[ RadSafe ] Cancer reduction by Radiation

[howard long]

John, 
  Prescription of radiation will gradually resume, I predict.

  My sacks of KCl lie 8" away in my office, instead of under my mattress
  because of my wife's disinclination.
  My belt with taped-on thorium welding rods lays on them, unused because it's unhandy and would provide only local exposure. 
  The diabetic with foot gangrene I just saw, might have been saved being hospitalized for 7 weeks had I access to radiation treatment like 60 years ago (now put out of business by "malpractice" lawyers).
   
  Consumer-controlled health care (like HSAs) and the increasing consumer knowledge of health, the market, will "advance man to the next level beyond the industrial and information revolutions" (Hiserodt finale for Ch22 on Energy in "Underexposed: What if Radiation is Good for You?") Hiserodt, B Cohen, Ted Rockwell and George Gilder are among speakers who can be questioned Aug 5 at Portland State U DDP meeting,
  program at www.oism.org/ddp 
   
  Howard Long    
  
John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Syd,
If you believe that low radiation is good for your
health, what have you done to increase your radiation
exposure?

Can you cite any articles that show low doses of
radiation are better than statin drugs? 

Dr. Long, HAVE you prescibe low dose of radiation
rather than statin drugs for your patients? 

--- "Syd H. Levine" wrote:

> Dr. Long:
> 
> Well said, and you certainly help put the debate
> over LNT in perspective.
> 
> Half the adult population in this country has been
> convinced to take
> statins, yet the evidence that a nice radiation dose
> would help a great deal
> more than statins ever could is profoundly more
> convincing!
> 
> Syd H. Levine
> AnaLog Services, Inc.
> Phone: (270) 276-5671
> Telefax: (270) 276-5588
> E-mail: analog at logwell.com
> Web URL: www.logwell.com
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "howard long" 
> To: "John Jacobus" ;
> "radsafe" 
> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 3:50 PM
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Re: Lung cancer reduction by
> Radiation
> 
> 
> > The paper by Luan in JAPS gives better evidence
> that radiation prevents
> > cancer (p<0.001) than we have for effectiveness of
> most therapies in
> > medicine.
> >
> > So does the Cameron analysis of NSWS.
> >
> > Double blind experiments were not conducted for
> penicillin in pneumonia
> > because the effectiveness was so obvious, as in
> the above.
> >
> > Of course stopping smoking is even better proven,
> and also has no double
> > blind experiments..
> >
> > Howard Long MD MPH
> >
> >
> > John Jacobus wrote:
> > Dr. Luan,
> > If you have serious concerns about the high
> incidents
> > of lung cancers, I would think that you would
> foster
> > the idea the people should stop smoking. Studies
> have
> > shown the individual who stop smoking have reduced
> > incidents in lung cancer. There is no evidence
> that
> > increased exposures to radiation have done so.
> >
> > Also, as WE discussed several years ago, your
> > statements on reduction of cancers in Taiwanese
> > apartment dwellers was at best an incompete
> report.
> > At worst, badly flawed. There has been no further
> > study of these people, as opposed to the Atomic
> Bomb
> > survivors. In your work was of limited scope.
> >
> > Maybe this is why many professional radiation
> > scientist consider this to be a "wild story."
> >
> >> yuan-chi luan wrote:
> >> Dear Dr. Cohen:
> >>
> >> I am glad to have read your letter to Toronto
> >> Glope & mail in showing the the results of your
> 25
> >> years studies of radon gas whether dangerous to
> >> humankind, that the US population in the high
> >> average radon level county, have 30% of less lung
> >> cancer deaths in the low average radon level
> >> counties. Therefore the EPA of US and Canada
> >> governments in trying to reduce the radon
> >> concentration in homes and water are really
> >> unnecessary and unreasonable..