In this article, Cecil says:
I’m afraid I must contest this. It was not until 1958 that low amounts of ionizing radiation were considered dangerous. 1958 was the year that the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) decreed, quite without any scientific evidence, that radiation creates adverse effects in humans according to a Linear, No Threshold (LNT) model.
The LNT model states:
- The effects of low doses of ionizing radiation can be estimated by linear extrapolation from effects observed by linear extrapolation from effects observed by high doses.
- There is not any safe dose because even very low doses of ionizing radiation produce some biological effect.
In 1959 the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) adopted the LNT theory.
Prior to this UN action, and indeed for the last 60 years before it, people had been voluntarily exposing themselves to low levels of ionizing radiation, because studies have always shown there to be healthful effects in doing so. Even today, anyone who cares to find the studies will see that the LNT model is bogus.
One such study was done by D. Bhattarcharjee, and this was done in the same year as Cecil’s response, so I fail to see how he missed it.
Bhattarcharjee found that when he preirradiated Swiss mice for 5 days with gamma-rays at the rate of 1 cGy/day, thymic lymphoma was induced in 16% (8/50) of the animals. A high 2-Gy dose induced lymphomas in 46% (23/50) of the mice, whereas if the animals were preirradiated before exposure to the 2-Gy dose, only 16% of them developed the cancers; i.e., the preirradiation seemed to cancel the induction of thymic lymphoma by the high dose.
But I concede the possibility that Cecil didn’t notice this study. After all, it was in India, which we don’t really pay much attention to, being American chauvinists, right? Okay. But how did Cecil miss the UNSCEAR study entitled “Adaptive Responses to Radiation in Cells and Organisms” released in 1994, two full years before this article? It would be relevant, since it pretty much paraphrases to mean “Sorry, folks. Turns out we were COMPLETELY WRONG about that whole LNT model thing. Heh. Oh well. Win some, lose some, eh?”
There are nearly 100 years of studies (Actually, i can only find 95 years worth. Sorry.) that bear out that exposure to the amount of ionizing radiation that would have been present in these false teeth would decrease one’s risk of cancer and cause one to live slightly longer than a control specimen not exposed to such radiation. I’ll give you plenty of citations to look up at the end of this post.
But first, let me paste one of the more impressive passages of this 1999 Paduchah Sun article, to add emphasis:
In conclusion, I paste the second quote in Cecil’s article that I have issue with, and then I’ll cite a whole bunch of studies so the reader can see for themselves.
Cecil said:
WRONG! :wally
References:
Bhattarcharjee D., Role of Radio-Adaptation on Radiation-Induced Thymic Lymphoma in Mice. Mutation Research 358:231-235 (1996)
Yonezawa M., Misonoh J., Hosokawa Y., Two Types of X-Ray Induced Radioresistance in Mice, Presence of 4 Dose Ranges With Distinct Biological Effects, Mutation Research, 358:237-243 (1996)
Howe G.R., McLaughlin J., Breast Cancer Mortality Between 1950 and 1987 After Exposure to Fractionated Moderate-Dose-Rate Ionizing Radiation in the Canadian Fluoroscopy Cohort Study and a Comparison With Breast Cancer Mortality in the Atomic Bomb Survivors Study, Radiation Research 149:694-707 (1996)
Jawarowski Z., Beneficial Radiation, Nukleonika 40:3-12 (1995)
Cohen B. L., Test of the Linear No-Threshold Theory of Radiation Carcinogenesis in the Low Dose, Low Dose Rate Region, Health Physics 68:157-174 (1995)
Cardis E., et. al., Effects of Low Doses and Low Dose Rates of External Ionizing Radiation: Cancer Mortality Among Nuclear Industry Workers in Three Countries, Radiation Research 142:117-132 (1995)
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation; Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes, Annex B: Adaptive Responses to Radiation in Cells and Organisms, 185-272, New York, NY (1994)
Mifune M., Sobue T., Arimoto H., Komoto Y., Kondo S., Tanooka H., Cancer Mortality Survey in a Spa Area With a High Radon Background, Japanese Journal of Cancer Research, Vol. 83, No. 1 (1992)
Matanoski G. M., Health Effects of Low-Level Radiation in Shipyard Workers, Final Report. Report No. DOE DE-AC02-79 EV10095. Washington: US Department of Energy (1991)
Mine M., Okumura Y., Ichimaru M., Nakamura T., Kondo S., Apparently Beneficial Effect of Low to Intermediate Doses of A-bomb Radiation on Human Lifespan, International Journal of Radiation Biology 58:1035-1043 (1990)
Miller A. B., Howe G. R., Sherman G. J., Lindsay J. P., Yaffe M. J., Dinner P. J., Risch H. A., Preston D. L., Mortality from Breast Cancer After Irradiation During Fluoroscopic Examination in Patients Being Treated for Tuberculosis, New England Journal of Medicine 321:1285 (1989)
Nambi K. S. V., Soman S. D., Environmental Radiation and Cancer in India, Health Physics 52:653-657 (1987)
Abbat J. D., Hamilton T. R., Weeks J. L., Epidemiological Studies in Three Corporations Covering the Canadian Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Biological Effects of Low-Level Radiation, IAEA, Vienna, 351 (1983)
Luckey T. D., Physiological Benefits from Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, Health Physics 43:771-789 (1982)
Kumatori T., Ishihara T., Hirshima K., Sugiyama H., Ishii S., Miyoshi K., Follow-up Studies Over a 25 Year Period on the Japanese Fishermen Exposed to Radioactive Fallout in 1954, pp. 35-54, in Hubner K. F., and Fry, A. A., eds., The Medical Basis for Radiation Preparedness, Elsevier, New York (1980)
Frigerio N. A., Stowe R. S., Carcinogenic and Genetic Hazard From Background Radiation, Biological and Environmental Effects of Low-Level Radiation, IAEA, Vienna, Vol. II, pp. 385-393 (1976)
Muller H. J., Artificial Transmutations of the Gene, Science 66:84-87 (1928)
Russ V. K., Consensus of the Effect of X-Rays on Bacteria, Hygie 56:341-344 (1909)
PS - The phenomenon is known as hormesis.