Re: Less lung ca @ 4.0 pCi/L home radon than @ 1.0 pCi/L

[Harry Hinks <Miller@nukeworker.com>]

Dr. Long,



If one weighs the opinion of "notoriously critical scientist" representing the DPP verses the scientific opinions of Drs. Van Pelt, Lubin, Puskin, Field, Darby, Doll, Goldsmith, Archer, Smith, the NCRP and many others concerning the validity of Dr. Cohen's radon findings - I believe I will go with the latter.  The thought of giving people extra radiation for hormetic reasons based on Dr. Cohen's studies is professionally irresponsible as a physician.    



I hope the people who monitor this list understand that your views do not represent the views of a lot of radiation safety professionals who depend on this list for information that helps improve our ability to reduce needless radiation exposure.  









--- "Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net> wrote:

Correction - 4.0, not 0.4, pCi/L, below. Thanks, Harry.



Pollycove and B Cohen submitted axiom-changing data to evaluation by

notoriously critical scientists at DDP meetings. It is available through

www.oism/DDP.  The mechanism seems to be stimulation of biologic defenses,

for which extensive data is presented.



Pollycove and B Cohen should see this post, and I hope will reference papers

with data that should change what you believe is the opinion of."most

mainstream scientists".



I am convinced, as FDA should be, that administration of home radon to

2.0-4.0 pCi/L

and gamma of 0.5- 5 rem (cSV/yr) would benefit longevity and cancer

resistance of most Americans.



Fast dose rate LDR may be also desireable for prevention, if fewer cancers

occur, as suggested by the original post on this thread.  Cuttler promotes

fast dose rate LDR for treatment (gangrene, bursitis, etc.) It may be that

slow dose rate is better for some situations, with 1/20 the cancer and 1/10

fetal abnormalities expected from Taiwan apartment CO60 steel, av 40 rem,

cSv, over about10 years (Chen,Luan,  Is Chronic Radiation an Effective

Prophylaxis Against Cancer, JAPS V1 #1 2004, e ref elsewhere on Radsafe

list). Also a gamma source under mattress, >0.5 rem over 5 years may be

convenient (Cameron).



Many HPs may wish to specialize in administration of  LDR, because it is

safer and more effective than most medicines we physicians now prescribe.

ALARA background seems learn benefit while avoiding harm.



Howard Long



----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Harry Hinks" <Miller@nukeworker.com>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Cc: <rad-sci-1@ans.ep.wisc.edu>

Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 9:58 AM

Subject: Re: Low-level Rn exposure and lung cancer





> Dr. Long,

>

> I don't understand your post.  What are you talking about?  Is this some

type of medical short hand?  Do you mean 4 pCi/L rather than what you wrote?

What is this bizzare reference to Pollycove.

>

> I thought Dr. Cohen's suggestions that radon is good for you has been

widely criticized by epidemiologist,the NCRP, and most mainstream scientist.

>From people I talk to in the field, most can not understand how alpha

exposure to the lung would be protective of cancer in other areas of the

body.  Please explain the mechanism.  Obviously, it is well documented that

radon casues lung cancer. Wes Van Pelt showed just recently in the HPJ that

half of the inverse association could be explained by altitude.  Others have

said it is due to poor smoking information.

>

> I think you are doing more harm than good by telling people they should

increase their radon exposure. Does anyone know the dose to the bronchial

epithelial cells from an average exposure of 4 pCi/L and what effective dose

that translates to?

>

> --------------------------------------

>

> Dr Long" <hflong@pacbell.net> wrote:

> Is dose rate range for administration of LDR partly defined by this?

> I hope HPs with added certification will soon be administering it.

>

> Could the more easily given (in medical office), quicker LDR actually be

> better with radon than longer exposure, as for gamma, favored by Luan from

> Taipei experience?

>

> The U or J shaped curve in B Cohen's lung cancer mortality in counties vs

> their average home radon levels, explains why in Iowa (highest radon, !%

> outlier), cases of lung cancer have higher home radon  than controls (at

> >0.4 piCi/l), while on the other, left, side of the U, less than USA av of

> c 1.3,  the lung cancer mortality is higher in counties with less radon.

>

> Are biologic defenses stimulated best by a medium dose rate, as well as a

> medium total dose (from 1.0 to 4.0 pCi/l) ? See Pollycove's presntations.

>

> Howard Long

>

>

> _____________________________________________________________

> NukeWorker.com is the only internet portal for Nuclear Workers, it offers

FREE Email service, message boards, chat rooms, outage schedules, and job

hunting services.

> ************************************************************************

> 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/

>









_____________________________________________________________

NukeWorker.com is the only internet portal for Nuclear Workers, it offers FREE Email service, message boards, chat rooms, outage schedules, and job hunting services.

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

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/