AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: Lung cancer reduction
crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 29 10:09:58 CDT 2006
Thank you for the inforamtion. To be very explicit,
is there any evidence that radiation reduces the
incidence of lung cancers in smokers? I am not asking
about radon exposures.
--- Rainer.Facius at dlr.de wrote:
> "There is no evidence that increased exposures to
> radiation have done so [reduced incidence of lung
> Dear John:
> Of course, whether or not your above statement
> holds, depends somewhat on what you consider
> "evidence". Regarding lung cancer, even the ICRP
> concedes that the [LNT] atomic bomb survivor risk
> estimates do NOT fit into the picture outlined by
> epidemiological data from truly chronic low dose
> rate exposures:
> "For cancers at some sites there is reasonable
> compatibility between the data from LSS and those
> from others sources. However it is recognised by the
> Commission that for a number of sites, e.g., lung,
> there are significant differences."
> quoted from: 2005 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
> INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION.
> Draft for consultation. §(104) p. 30 and once more
> in annex A, (A13) p. 67)
> I attach a PDF file with 6 diagrams showing such
> significant differences in data from some of such
> 'opposing' studies.(If the attachment does not pass
> the moderator, I will provide it upon request)
> Unless you can provide reasons for ignoring these
> findings, my interpretation of these data falsifies
> your above statement.
> Kind regards, Rainer
> Sources for the diagrams in the attachment:
> Bogen K T.
> Mechanistic model predicts a U-shaped relation of
> radon exposure to lung cancer risk reflected in
> combined occupational and US residential data.
> Human and Experimental Toxicology 17(1998)691-696
> Fleck C M, Schöllnberger H, Kottbauer M M, Dockal T,
> Prüfert U
> Modeling radioprotective mechanisms in the dose
> effect relation at low doses and low
> dose rates of ionizing radiation.
> Mathematical Biosciences 155(1999)13-44
> (Fleck et al. and also Bogen successfully model
> different sophisticated cellular models
> (sophisticated in contrast to the petty LNT
> postulate) to own data or to data from Cohen B L,
> Test of the linear-no threshold theory of radiation
> carcinogenesis for inhaled radon decay products.
> Health Physics 68#2(1995)157-174)
> Cardis E, Gilbert E S, Carpenter L, Howe G, Kato I,
> Armstrong B K, Beral V, Cowper G, Douglas A, Fix J,
> Fry S A, Kaldor J, Lavé C, Salmon L, Smith P G,
> Voelz G L, Wiggs L D.
> Effects of low doses and dose rates of external
> ionizing radiation: Cancer mortality among nuclear
> industry workers in three countries.
> Radiation Research 142(1995)117-132
> Rossi H H, Zaider M
> Radiogenic lung cancer: the effects of low linear
> energy transfer (LET) radiation.
> Radiation and Environmental Biophysics 36(1997)85-88
> Tokarskaya Z B, Okladnikova N D, Belyaeva T D,
> Drozhko E G.
> Multifactorial analysis of lung cancer dose-response
> relationships for workers at the Mayak nuclear
> Health Physics 73#6(1997)899-905
> Dr. Rainer Facius
> German Aerospace Center
> Institute of Aerospace Medicine
> Linder Hoehe
> 51147 Koeln
> Voice: +49 2203 601 3147 or 3150
> FAX: +49 2203 61970
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag von
> John Jacobus
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 25. Juni 2006 19:31
> An: radsafe
> Betreff: [ RadSafe ] Re: Lung cancer reduction
> 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."
"You get a lot more authority when the workforce doesn't think it's amateur hour on the top floor."
GEN. MICHAEL V. HAYDEN, President Bush's nominee for C.I.A. director.
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail: crispy_bird at yahoo.com
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
More information about the RadSafe