RE: Tiny doses of some toxins may make body stronger, theory says

["yuan-chi luan" <nbcsoc@hotmail.com>]

Dear Jim and all RSH friends:



Based on the information of Jim and Seth, I would like to render the 

following viewpoints for your consideration of the issue of Hormesis.

1.	I prefer using the chronic radiation instead of low dose radiation, and 

the chronic toxins instead of tiny or small dose of toxin. Dr T.D Luckey 

asserts 10 Sv or 1000 rem of radiation received in one year is still in 

hormetic range, is the dose of 10 Sv a low dose? Dr. E. Calabrese assets 

tiny or small dose of Toxins is hormetic, both vitamin (as Centrum silver 

used every where in the world) and many Chinese medicine contains different 

carcinogenic metals, if used for ten years, is the dose  received in ten 

years as tiny or small dose?.

2.	The chronic radiation or chronic toxins received in some cases induced 

hormetic effects, in the other cases resulted in harmful effects, so that we 

it need all the toxicologists to understand them. But I do believe the 

health effects of the chronic radiation or toxins have demonstrated 

themselves, only the data are often prejudicially considered as having 

uncertainty factors and not reliable. I want to show the chronic radiation 

is always hormetic to people with two examples in Taiwan. There was a case 

study of the cancer mortality of the nuclear energy workers in three nuclear 

power plants in Taiwan, the result was that the mortality of the workers is 

about 50% of the general public of male in the same age of 20-65. The 

workers in Taiwan have almost the same mortality, not like the workers in US 

from different States might have different mortality. There are  ¡§healthy 

worker effects¡¨ and ¡§good medical care¡¨ factors also in Taiwan, but could 

the factors result 50% cancer reduction? The residents in the Co-60 

contaminated buildings had no ¡§healthy workers effects¡¨, but their cancer 

mortality reduced to only about 3% of the general population. The residents 

had ¡§ good medical care¡¨ from the three contracted follow-up hospitals, 

but the sharp reduction of cancers was possible attributed to only¡§ good 

medical care¡¨? If it is so, all wealthier people must have smaller cancer 

mortality. .

3.	Dr. Calabrese found chronic toxins are beneficial to human health. There 

were no dramatic evidences as the chronic radiation could strongly reduce 

the cancer deaths and observed right after the radiation received, but it 

could not be deemed as chronic toxins have no similar beneficial effects as 

the radiation. It is well known that there are carcinogenic elements in 

vitamins and in many Chinese medicines, the elements must have certain 

beneficial effects and must be beneficial to humans. And there are still 

Chinese doctors to give description of medicine containing arsenic, mercury 

etc to patients in Peijing, China; though the biological effects are not 

exactly proved. There are no doctors nowadays intent to use the beneficial 

effects of the chronic toxins for sickness treatments, even the chronic 

radiation 50 mSv/y could be effective in immune of cancers have been tested 

by 10,000 people, still no doctors intend to try, though it is popularly 

known 50 mSv dose has no any harm to people. Applying higher dose of chronic 

radiation and toxins to animals and plants seems to be the only way to 

understand   their hormetic effects. Dr. Calabrese ever applied quite dose 

of toxic chemical to certain plant, and the plant grew faster and bigger, is 

a good example to reveal the beneficial effects of the chronic toxins. Dr. 

E. Calabrese tried to recommend EPA to save the tax of US public and to 

benefit their health is a highly valuable and respectable conscientious 

deed.      .



Best regards

Y.C. Luan   Senior Scientist of the NuSTA and Consultant to the NBC Society.





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

>From: "Jim Muckerheide" <jmuckerheide@cnts.wpi.edu>

>To: <rad-sci-l@WPI.EDU>

>Subject: Tiny doses of some toxins may make body stronger, theory says

>Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 02:14:48 -0500

>

>Friends,

>

>The following article reports on the further development of the hormesis

>story and the continuing work by Ed Calabrese to get the data considered in

>the regulatory environment.

>

>Please forward this link to those who should be aware of the data and the

>effort that is being applied to bring hormesis out of the darkness.

>

>Thannk you.

>Regards, Jim Muckerheide

>========================

>

>Posted on Thu, Feb. 26, 2004

>

>Tiny doses of some toxins may make body stronger, theory says

>

>By Seth Borenstein

>Knight Ridder Newspapers

>

>WASHINGTON - Tiny doses of toxins and radiation in the environment, once

>seen as insignificant, affect people's health in good and bad ways,

>scientists are finding.

>

>In some cases - such as most types of radiation and cancer-causing dioxin -

>tiny exposures may benefit people, according to a scientific theory that's

>becoming more widely accepted.

>

>In other cases - such as lead and tiny particles of soot - new research

>indicates that doses once considered insignificant sometimes make people

>sick.

>

>If these findings seem to be confusing, that's because toxicologists are

>still trying to understand them. Whether small doses of toxins are

>beneficial or harmful seems to depend on what the substances are, how small

>the doses are, what diseases are being studied and who's exposed to them.

>

>http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/8049365.htm

>

>

>

>



_________________________________________________________________

The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  

http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail