Just after 3:23 in [this TED Radio Hour segment](http://www.npr.org/2016/10/21/497837955/what-can-we-learn-from-one-of-the-world-s-most-toxic-accidents), featured guest Holly Morris makes the claim that "the older you are, the less detrimental the effects of radiation is." The context is in why explaining older people were allowed to return to their homes near Chernobyl following the nuclear accident. Is it true that the elderly are less sensitive to ionizing radiation than younger people, and that detrimental effects of ionizing radiation decrease with age? 

---

Note: The [original TED talk](https://www.ted.com/talks/holly_morris_why_stay_in_chernobyl_because_it_s_home/transcript?language=en) (2:11-2:34) indicates these people returned illegally, in defiance of authorities, while the later radio program claims the women "were allowed back into the area," and this age explanation is given as to why they were allowed to return, contrasted with young people who were not allowed to return (radio 3:34).
['https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/38645', 'https://skeptics.stackexchange.com', 'https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/users/27319/']
It seems plausible that such a "pool" did exist at Auschwitz in 1944. It probably served several purposes: A pool for swimming in by hard working prisoners, a fire reservoir tank and possible to fool the West at the same time who took aerial photos of the camp in order to see the living conditions of the prisoners.

> 
> Barbara Cherish, the daughter of Arthur Liebehenschel, wrote a book which was published in 2009, entitled "My father, the Auschwitz commandant." In her book, Barbara credits her father with building a swimming pool for the use of the prisoners. Liebehenschel was the Commandant of the Auschwitz main camp for five months, beginning on December 1, 1943. Liebehenschel is credited with other improvements at Auschwitz I, including the tearing down of the standing cells in Block 11. - [Swimming Pool at Auschwitz I](https://www.scrapbookpages.com/AuschwitzScrapbook/Tour/Auschwitz1/AuschwitzPool.html)
> 
> 
> 

[![Swimming pool at Auschwitz main camp, 1996](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HCqUM.jpg)](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HCqUM.jpg)

> 
> The photo [above] shows what the swimming pool looked like in 1996 before preservation work began. The high diving board is at the far end in the background of the photo. The diving board itself is now gone. - [Swimming Pool at Auschwitz I](https://www.scrapbookpages.com/AuschwitzScrapbook/Tour/Auschwitz1/AuschwitzPool.html)
> 
> 
>
> 
> Is it a "fire brigade reservoir", which I assume has something to do with fire safety although I don't know exactly what this means or why they would need it?
> 
> 
> 

A fire brigade reservoir is a [supply of water](http://www.firerescuemagazine.com/articles/print/volume-9/issue-3/firefighting-operations/obtaining-water-without-a-hydrant.html) that can be pumped at a fire. They are often used in places where [fire hydrants are not available](http://www.bcfpd.org/index.php/faq/put-fires-no-fire-hydrants) or are insufficient to meet the demand. For example, where people get their water from a well rather than a municipal source. 

As a practical matter, almost any water can be used (although some may be easier to use). So if that was something that collected water, it could be a fire brigade reservoir. That is true even if it was also used as a swimming pool. 

My point being that it being a fire brigade reservoir would not prevent it from being a swimming pool. Or vice versa. They are not mutually exclusive uses. 

In regards to whether this particular water was actually a swimming pool, I have nothing to add to the [other answer](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/38643/30596). 

Additional sources: 

* [Quora](https://www.quora.com/In-neighborhoods-lacking-fire-hydrants-what-do-fire-departments-use-as-water-sources-when-dealing-with-fires)
* [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/notes/eastern-panhandle-working-fires/what-if-there-is-not-a-fire-hydrant-nearby-where-i-live/540193675999432/)