The linear no threshold scare continues–Nature announces a landmark study.

Nature declares a landmark study results confirm low dose radiation causes leukemia–or does it?

Of course Nature is in the camp of the linear no threshold (LNT) scaremonger toxicolgists.

In this case they showed what appears to be a high relative risk for leukemia in the exposed population.

Observational studies with robust results are hypothesis generating.

Trouble is linear no threshold radiation biology was adopted by toxicology generally, ignoring thresholds and dose makes the poison. In fact in most pharmacology dose is critical to effect, whether beneficial or detrimental effects are being studied.

I hope that Ed Calabrese will provide a commentary on this study for our benefit. One thing for sure, multiple inquiry is a factor–the researchers looked for any cancers in these workers.

One must also recognize that low dose radiation is present for everyone around the world from environmental ionizing radiation.

JS archive on Ed Calabrese’s expose of cheating on low dose radiation claims by Muller, among other things on his efforts to maintain the toxicological foundations of threshold–the dose makes the poison, and Ed’s particular intrerest in hormesis–low dose benefits from what might be toxic at high dose.


5 responses to “The linear no threshold scare continues–Nature announces a landmark study.

  1. For years, Nature has primarily been a source for junkscience and not a credible journal.

  2. Thank you for this information. If humanity is to survive 500 years of deception about the FOUNTAIN OF ENERGY Copernicus reported at the gravitational center of the solar system in 1543, we must have reliable information on the real dangers of nuclear radiation.

    Purposeful deception about nuclear and solar physics after 1945 [1], show the need for a reliable quantitative review of the nuclear radiation scare described by Galen Winsor after WWII.

    I will post a link to the video made by radiation safety officer Gslen Winsor.

    1. Oliver K. Manuel, “Solar energy,” Advances in Astronomy, submitted 1 Sept 2014, privately published 17 Mar 2015):

  3. One day, the earth was shown to be round.
    Incredible yeah?

    Yes, low radiation generates a risk, that is a fact.

    If you want to test hormesis on yourself, I suggest that you should
    perform a CT scan everyday and test whether it would generate so much benefit on your health

    • DMY

      CT scan everyday is not a hormetic level of exposure to radiation.

      You should study toxicology and pharmacology a little more before making flat earth accusations, an overused lefty barb.

      Simple example, therapeutic doses of pharmaceuticals are at one level, toxic at a higher level–it’s all about the rule on poisons–dose makes the poison (coined by Paracelsus a long time ago).

      In the case of radiation, ambient levels and exposures above ambient levels of ionizing radiation are not toxic or carcinogenic and reduce cancer rates for people who live in places with higher background levels of ionizing radiation or work in professions where they have higher ambient exposures, like pilots exposed to cosmic ionizing radiation or radiology techs. But you may not know that.

      Hermann Muller lied about low dose radiation because he wanted to prevent atomic testing. He got a Nobel prize for his lies. Ed Calabrese exposed him.

      Read a little, try not to sneer so much. Here is an archive on hormesis and why linear no threshold toxicology is junk science. The story on Muller and Ed Calabrese’s investigation is the 7th item on this archive:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s