[ RadSafe ] Article by Vincent Giuliano on "Radiation Hormesis"

[Howard Long]

Pollycove and Feinendigan did similar studies on mice. 
I am looking at the handout given by Pollycove at DDP 5-10 years ago, titled.
(Seal of Nuclear Regulatory Commission)
Epidemiology, Molecular Biology, and the Demise of the Linear No-Threshold 
(LNT) Hypothesis
Myron Pollycove MD Visiting Medical Fellow US NRC 

I just spoke with Myron and forward this to him.
He says he is loaded with ammunition for you all.

Howard Long


On Jan 30, 2013, at 9:42 AM, "Brennan, Mike  (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV> wrote:

> I suspect that lit searches and cell studies and such will never be
> convincing.  What might be more convincing would be a double-blind (or
> even triple-blind?) animal study that shares some features with your
> beagle study (though I would use rats, as they are cheaper, don't live
> as long, and cause less hate and discontent when you experiment on
> them).
> 
> I would arrange the study along the following lines:
> 
> 1.  Obtain a cohort of standard rats, genetically identical if possible,
> and similar age.  Provide identifiers, such as tattooed numbers.
> 2.  Insert some sort of dosimeter chip under the skin.  It should be
> designed to last the lifetime of the rat.
> 3.  Provide researchers in various locations with identical habitats for
> the rats.  The habitats should have a way of randomly exposing the rats
> to ionizing radiation.  I would use x-rays, but that isn't particularly
> important, as long as cumulative dose is fairly low and there is a good
> gradient in the field.
> 4.  Put rats in the habitat, tend them normally, irradiate them a
> little, and let them live out their lives.  Record when they die,
> determine the cause, and send the chips off to be read.
> 5.  After the lot of them are dead, compare dose with lifespan and cause
> of death.
> 
> I don't know what the results of such a study would be, but it would
> either clear the waters, or muddy them in a very definitive way. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Otto G. Raabe
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 1:24 AM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Article by Vincent Giuliano on "Radiation
> Hormesis"
> 
> So, now how do we convince EPA that 15 mrem per year (the expensive
> super fund cleanup standard) is not hazardous?
> 
> Otto
> 
> 
> **********************************************
> 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
> ***********************************************
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu