I was thinking about the industrialization of the Soviet Union, most notably the death toll involved. The policies (such as forced-labour, prison camps for those who under performed, extremely poor living conditions etc) of the government are commonly regarded as inhumane and tragic, but how much resemblance did this bear to the respective industrial revolutions in other countries, to give an example (as it is the closest to home for me), Britain's in the 18th/19th century. In terms of casualties (the death toll in the USSR was very high, but was this a result of the totalitarian government or the industrialization process, and how similar was the British casualty list?) products and success. Could this have been because of the speed of their industrialization or as a result of the Communist ideology that resulted in different/worse/better results?
The USSR's experience wasn't unique. Mao's Great Leap Forward had a significantly bad effect on the population at large (20 millions dead over ~ 4 years) due to the resulting famine.
One impact of industrialization in the UK was increased urbanization, which seems to have led to horrendous mortality due to communicable disease. But it's difficult to find hard numbers on this without very strong Google-fu. In this context it will be interesting to look at the epidemiology of cancers in China over the next 20-40 years to see the impacts of industrial pollution on the health of their population.
A big challenge when looking at the UK, US, German, etc experience with industrialization is trying to segregate the positive effects. Increased industrialization in the 19th century led to a generally increased standard of living. So you have to factor in what benefits industrialization gave (e.g. how many lives were saved by reduced levels of starvation) in order to figure out the total cost.
The USSR industrialized at roughly the same rate as the peripheral European countries. Maybe a little slower.