[ RadSafe ] Re: Hormetic X-Ray Exposure ?

Tue Apr 19 06:16:29 CEST 2005

Dr. Luan¹s case about reduction of lung cancer vs. LDR is also indicated in
a review of all studies of lung cancer vs. external x-ray doses (24 refs) by
the eminent researcher Harald Rossi:

Rossi, H.H.; Zaider, M.  (1997).  "Radiogenic lung cancer: the effects of
low doses of low linear energy transfer (LET) radiation."  Radiat Environ
Biophys  36(2):85-8.

See:
http://cnts.wpi.edu/rsh/dd3/1.3Rossi97.html

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
=========================

on 4/18/05 11:24 PM, yuan-chi luan at nbcsoc at hotmail.com wrote:

> Two website information rendered  by Dr. John Jacobus.
> 
> The FDA gives the common cause of Lung concers in the website , 90% of men
> and 70 % women lung caners are associated wth smokg. 90% women in Taiwan are
> not smokers, but their lung cancer mortality is the first space of all cancer
> deahts, and the cause of women lung lung discussed in the papers in Pubmed  by
> the scientists from two Taiwan medical univerdities were quite unque: exposure
> to fumes of cooking oil.
> 
> The RERF website indicated most cancer deaths of atomic survivors are
> spontaneous or natural cancers deaths. If the LNT of RERF is right, the
> average cancer mortality of the survivors in 40 years to be about 234
> persons/100,000 person-year, the excess cqncer mortality induced by radiation
> is only 17/100,000. The average natural cancer morbality of population in
> Taiwan in 21 years(1982-2003) was 116 persons /100,000 person-year, but the
> irradiated residents at same time did have any excess cancer deaths, on the
> contrary, their cancer motality reduced to only 2.8 %of natural cancers. The
> experience observed in the incident surely should  be reistamted by the
> authorized communities and used for benefitting the humanity.
> 
> Y.C. Luan  Senoir Scientists of NuSTA and Consultant of NBC Society
> =================================================
>> >From: John Jacobus <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
>> >To: Patricia Lewis <lewis at radonmine.com>, QuitMed <info at quitmed.org>,
>> rad-sci-l at WPI.EDU, yuan-chi luan <nbcsoc at hotmail.com>,  "Dr. Howard Long"
>> <hflong at pacbell.net>,  Ted Rockwell <tedrock at starpower.net>,  Jim Muckerheide
>> <jmuckerheide at cnts.wpi.edu>,  Jerry Cuttler <jerrycuttler at rogers.com>,  "Dr.
>> T. D. Luckey" <tdl108 at sunflower.com>, RadSafe List <radsafe at radlab.nl>
>> >Subject: Re: Hormetic X-Ray Exposure ?
>> >Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 07:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
>> > 
>> >Obviously, I touched a raw nerve.  I cited the example
>> >of lung cancer as an example of cancer rates rising
>> >and falling.  The relation between smoking and
>> >incidence rate is fairly intuitive.  One of the big
>> >inequities of our health care system is the inability
>> >to regulate cigarettes.  My father's heart attack and
>> >death were probably due to the two packs a day he
>> >smoked.  At the bottom of this link there is a good
>> >comparison between the big three cancers
>> >http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/1999/399_lung.html
>> > 
>> >I am not sure what question you answered, since I did
>> >not pose a question to you.  However, I am interested
>> >in what the radon and ambient radiation exposure rates
>> >are at your facility?  How long do your customers
>> >stay?  Have you or anyone else determined what their
>> >doses are? 
>> > 
>> >I would not worry about getting cancer.  Even with the
>> >atomic bomb survivors, the incidence was not high for
>> >many of the doses, and protracted exposures probably
>> >reduces the risks by a factor of 2 or 3.  But I suer
>> >you are aware of that.
>> >http://www.rerf.or.jp/eigo/radefx/late/cancrisk.htm
>> > 
>> >Of course, it would be interesting to know what your
>> >dose has been.  Without a measured number, your
>> >ancedotal comments are only that, which is why I asked
>> >the questions about doses above.  By the way, my
>> >grandmothers lived into their late eighty's and had
>> >never been to a radon mine.  Is that surprising?
>> > 
>> >--- Patricia Lewis <lewis at radonmine.com> wrote:
>>> > > Answer: With interest and only if the cancer is Lung
>>> > > Cancer.....
>>> > >     Just kidding - You think you can stump me, eh??
>>> > > Cancer is a mighty big
>>> > > word.  2 of 3 men will get "cancer"; 1 of every 3
>>> > > women will get "cancer".
>>> > > If ANYONE is to get cancer it will be me.  I put my
>>> > > money where my mouth is.
>>> > > See, I understand the exposures and we've done the
>>> > > math.  2 + 3 does not
>>> > > equal 3,658 - no matter WHO is paying for the
>>> > > answer.  I get 25x's the
>>> > > exposure as my guests on an annual basis - 12 years
>>> > > of it so far .... I
>>> > > should probably be getting "cancer" any minute now.
>>> > >  If I do, I promise to
>>> > > share that information with all of you.  A guest
>>> > > checked in yesterday - his
>>> > > last visit here was 30 years ago.   Many employees
>>> > > who worked in the office
>>> > > decades ago live to their late 80's and 90's -
>>> > > except the smokers.
>>> > >     I've toyed with a "money back guarantee" or
>>> > > something like Bernie's
>>> > > "prove me wrong" reward - prove no improvement (via
>>> > > a specific lab test
>>> > > etc.,) and if no positive effects = money back.
>>> > > Kills two birds - I get the
>>> > > blood work documented, and our guests get back their
>>> > > health (in most cases).
>>> > >     Thanks for letting me answer that question.
>>> > > Best,  pat 
>>> > > 
>>> > > 
>>> > > 
>>> > > 
>>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > > From: "John Jacobus" <crispy_bird at yahoo.com>
>>> > > To: "Patricia Lewis" <lewis at radonmine.com>;
>>> > > "QuitMed" <info at quitmed.org>;
>>> > > <rad-sci-l at WPI.EDU>; <radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl>;
>>> > > "yuan-chi luan"
>>> > > <nbcsoc at hotmail.com>; "Dr. Howard Long"
>>> > > <hflong at pacbell.net>; "Ted Rockwell"
>>> > > <tedrock at starpower.net>; "Jim Muckerheide"
>>> > > <jmuckerheide at cnts.wpi.edu>;
>>> > > "Jerry Cuttler" <jerrycuttler at rogers.com>; "Dr. T.
>>> > > D. Luckey" 
>>> > > <tdl108 at sunflower.com>; "RadSafe List"
>>> > > <radsafe at radlab.nl>
>>> > > Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 2:47 PM
>>> > > Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: First Ever Intentional
>>> > > Hormetic X-Ray Exposure
>>> > > ? 
>>> > > 
>>> > > 
>>> > > | If you develop cancer in 10 years, do you get your
>>> > > | money back?
>>> > > | 
>>> > > 
>>> > > 
>> > 
>> >+++++++++++++++++++
>> >"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!? 
>> >Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>> >http://mail.yahoo.com
> 