AW: Radiation Hormesis

["Franz Schoenhofer" <franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>]

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

Von: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]Im Auftrag von

RuthWeiner@AOL.COM

Gesendet: Montag, 19. Jänner 2004 20:53

An: "Joan Stovall"; "Karl Ellison"; radsafe-digest@list.vanderbilt.edu

Betreff: Re: Radiation Hormesis





In a message dated 1/19/2004 12:24:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Joan

Stovall" <joans@PCEZ.COM> writes:



>I am convinced there is a hormesis effect.

>

>Some evidence:

>

-----------------------------



Dear Joan,



I hope you will not be to much offended by my comment on your comment. From

the scientific point of view Ruth has said what is to be said, but her

arguments could be backed by a lot more facts all over the world. But the

discussion, not only restricted to your point of view, reminds me on some

old unscientific stories like the following:



In late spring, when the storks come back from Northern Africa to the

South-Eastern part of Austria there used to be a rise in the birthrate. This

is a clear and undeniable proof, that the storks bring the babies.



To become scientific again: In earlier days obviously the most important

"confounders" like cold nights, long nights and no television, radio and

transport by private cars might not have been recognized. I unfortunately do

not have any statistics available which could show a dramatic change after

the advent of central heating, radio, television and cars. BTW the storks

still come....



To draw a serious conclusion: To put forward some isolated facts (like high

arsenic concentration in drinking water, low, medium, high radon

concentrations in drinking water, chromium concentrations etc.) and trying

to link them to diseases is in almost all, but not in all cases,

unjustified. Linking lung cancer to cigarette smoking is one of the few

cases, where there is not the slightest doubt, that the link is justified -

is there nobody smoking in this world? So why complain about unconfirmed and

unconfirmable risks? This is Sanctimony (I hope this is the right word). One

should fight the most disastrous and well known big risks first and then

take to others. This is btw true in any sector, where risks have to be

managed, like for instance traffic. I know that mass media and politics

distort risks, so one should and has to start there.



Best regards,



Franz





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the

text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,

with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/