Nothing from Fukushima.
Now consider this from the NIH – Radiation Hormesis: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
Three aspects of hormesis with low doses of ionizing radiation are presented: the good, the bad, and the ugly. The good is acceptance by France, Japan, and China of the thousands of studies showing stimulation and/or benefit, with no harm, from low dose irradiation. This includes thousands of people who live in good health with high background radiation. The bad is the nonacceptance of radiation hormesis by the U. S. and most other governments; their linear no threshold (LNT) concept promulgates fear of all radiation and produces laws which have no basis in mammalian physiology. The LNT concept leads to poor health, unreasonable medicine and oppressed industries. The ugly is decades of deception by medical and radiation committees which refuse to consider valid evidence of radiation hormesis in cancer, other diseases, and health. Specific examples are provided for the good, the bad, and the ugly in radiation hormesis.
OK. Hormesis is a new word for you. What does it mean? From the link.
Hormesis is the stimulation of any system by low doses of any agent (Luckey, 1980a). Large and small doses of most agents elicit opposite responses. A dose that elicits a response which separates positive from negative effects is the threshold dose; it is the “zero equivalent point” (ZEP) for that specific parameter. Low dose is any dose below ZEP. Dose rate is also important. Taking one pill per day may be life-saving; taking 365 of most pills in one day would be lethal.
Radiation hormesis is the stimulation, often considered to be beneficial, from low doses of ionizing radiation. Large doses are harmful. The difference is quite clear in those dose-response curves which involve both biopositive and bionegative effects. At any given rate, the physiologic response to ionizing radiation is directly proportional to the logarithm of the dose (Luckey, 1991).
You can find the links at the link.
So what does it all meen in layman’s terms? Low does of radiation up to a point, can energize the immune system. That is you are actually better off after receiving the dose. Which may explain the popularity of spas like the Bad Gastein spa. Note that there is no mention of radiation hormesis in the ABC report. I would prefer to think it was ignorance on their part rather than an attempt to keep you ignorant.
Comments
4 responses to “Radiation From Half Moon Bay and Hormesis”
Man is a truly ingenious animal; in every age, we come up with new and interesting ways to close our minds.
I certainly can accept the idea of hormesis. A large exposure to a virus kills you, a very small exposure makes you immune. Moderate alcohol consumption makes you healthy, wealthy, and wise, it seems. It’s the dose that makes the poison.
This ties into two of my personal bugbears–hysterical sciencism, and individualized medicine. The taboo against radiation is an example of hysterical sciencism. Tobacco smoke is probably similar. The old attitudes about alcohol. And yes, recreational drug use as well.
Part of the problem is that modern medicine is not individualized–it considers only the lowest common denominator. If it’s not good for everyone, then it’s not any good at all. Hormesis is probably an individual effect–an occasional cigar will have beneficial effects for some people, but not for others. So modern medicine says “smoking is bad”, end of story. And then people who don’t really understand the provenance of the recommendation get hysterical about the “science”.
Hormesis. A small exposure can be beneficial where a larger exposure is not?
Could this mean we should reconsider homeopathic notions about teeny little doses of stuff, or should I still consider it nonsense?
And I now remove tongue from cheek.
Walt,
Is it possible that homeopathy relies on the placebo effect?
Faith healing indeed.
Parts of homeopathy work. Those parts are called vaccination. The parts that don’t work are still known as homeopathy.