Forbidden Science: Low Level Radiation and Cancer

American Thinker ^ | July 6, 2012 | Norman Rogers

[neverdem]

Some things are hard to believe. What you've been told about low-level radiation by the people who are supposed to be responsible authorities is very wrong. The evidence that the official story is wrong is overwhelming. They know about the evidence. Yet because they have a vested interest in being wrong, they willfully keep being wrong. There is massive evidence that low levels of radiation rather than causing cancer, actually suppress cancer. The reason is, probably, that radiation in small or moderate quantities stimulates cellular repair mechanisms. This is not to negate the fact that large amounts of radiation can kill you or make you sick. This protective effect of low levels of radiation is called radiation hormesis.

The case of radiation hormesis provides yet more evidence that the scientific establishment and the EPA are lacking in objectivity when their interests are at stake. They cling to scare stories like leeches. Be it ionizing radiation or global warming they will not admit that they were wrong, at least if they can avoid it.

Our bodies are bombarded with ionizing radiation because it is everywhere. Radiation is ionizing if the rays or particles have sufficient energy to rip electrons from atoms, a feat that can disrupt biochemical systems. Ionizing radiation comes in the form of cosmic rays, radioactive minerals and even potassium 40, the radioactive isotope of potassium that is always in our bodies and lurking everyplace where potassium is found. The particles and rays from radioactive decay rip through our cells leaving a trail of destruction in their wake. Our bodies have powerful mechanisms evolved over millions of years to deal with the destruction caused...

[redgolum]

Now that is interesting. See, when I took a few nuke Engineering classes at Iowa state (right before they shut the program down), they said less than a milligram of Plutonium would kill you. Not from the radiation, but from the toxicity of the metal itself.

Not saying you're wrong, or even that my memory is right, but the Prof. said he lost friends during the Manhattan project to Plutonium, and not because of the radiation.

[1010RD]

Good. I’ve been spreading the word on this since I first encountered it about 25 years ago. That’s how ingrained the liberal 5th column is and how important the Internet is.

This should give conservatives some perspective as to how long it will take to right the ship and return to the Constitution. We’ll need to win for over a generation, plus break the government school monopoly.

[1010RD]

The goal of environmentalists is less human life. So lying about beneficial results is consistent. They hate human beings.

[meyer]

They hate human beings.

Apparently, they only hate other human beings, since they don't seem to want to take the logical next step and remove themselves from the planet to save it.

[1010RD]

the logical next step

They're absent logic. Hence the whole source of the problem. Mental illness posing as a philosophy/religion.

[donmeaker]

I don’t doubt that the lesson (to machine Plutonium only while water was flowing over it) was learned at the price of many lives.

Dust, if breathed in, is very toxic. A team was operating an atomic pile, when it got away from them. After they got it shut down, the chief ordered everyone to stay at their work station. He drew a circle around his feet, and signed it with a piece of chalk in his lab coat. He walked over to each physicist, and had them do the same. All of them died of radiation (IIRC) and from their distance from the pile, they their doses were calculated, and correlate with how long it took them to die.

One early reactor got away, and the rescue crew found all the bodies but one. Eventually they found the last one. One worker had removed a control rod too far, the reactor moderator boiled, and the last man was found pinned by the control rod to the ceiling, pinned through his chest by the control rod he was adjusting. After that control rods were controlled by a worm gear for positive control over the position.

[donmeaker]

Below please find a link to the material data safety sheet for plutonium. Note the difference between ingestion and inhalation hazards.

http://www.chemexper.net/specification_d/chemicals/supplier/cas/Plutonium.asp

[aruanan]

One early reactor got away, and the rescue crew found all the bodies but one. Eventually they found the last one.

The first fatal nuclear accident in the United States. Still, though, one of the safest methods of generating electricity and far, FAR safer than coal.

[redgolum]

The last was the Idaho Falls accident. I remember that one from a class I took. The first was a famous accident (or rather infamous) during the Manhattan project.

[donmeaker]

Safer than oil, natural gas, wind generation or even solar.

[donmeaker]

I worked, briefly, inside a reactor at Idaho Falls at the National Engineering Laboratory. We were looking at an artificial intelligence diagnostic system.

Happy times!