[Rad_Sci_Health] RE: [ RadSafe ] dose RATE is the decisive variable - the wheel ofreincarnation of ideas

Tue Sep 5 22:35:25 CDT 2006

Jim:

Walston Chubb, formerly of Bettis Lab, has sent me a number of letters
making this point, from a somewhat different (e.g thermodynamic) viewpoint.

Didn't you say he had sent you such letters too?  They fit in rather nicely
with the subject reports.  I should send him a copy of this thread, but I
don't think he has e-mail.

Ted Rockwell

> From: "Muckerheide, Jim  (CDA)" <jim.muckerheide at state.ma.us>
> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 12:53:57 -0400
> To: <Rainer.Facius at dlr.de>, <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Cc: <rad-sci-l at wpi.edu>, <Rad_Sci_Health at yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [ RadSafe ] dose RATE is the decisive variable - the wheel
> ofreincarnation of ideas
> Subject: [Rad_Sci_Health] RE: [ RadSafe ] dose RATE is the decisive variable -
> the wheel ofreincarnation of ideas
> 
> Rainer, All,
> 
> Note that the link to the 1993 review of Delattre's theory is at:
> BRUTER C.P. (Ed)
> 
> It seems to me that the issue of the primacy of dose rate is 70 or 80 years
> old.  But ICRP et al. could not be applied to overturn the LNT premise as used
> against medical therapies.  However, note that dose rate can be reported as
> just rate.  In Jake Spalding's experiments, roughly 4000 mice (in each of
> replicated experiments) were exposed to 5 total external (Co-60) doses, at 6
> dose rates, starting at 4 ages, with about 25 mice in each group.  The high
> dose rate of 36000 R/day reflects an actual exposure of 25 R in one minute.
> Doses were 20 to 1620 rad. There was no life shortening, and in a strain with
> very low cancer rates, the cancers were even lower in the exposed groups.
> See, e.g.:
> http://www.radscihealth.org/rsh/Data_Docs/1-3/1/Rev%202%2013122Spal.html
> 
> During the Manhattan Project and subsequent work, e.g., by NCI, dose rate was
> often used as a measure. See, e.g., Egon Lorenz:
> http://www.radscihealth.org/rsh/Data_Docs/1-3/1/1312lo54.html
> (Report on Manhattan Project work - Zirkle (Ed.) 1954, McGraw-Hill [something
> like Vol. 22?])
> 
> http://www.radscihealth.org/rsh/Data_Docs/1-3/1/1313lo50.html
> (NCI 1950 - after post-War suppression of data had again been established,
> picking up from the pre-War '30s, led by the FDA to favor drugs over radiation
> therapies - especially with the new antibiotics instead of the serums of the
> 1930s.)
> 
> E.g., the "Yearbook of Radiology" (Yearbook Publishers) reported on successful
> low dose therapies in the 1947 and 1948 volumes, and none in the 1949 and 1950
> volumes.
> 
> For infections, there are the many papers by Kelley and Dowell, mostly in
> Radiology from 1928-1941, incorporated in their 1942 text on the subject
> "Roentgen Treatment of Infections."  See:
> http://www.radscihealth.org/rsh/docs/Kelly42/Kelly42TableOfContents.htm
> 
> Regards, Jim 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Rainer.Facius at dlr.de
>> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 6:00 PM
>> To: radsafe at radlab.nl
>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] dose RATE is the decisive variable - the
>> wheel ofreincarnation of ideas
>> 
>> 
>> Prof. Raabe's pointer to his publications in the early
>> 1980ies stirred my subconciousness until it unearthed another
>> still earlier source where radiobiological responses were
>> treated as functions of dose-rate as the primary independent
>> variable instead of dose, and where in the most general case
>> response function were drawn as a function of time. I
>> encountered this approach during the Symposia on
>> Microdosimetry, where Pierre Delattre and his co-worker J.
>> Delforge attempted to persuade radiobiologists to look at
>> radiobiological experiments - actually already at their
>> design - from the vantage point of Delattre's systems
>> theoretical formalism (see refs. below). Unfortunately most
>> of them apparently were overtaxed by the mathematics (though
>> mostly only systems of linear differential equations) and -
>> perhaps more importantly - by the required radical redesign
>> of the conventional radiobiological experimentation they were
>> adapted to. In addition, the stage for their proposals was
>> unfavourable since at these Symposia - as in this decade -
>> radiobiologists strove to understand radiobiological effects
>> primarily in terms of the microscopic (later even the
>> nanoscopic!) spatial distribution of initial energy
>> deposition events in abstract sites - though when pressed
>> they would invoke DNA as a target.
>> 
>>> From the second book below I copied an interesting graph
>> displaying shapes of time-response functions predicted by his
>> approach which cover hypersensitivity, induced radiation
>> resistance as encountered experimentally many years later and
>> (more interestingly) hormesis - 'predicted' 1971! by a
>> biologically sophisticated systems-theoretical formalism. If
>> the moderator will let this pass, you can see this predicted
>> hormetic response in the attached PDF file.
>> 
>> Regards, Rainer
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Pivotal references:
>> 
>> Pierre Delattre
>> Système, Structure, Fonction, Évolution - Essai d'analyse
>> épistémologique.
>> Maloine-Doin, Paris 1971
>> 
>> Pierre Delattre
>> L'Évolution des Sytèmes Moléculaires: Bases théoriques -
>> Applications à la Chimie et à la Biologie.
>> Maloine-Doin, Paris 1971
>> 
>> Delattre P.
>> Sur l'interprétation des certaines aspects morphologiques des
>> courbes de survie.
>> In: Proc. 5th Symp. on Microdosimetry (Booz J, Ebert H G,
>> Smith B G R, eds.), pp 479-515
>> The Commission of the European Communities, EUR 5452,
>> Luxembourg, 1976
>> 
>> I also found a pointer to a slightly more recent short review
>> of Delattre's work in
>> http://membres.lycos.fr/mcxapc/lectures/indexlec.htm
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> 
>> Von: Otto Raabe [mailto:ograabe at ucdavis.edu]
>> Gesendet: Sa 02.09.2006 17:34
>> An: Facius, Rainer; radsafe at radlab.nl
>> Betreff: Re: AW: [ RadSafe ] dose RATE is the decisive variable
>> 
>> 
>> At 02:17 AM 9/2/2006, Rainer.Facius at dlr.de wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Dear Prof. Raabe:
>> Though you apparently detected the ramifications of
>> this fundamental principle quite some time ago, this time the
>> data pertain directly to human cancer mortality (which of
>> course I would expect to display the same regularities).
>> 
>> 
>> Human cancer is from radium is directly evaluated in:
>> 
>> Raabe, O.G., S.A. Book and N.J. Parks (1980) Bone cancer from
>> radium: Canine dose response explains data for mice and
>> humans. Science 208: 61 64.
>> 
>> Raabe, O.G., S.A. Book and N.J. Parks. (1983) Lifetime bone
>> cancer dose-response relationships in beagles and people from
>> skeletal burdens of 226Ra and 90Sr. Health Physics 44: 33 48
>> 
>> Raabe, O.G. (1989) Scaling of fatal cancer risks from
>> laboratory animals to man. Health Physics 57 (suppl.1): 419-432.
>>  
>> Raabe, O.G., L.S. Rosenblatt and R.A Schlenker. (1990)
>> Interspecies scaling of risk for radiation-induced bone
>> cancer. International Journal of Radiation Biology 57: 1047-1061.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> **********************************************
>> Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D., CHP
>> Center for Health & the Environment
>> University of California
>> One Shields Avenue
>> Davis, CA 95616
>> E-Mail: ograabe at ucdavis.edu
>> Phone: (530) 752-7754   FAX: (530) 758-6140
>> ***********************************************
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Rad_Sci_Health/
> 
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     Rad_Sci_Health-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
> 
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>  
> 
> 