Re: [rad-sci-l] Re: ABSTRACT

[Jim Muckerheide <jmuckerheide@delphi.com>]

Hi Mike,

You have the paper?  Does it have Goraczko's email address?  

Will you respond to him on this?  A letter to the Journal?  

Or want RSH response to your comments here?  Are you proposing to draft
something for RSH review for correspondence or response?

Thanks.

Regards, Jim
muckerheide@mediaone.net
Radiation, Science, and Health
==============================

Mike Fox wrote:
> 
> Jim:
> I support this kind of research since hopefully, it will end some debates.
> However, to make the paper stronger I am concerned about the statement which
> says:  "Data from radon exposure in chronically exposed nuclear workers, acutely
> exposed Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims, and observers of atmospheric nuclear
> explosions...."
> 
> As you know I was involved directly with radiological/Pu lab activities here in
> the 70s and I am not aware of any such radon exposure data for me or my people.
> This will likely be a weak link in this paper.  Regrettably, the only exposure
> data of concern historically were those related to Hanford sources.  Spiers (I
> have the exact reference in my files ca 1979, and should be in the materials I
> recently sent to you) made some attempt to quantify these other significant
> sources to which all such workers were exposed, namely natural sources such as
> radon, and medical exposures. Depending upon exposure assumptions made (such a
> radon levels in the workers homes), these latter sources can be more than 70% of
> the total exposures to the workers!!
> 
> This could be important since the average resident of Spokane county, 130 miles
> north of Hanford, receives about 1500 mrem/yr, according to Wash. State Dept. of
> Health data, many times the exposures to Hanford workers. These data by the way,
> do not agree with Bernie Cohen's radon levels for Spokane County (which are much
> lower), but they are official agency data here in this state.  Conversations with
> the owners of a radon measurement/mitigation company in Spokane indicate that its
> quite easy to find individual schools, homes, individual rooms, and businesses
> with much higher doses.  Spokane geology is dramatically diverse, especially in
> the city, making any "average" exposure data highly suspect, and quite
> unrepresentative of the real situation there.
> 
> My other comment is a nit: the acronym IR (here defined as Ionizing Radiation)
> conflicts with my old IR acronym (Infrared Radiation---which is non-ionizing).
> Can't recommend an improvement.
> Mike
> 
> Jim Muckerheide wrote:
> 
> > If anyone gets this paper, please comment, and send a copy.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Regards, Jim
> > muckerheide@mediaone.net
> > Radiation, Science, and Health
> > ==============================
> >
> > Med Hypotheses 2000
> > Mar;54(3):461-468
> >  Ionizing radiation and mitogenetic radiation: two links of the same energetic
> > chain in a biological cell.
> >
> >  Goraczko W
> >  Radio- and Photochemistry Department, Technical University Poznan, Poznan,
> > Poland
> >
> > Present research demonstrates that the excitation of living systems by high
> > energy/low doses of ionizing radiation (IR) initiates prolonged secondary
> > ultraviolet (UV) range emission that influences biota. When doses of this
> > energy are too high, the process of energy or radiation absorption by the
> > cells causes negative changes (i.e. negative mutations or death). When these
> > doses are sufficiently low, vital processes inside the cells are stimulated
> > and can create positive changes. This paper proposes a common denomination for
> > mechanisms of UV and ionizing radiation when interacting with living cells,
> > underlying both its mitogenetic effect and radiation hormesis. Data from radon
> > exposure in chronically exposed nuclear workers, acutely exposed Hiroshima and
> > Nagasaki victims and observers of atmospheric nuclear explosions, combined
> > with animal results, present irrefutable evidence that low doses of IR are
> > beneficial. As a conclusion the author postulates the possibility of new
> > methods of therapy regarding the use of IR and mitogenetic radiation. This
> > paper has been written to encourage debate regarding possible future benefits
> > that may be derived from low level doses of IR exposure in the general
> > population. (c) 2000 Harcourt Publishers Ltd Copyright 2000 Harcourt
> > Publishers Ltd.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rad-sci-l mailing list
> rad-sci-l@ans.ep.wisc.edu
> http://ans.ep.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-sci-l
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html