[ RadSafe ] Re: First Ever Intentional Hormetic X-Ray

[Maury Siskel]

Dear Floyd,
I am overcome by the sagacity and clarity of your final disposition of 
the nuclear LNTcontroversy. To withdraw even more fuel rods, as it were, 
from the reactor, the LNT meltdown may depend on one more factor. You 
may have overlooked the crux of, or at least another crucial variable in 
the entire issue. It IS the fencesitters that we must be concerned 
about. Have you considered the terrible damage that can be wrought upon 
a chronic fencesitter? It can do terrible long-lasting, genetic, 
debilitating damage to not only the cellular structure, but to the whole 
organism. Some fences are more damaging than others; e.g., it certainly 
is inadvisable to resort to kilts or tunics if you should select a 
barbed wire fence. The linear no-threshold hypothsis (as well as the 
curvilinear one) will be to no avail -- here, there probably is no 
threshold at all -- the fencesitter is in excruciating pain from the get 
go. He will gladly forego his fencesitting for the highway or for 
shark-infested waters with alacrity.

qed: there can be no such construct or operational variable as an LNT. 
Therefore, once and for all we can dispense with the LNT's of the world. 

And when you find those nine rental S's, I'd very much like to meet one 
-- those poor fellows will live longer than Lazarus Long and return to 
arguing over whether we have enough bows and arrows in the cave 
storeroom. And one final point if you have any influence over these 
developments: please don't do away with all the trees, Dog is quite 
sqeemish about those sound-activated bark collars. LNT is dead! Long 
live LNT -- we shall be waiting to be done in -- or out, either way is fine.
Cheers,
Maury&Dog   (Maury Siskel   maurysis at ev1.net)

Flanigan, Floyd wrote:

>Threshold, threshold, threshold, threshold, THRESHOLD ..... there! I got it out of my system. There is no hard evidence that low level chronic exposures cause ANY ill effect ... BECAUSE ... every MINUTE a human being continues to live, the chance increases that that human being will contract some illness/disease/ailment/malady ... it's a statistical FACT that the longer you exist, the greater the chances are that something bad will happen to you. We've been through this all before ... the longer you stand in the middle of the highway, the greater the chances of being hit by a car ... The longer you stand in piranha infested waters, the greater your chances of being bitten ... nudity increases these chances considerably. The longer you LIVE ... the greater the chances you will stop doing so. It's a crap-shoot. Every day you wake up and you throw your hat back into the proverbial ring of death. You put on your pants (unless you are protesting pants ... in that case ... put on your kilt/tunic etc. ...Just please ... if you are a guy ... no culottes)... you go out into the big bad world and you take your chances. You could get hit by a bus or contract cancer. So ... being exposed ... outside a sterile, clinical environment with birth to death controls and selected population isolation ... to low level radiation, over a long period of time ... CANNOT BE PROVEN TO HAVE ANY ILL EFFECT!!!!!! The parameters within which such a study would have to be conducted cannot be held to, due to the whole 'humans aren't lab animals' problem. When they change the laws so that we can rent twelve humans from birth to age thirty-five ... keeping 3 as a control group and raising the other nine in a completely sterile environment with an above average background dose rate constant of about 5mr/hr ... then we might get some meaningful data. Until then ... it's all empirical fluff. Now ... I know some humans who are on the fence as far as qualifying for non-lab-animal status ... but that is another issue. There are too many environmental variables standing in line waiting for their chance to do you in, for us to try to pin ANYTHING on low level radiation exposure. Please find another tree to bark up. This one is a 'no barking zone'. Persistent barkers will be fitted with sound activated shock collars in an effort to save having to go through this again.
>
>Floyd W.Flanigan B.S.Nuc.H.P.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
>Behalf Of Karl Ellison
>Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 7:58 AM
>To: radsafe at radlab.nl
>Subject: [ RadSafe ] Re: First Ever Intentional Hormetic X-Ray
>
>
>In most people's LNT eye, what Jay Caplan is doing takes some courage. I'm
>disappointed by the posts towards him that amount to public jeering.
>
>Radiation hormesis has been shown to hold in animal experiments many times,
>and seems to follow true in humans (one of *many* examples on the 'net:
>http://www.jpands.org/vol9no1/chen.pdf).
>
>I wish someone would point us all to an article that provides some evidence
>of LNT's truth with regards to chronic low-dose radiation health jeopardies.
>
>- Karl Ellison
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
>_______________________________________________
>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
>
>.
>
>  
>