[ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation deficiency remediation

[John Jacobus]

I am not sure what your mean by "you apparently lack
much . . ."  You really need to learn to write
complete sentences.

Yes, I read the article when it was first mentioned.
As Dr. Luan has noted, the study lacks a rigorous
analysis.  I guess you need to read some of the old
e-mails.  The reported effects apparently appeared in
the local media, and is not based on any
epidemiological studies.  Since you studied to be an
epidemiologist, I assume that you understand the
significants of having appropriate controls.  Of
course, I could be wrong in assuming you understand
the issues

Have you read the McGregor and Land 1977 article I
sent?  Can I expect an answer?

--- howard long <hflong at pacbell.net> wrote:

> John,
> You apparently lack much if the data available from
> the JAm Phys & Surg @ www.AAPSonline.org V9:1 pp6-11
> Is Chronic Radiation an Effective Prophylaxis
> Against Cancer" Chen, Luan et al.
>  
> I hope you will study it more before commenting
> further on it.
>  
> Howard Long
> 
> John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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 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 
> 
> 
> >To: yuan-chi luan ,
> 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 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.
> 
=== message truncated ===


+++++++++++++++++++
"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


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail