[ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation deficiency remediation

[John Jacobus]

Dr. Luan,
While this may seem like a noble endeavor, e.g.,
reducing the incidence of cancers, and obviously a
belief in the power of hormesis, even your comments do
not seem to support your efforts.  The purpose of most
immunity programs is to have the body's immune system
to certain biological agents.  This is the basis for
vaccine programs like polio, influenza, dipteria, etc.
 If you have to continually take an agent to boost the
immune system, no immune response is being created. 
Do you have any proof of long lasting effects that did
not involve continuous exposures?

Also, without a rigous review of the Taiwan data, I,
personnally, would not consider the result
significant.  As one who has worked in radiation
safety and science for over 29 years, I have learned
to be careful about claims of radiation effects and
measurements.

--- yuan-chi luan <nbcsoc at hotmail.com> wrote:

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

Dear friends:

Please keep in mind that our  disscussion is  trying
to develop a simple vaccine injection for immune of
the most miserable cancers. The idea originated from
the 26 Pu heavy contaminated 
atomic bomb workers and the 23 fallout heavy
contaminated Japanese fishermen, died in much lower
cancer mortailty than the normal population in the
world in  25%. Their number are smalll, but I believe
with high statistical significane. And the most
important idea comes from the 10,000 residents who
living in the Co-60 contaminated apartments. Using
Co-60 for immunie of cancers in external radiation
might be still a way. If the immunie of cancer turn to
be true, Please do not forget the Co-60 irradiated
residents in Taiwan.      

Y.C. Luan  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


>From: Bernard Cohen <blc+ at pitt.edu>
>To: Jay Caplan <uniqueproducts at comcast.net>
>CC: dckosloff at firstenergycorp.com, howard long
<hflong at pacbell.net>, John Jacobus
<crispy_bird at yahoo.com>, jjcohen
<jjcohen at prodigy.net>, radsafe <radsafe at radlab.nl>,
yuan-chi luan <nbcsoc at hotmail.com>,
radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl, shliu at iner.gov.tw
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation deficiency
remediation
>Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 10:25:58 -0400
>
>According to ICRP-30, the weighted committed dose
equivalent for
>tritiated water is 1.7^-11 Sv/Bq, or about 60 rem/Ci.
Thus to get 1
>rem you should ingest about 16 mCi of tritiated
water.
>
>Jay Caplan wrote:
>
>>Dr. Cohen,
>>With a 10 day biological half life, what amount
would deliver 1
>>rem? Is the
>>fact that tritium only emits a low voltage beta a
deficiency vis
>>anticipated
>>hormesis compared to x-ray or gamma?
>>Thanks
>>Jay Caplan
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "jjcohen"
<jjcohen at prodigy.net>
>>To: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>; "howard
long"
>><hflong at pacbell.net>;
<dckosloff at firstenergycorp.com>
>>Cc: "radsafe" <radsafe at radlab.nl>; "yuan-chi luan"
>><nbcsoc at hotmail.com>;
>><radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl>;
<uniqueproducts at comcast.net>;
>><shliu at iner.gov.tw>
>>Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 4:26 PM
>>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation deficiency
remediation
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Some answers to questions regarding RDS (Radiation
Deficiency
>>>Syndrome)
>>>
>>>Q: What is the optimal dose for humans?
>>>A: Optimal dose would be subject to individual
differences, but
>>>would
>>>
>>>
>>likely
>>
>>
>>>range somewhere between 1.0 and 10.0 rem/a
>>>     (0.01 and 0.1 Sv/a). If a single value is
desired, probably
>>>3.0 rem/a
>>>(0.03Sv/a) would suffice.
>>>
>>>Q: How to identify those with radiation deficiency?
>>>A: Just about everybody, except perhaps residents
of Ramsar or
>>>Kerala.
>>>
>>>
>>(see
>>
>>
>>>previous answer)
>>>
>>>Q: How about Potassium for supplementary radiation?
>>>A: No good! Specific activity level too low for
internal
>>>application
>>>
>>>
>>(would
>>
>>
>>>need too much)--- also could screw up electrolyte
>>>      balance. For external, also not good---see
discussion by
>>>Howard Long
>>>
>>>Q: Just move to Denver?
>>>A: Why bother. It would only get you a small
fraction of the way
>>>toward
>>>optimal dose level.
>>>
>>>Q: X-rays?
>>>A; Not uniform, inconvenient, and expensive
>>>
>>>Q: Why supplementary radiation via Tritium?
>>>A: It is cheap, abundant, can be easily distributed
as water, and
>>>is
>>>naturally occuring (for those who like "organic"
isotopes.)
>>>    --- if its natural, it must be good!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing
list
>>radsafe at radlab.nl
>>
>>For information on how to subscribe/unsubscribe and
other settings
>>visit:
http://radlab.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
>>
>>



+++++++++++++++++++
"Embarrassed, obscure and feeble sentences are generally, if not always, the result of embarrassed, obscure and feeble thought."
Hugh Blair, 1783

-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/