Re: Article: Lung cancer screening raises OR LOWERS lung cancerrisk

["Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net>]

"Political agenda" or scientific correction, John?



Yes, I would want hormesis, hopefully with less cost but dose equal to or

greater than CT.



And it's not just me.

At the DDP meeting 2 days ago, a health physicist sought from me and a

radiation oncologist how to get LDR (for increasing PSA, after prostate

removal years ago for cancer). That radiationo oncologist had felt

restricted 5 years ago (from treating another health physicist I referred to

him with prostate cancer), with sensitizing LDR 2 weeks before high dose

radiotherapy for the cancer.



Apparently, standard therapy (dictated by lawsuits) is becoming more

scientific.



Howard Long



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

From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM>

To: "Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net>; <TConley@kdhe.state.ks.us>;

<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 9:31 AM

Subject: Re: Article: Lung cancer screening raises OR LOWERS lung cancer

risk





> Howard,

> Animal studies are useful, but may not reflect the

> actual effects on humans.  As a physician, I assume

> you understand the issues with animal vs. human

> studies. As for the epidemiological, most conclude

> that there is no adverse effect to the radiation

> received.  It is only those who have a political

> agenda that draw conclusions that the study authors do

> not find.

>

> By the way, would you prescribe a CT scan to one of

> your patients just so they get a dose of radiation?

> Would you precribe one for yourself?

>

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

> > Wrong, John,

> > At 100 mSv (approx10 Rad) effects have been shown in

> > numerous animal and epidemiologic studies (below).

If you insist on $800M studies to prove efficacy, like FDA requires,

you support the Empire while depriving citizens.

> >

> > Howard Long

> >

> > ----- Original Message ----- 

> > From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird@yahoo.com>

> > To: "Howard Long" <hflong@pacbell.net>;

> > <TConley@kdhe.state.ks.us>;

> > <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

> > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 2:59 PM

> > Subject: Re: Article: Lung cancer screening raises OR LOWERS lung cancer

> > risk

> >

> > > Considering the levels of uncertainty of the

> > > statistical risk, I doubt that it cannot be proven

> > > that 1 rad will INCREASE or DECREASE the risk.  At

> > > levels below 100 mSv no demonstrated effects,

> > positive or negative, have been seen.[proven in clinical studies]

> > >

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

> > > > One rad acute (av CT dose) would more likely

> > LOWER risks of cancers,

> > > > according to numerous references at

> > > > jmuckerheide@cnts.wpi.edu or

> > > > muckerheide@comcast.net .

> > > > Howard Long



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

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/