expected between exposure and its occurrence compared with solid cancers, does not appear to be elevated. Although those most highly exposed individuals are at an increased risk of radiation-associated effects, the great majority of the population is not likely to experience serious health consequences as a result of radiation from the Chernobyl accident. Many other health problems have been noted in the populations that are not related to radiation exposure.</i>