Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Hormesis

Hormesis is a term used by toxicologists to refer to a biphasic dose response to an environmental agent characterized by a low dose stimulation or beneficial effect and a high dose inhibitory or toxic effect. In the fields of biology and medicine hormesis is defined as an adaptive response of cells and organisms to a moderate (usually intermittent) stress. Examples include ischemic preconditioning, exercise, dietary energy restriction and exposures to low doses of certain phytochemicals. Recent findings have elucidated the cellular signaling pathways and molecular mechanisms that mediate hormetic responses which typically involve enzymes such as kinases and deacetylases, and transcription factors such as Nrf-2 and NF-κB. As a result, cells increase their production of cytoprotective and restorative proteins including growth factors, phase 2 and antioxidant enzymes, and protein chaperones. A better understanding of hormesis mechanisms at the cellular and molecular levels is leading to and to novel approaches for the prevention and treatment of many different diseases.

1 posted on 12/30/2012 10:15:14 AM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: neverdem

Spider-mouse. Spider-mouse
Does whatever a Spider-Mouse does
Can he swing, on a web?
No he can’t, he’s a mouse.


2 posted on 12/30/2012 10:18:48 AM PST by Dr. Sivana ("C'est la vie" say the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell. -- Chuck Berry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

3 posted on 12/30/2012 10:31:45 AM PST by KC_Lion (Build the America you want to live in at your address, and keep looking up.-Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
Bad enough that Marvel owns Disney, but now irradiated mice are healthier? What next . . . ?


4 posted on 12/30/2012 10:46:05 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Makes sense, explains why the people at Chernobyl had much, much, less problems than predicted.


7 posted on 12/30/2012 10:57:48 AM PST by BobL (Agenda 21...Agenda 21...Agenda 21...Agenda 21...Agenda 21... (whatever the hell that is))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Don’t we get a good dose of radiation daily from natural sources, i.e., the sun?


8 posted on 12/30/2012 10:59:18 AM PST by AtlasStalled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

“producing health benefits for mice with an unusual genetic makeup” ...so normal mice (without this unusual genetic makeup) would NOT experience this ‘benefit’? Wouldn’t they have said so if normal mice were unharmed?

So much hedging in this article; note the “probably in humans”. State of the art, massive, long-term, well-designed scientific studies like BEIR VI have shown, year after year, that there is no safe or beneficial radiation threshold and that even low dose radiation damages humans.
In the BEIR VI, researchers note low doses are especially damaging to young and to females (twice as damaging to girls than boys). The article doesn’t say but I am guessing they used adult mice for their “genetic anomaly” sample in order to avoid this sensitivity because damage to thyroid/endocrine/bone-marrow etc. would interfere with their study of this genetic anomaly.
Since BEIR VI and other studies have proven that low dose radiation is damaging to humans (and quantified the damage by age/gender), I don’t believe this research will be useful to humans unless used to treat a gentically anomalous human who is older and male and whose genetic anomaly is regarded as worse than the damage caused by radiation dosing.


9 posted on 12/30/2012 11:02:30 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Ah...checking the article I see:

“Mother mice that got radiation doses between 0.7 and 3 centigrays had more pups with browner coats than did sham-irradiated mice. Browner coat colors among mice exposed to low-dose radiation were associated with higher levels of DNA methylation on the agouti gene, indicating that radiation does something to alter the chemical tagging.”

So irradiating the young altered their DNA. Not something we want to try unless you are a “viable yellow agouti mice”.


12 posted on 12/30/2012 11:12:23 AM PST by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

This eminent scientist agrees:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKeaVq6fUpw


14 posted on 12/30/2012 12:17:12 PM PST by darth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

15 posted on 12/30/2012 12:31:48 PM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Better living through chemistry!


16 posted on 12/30/2012 12:40:50 PM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Most people get too little radiation. Art Robinson worked on this and radiatoin hormesis appears to be beneficial. IIRC the lowest incident of skin cancer is among Australian life guards.


17 posted on 12/31/2012 3:53:43 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson