Re: Hormesis - medical benefits?

[Muckerheide <muckerheide@mediaone.net>]

Hello Franz,


> Hi,
> 
> At 12:32 27.01.2000 -0600, you wrote:
> >Substantial recent medical evidence (mostly in German, so there's not much on
> >our site :-)
> 
> I would be very careful on papers published in German. Everybody convinced
> to have important results to be presented would publish them in English,
> simply in order to get them known to a large scientific forum. Papers
> published in small, maybe even local journals like (hypothetically) the
> "Monthly review of our valued guests at Bad Gastein" have to be taken with
> caution. One should not forget, that a tremendous amount of money is
> involved in the spa-business and as I pointed already out positive effects
> may be simply attributed to other treatment methods which are not related
> to radioactivity. "Radioactivity", which is obviously a very negative word
> in everyday life may have some fascination, when used medically.

I didn't say "articles" or "brochures." I said papers, and to medical
'double-blind' research standards. That they are not pub'd in English
says more about the lack of interest in the science and the lack of a
medical establishment interested in the results than in Europe, that
has at least some professional science and medical interest and
support (including the funding by insurance comnpanies of such
treatments - which have perhaps led to the unduly costly 'resort
therapy' facilities instead of more cost-effective options.
 
> (From the time
> >of the Romans there has been evidence of 'real effects' sufficient to cause
> >substantial effort to attain the benefits
> 
> The Romans did not know about radon, they used the spas because of the warm
> water and anybody knows that warm water (with or without radioactivity) is
> very pleasant when suffering from certain diseases.

Right. They didn't know to be afraid. They just knew it worked. And
that it worked better than just hot springs for medical conditions. A
true 'double-blind" (triple-blind?" test!!  The same is true in Japan
and elsewhere.
 
> >Franz, Like many LNT-committed,
> 
> I am not a supporter of LNT and I am not its enemy, I simply am of the
> opinion that neither the LNT nor the contrary has been proved and unless it
> has been proved (yes, I know you believe so) I think it is better to be on
> the safe side and to assume its validity.

But you don't have to "assume" anything, just consider the data
(without taking your conclusions from the "current wisdom" -
promulgated by the only people with a true financial conflict of interest.


> your 'beliefs' are having undue influence on
> >your consideration of the data - this is making "the LNT-religion" an
> >increasingly apt term. :-)  But if you obtain some of the German refs,
> 
> Please, forward them to me!

I'm sending a copy of this to Klaus Becker who may have a good summary
of some of the papers at hand. (I thought some we're ref'd in the last
year or so in Rad Prot Dosimetry.)
 
> we'd be
> >happy to receive some limited translations of the essential results. :-)
> 
> I will do my best.
> 
> In the meantime I send my best regards and wish you to be spared from
> attacks like the ones from Franz Schoenhofer!

Well, it hasn't stopped our progress yet. :-)

Regards, Jim
muckerheide@mediaone.net
========================
 
> Franz
> 
> Franz Schoenhofer
> Habicherg. 31/7
> A-1160 Vienna
> Austria
> Tel.: +43-1-495 53 08
> Fax.: same number
> mobile phone: +43-664-338 0 333
> e-mail: schoenho@via.at
> 
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html