Here's the putz deceiver's Wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Joseph_Muller
Here's the putz deceiver's Wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Joseph_Muller
“Muller was born in New York City, the son of Frances (Lyons) and Hermann Joseph Muller, Sr., an artisan who worked with metals. He excelled in the public schools. His mother’s family was Jewish, and had come from Britain, while his father’s was Catholic and German.[4] As an adolescent, he attended a Unitarian church and considered himself a pantheist; in high school he became an atheist. At 16 he entered Columbia College. From his first semester he was interested in biology; he became an early convert of the Mendelian-chromosome theory of heredity — and the concept of genetic mutations and natural selection as the basis for evolution. He formed a Biology Club and also became a proponent of eugenics; the connections between biology and society would be his perennial concern. Muller earned a B.A. degree in 1910.[5]”
As predicted by Robert Heinlein...............
When “settled science” becomes unsettled.
Exposure to small amounts of radiation won’t hurt. The benefit is debatable.
What is not debatable is that at 3 Grey or so total body irradiation, you are going to die a slow drawn out death.
I’m an occasional radiation worker.
We are required to work in accordance with the no-threshold approach.
This results in higher electricity costs, with no benefit to safety.
One would think that the sciences could remain as the only Nobel Prizes not awarded by a committee of clowns.
However, progressives will constantly bombard the walls of intellect knowing that sooner or later their idiocy will leak and start the corruption.
Politics, being the father of corruption, obviously exists in all aspects of the Nobel process, but it’s still disheartening to see that Muller managed to suppress information.
Look for a future Nobel committee to present an award in “climate change” and think of Muller.
Why are you posting a three-year old article as new?
I don’t think that anyone considers the Nobel Ceremony to be a scientific assembly. The use of the linear-dose, no threshold hypothesis cannot be traced to the 1946 Nobel Prize.
I am guessing the small amount of radiation acts to kill of microbes kinda like a low level anti-biotic.
But that is just a guess.
This whole article is complete and total crap. There was no Nobel scam of 1946 and radiation hormesis is dangerous quackery.
I just hate to see anti-science articles like this on Freerepublic because it makes it seem like the “progressives” are right when they say Conservatives are anti-science. No, nothing about this OP article is correct.
There’s vast, grudging medical proof that small doses of radiation are harmful to health. That’s why you sign a medical release obsolving your dentist of liability and indicating you realize that small doses of radiation are harmful but thta you hope to gain more (dental health) than you lose (small amount of cancer risk increase). Actually the risk wasn’t so small for many years because x-rays of all kinds were so much higher in dose.
The BEIR reports (Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation) are massive large scale studies proving that even small amounts of radiation contribute to health risk/problems.
In particular, children and women become ill at higher rates compared with adult males. Women have twice the sensitivity level and sadly, children are more sensitive still.
Wherever scientific documents or institutions hold proof that radiation, even in small amounts, is harmful to health, federal funding is stripped and careers and programs are threatened. I’ve watched as scientific documents are “removed” or become “unavailable” as they are cited in debates like these. THe BEIR reports are state-of-the-art science and had been long term large scale studies.
On the last BEIR report, they had a page that read something like “Despite what nuclear industry experts would like to believe, small amounts of radiation are harmful to human health.” Within a year, and following intense debate wherein that page was cited, that page was no longer on the web. It’s creepy - medical proof that low level radiation is harmful is being removed wherever the Feds/nuclear industry have control (funding) and worthless fake studies saying it’s helpful to health are being promoted. As rumor is being promoted and science is being demoted, 3 nuclear cores are being washed into the ocean in Fukushima and will continue to do so indefinetly. This whole “do not lok at the man behind the curtain!” is something Orwell would understand.
Why does the name Al Gore keep jumping off the page?
The EPA has alot of information about the different health effects of different sources of radiation.
The basic problem is that low dose radiation still damages DNA, even in small amounts. Your body will try to repair that damage and it is often successful (you fight off the damaging effects of gamma in sunlight for a long time) but sometimes, particularly as small doses ACCUMULATE over time, people get skin cancer. That’s a key issue with small doses - they accummulate.
Radiation sources that humans mine/manufacture are more harmful than radiation in sunlight or the potassium in bananas because in addition to the risk to DNA, mined/manufactured radioactive waste is released into the environment and ingested or inhaled. A radioactive particle can lodge next to tissue and, allow me to paraphrase, “zap” it with energy pulses for years until the irritation becomes a tumor. INgestion of radioactive material is harmful to health - a specialist in Japan spoke at their public hearings about this matter and noted that, based on studies in Chernobyl, bladder cancer increased in people drinking water with as small as 2 bequerels of radiation in it.
Also, as the body tries to recover from exposure to radiation (damage to DNA), it’s effort can lower the immune response; as it is kept “busy” healing from radiation exposure it can fail to ward off illnesses it would have otherwise fought off.