[ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation deficiency remediation

Tue Apr 12 21:17:18 CEST 2005

Dr. Luan,
Thank you for your reply.  Like you, I was surprised
of the reports of no cancers among the apartment
residents to be incredible.  Unfortunately, I still
find the reports to be incredible.  

My belief is that without a proper study of the
exposure and health effects of the residence, this
event will not carry much weight in the scientific
community.  I am glad that you agree with me.  I
believe that the media news.  Scientists should do
science and report it to the media.  And while animal
studies form the basis of testing the effectiveness of
many medicines, only clinical trials in humans provide
the proof.  I have believed that good epidemiological
studies of human populations who have lived under
high, continual background exposure levels for many
years provide the best source to study the effects of
radiation on overall human health.  In your Taiwan
situation, the activity has been decreasing over time.
 What if the exposure had remained constant for 10 or
20 years?

As for Dr. Luckey's claim that cancer is increasing in
the U.S., is in error with the data.  I was at a
presentation he gave a number of years ago.  Some of
the problems involved looking at the absolute number
of cancers without taking into account the aging of
the population.  Older populations have more cancers. 
In the U.S. the life expectancy was 45 years of age,
so few people lived long enough to get cancers. 
Currently our life expectance is about 75, and the
incidences of cancer increase after age 55 or so. 
Consider the age of the people you know who have
cancer.  When you were young, how many of your friends
had cancer?

I should make clear that I am not a doctor.  I would
not anyone to get the idea that I have certain
qualifications that I have not earned.

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

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

Dr John Jacobus:

I always encourage all scientists to create a vaccine
like polio, inflrenza and dipteria for cancers, and I
showed them the effect of chronic radiation could
prevent cancers, but I do not know what would be the
proper way to do  it. Since the Taiwan residents lived
continously in the Co-60 apartment, their cancers were
effectively prevented, how could we do that? could we
give a tiny piece of Co-60 for putting on the living
room ceilig? Dr. Sakai tested mice with low-dose-rate
are good for reducing tumor, diabetis and AIDS, I
encouraged him to inject certain long half-life
isotope to mice for obervation of the reduction
effects.

You said the Taiwan data without a vigorous review can
not be considered significant, that is right and that
is why I always try to have the interantional
communities to confirm it. I worked for atomic and
radiation protection for almost 50 years, I have to
have some claims about radiation effects induced to
the irradiated residents for 6 years and they had
continously received the radiation for 16 years. When
the first medical review (no official minute or
record,only media report) by about 1000 residesnts
(with >5 mSv/y) by many nuclear medical doctors from
the imortant hospitals in 1992, my first conclusion
was that no one cancer death was unbelivable, When the
residents grew to about 4000 (included residents with
dose> 1mSv/y) and still no cancer deaths in 1996, my
conclusion to it was almost impossible. I presnet a
public letter to the country to worry no more of Co-60
contamination,  I was invited by Dr Muckerheide to
present our paper" chronic radiation might be an
effective immunity of cancers"         

I do not care whether ICRP, IRPA etc consider the
chronic radation is always beneficial to people, If I
could convenice them, there will be possility for
radiation to be used as vaccine to reduce the misery
of cancers.Two of my closet colleages died in cancer
in two years and one is suffering an incidence, The
cancer mortality increased two times in 20 years in
Taiwan, and some thing the same in USA according Dr
Luckey. I hope there is vaccine for cancer and  which
will be really effective. I saw influenza had revers
effective to people when there was SARS in Taiwan.

Best regards

Y.C. Luan  Senor Scientist of NuSATA and Consultant of
NBC Society  

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

From: John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> 

>To: yuan-chi luan <nbcsoc at hotmail.com>,
blc+ at pitt.edu,  uniqueproducts at comcast.net
>CC: dckosloff at firstenergycorp.com,
hflong at pacbell.net, crispy_bird at yahoo.com, 
jjcohen at prodigy.net, radsafe at radlab.nl,
radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl,  shliu at iner.gov.tw
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation deficiency
remediation
>Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 08:59:11 -0700 (PDT)
>
>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/

+++++++++++++++++++
"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/