Posted on 02/11/2015 12:47:33 PM PST by fishtank
Lawrence Solomon: The fallout of the Nobel scam of 1946
Scientist’s radiation cover-up might have cost thousands of lives
Why do most people today, scientists included, believe that small doses of radiation are harmful to human health when no proof for this theory exists, and when mountains of evidence show the opposite — that small amounts of radiation actually promote health? After years of sleuthing into historical records, a scientist at the University of Massachusetts has found a smoking gun, involving a scientific scam in 1946 at the very highest echelons — the Nobel Prize ceremonies in Stockholm.
(Excerpt) Read more at business.financialpost.com ...
“The tritium on my Rolex from the 1980s no longer glows in the dark.”
Tritium doesn’t glow. It is probably the phosphor material that has broken down. Although the tritium has gone through about 2.5 half-lives so its activity has been reduced to about 1/5 of the original. So maybe it glows but not so brightly?
Why are you posting a three-year old article as new?
Yes.
Immediate bone marrow transplant would be the best treatment.
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.
But, up to 500 rads and above, GI syndrome kicks in and there is no effective treatment for that, as far as I know.
ok.....the coating used to glow or show up in darkness but no longer at this point. Maybe it is so faint my older eyes can no longer detect anything.
Weren’t they putting the brushes in their mouths to align the bristles into a tip?
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.
The painters were twirling the tips on their paint brushes on their tongues to give the brush a sharp enough point to paint with the radium. That was later found to be a bad idea.
This whole article is complete and total crap. There was no Nobel scam of 1946 and radiation hormesis is dangerous quackery.
The painters were ORDERED to twirl the tips of their paint brushes that way.
The painters who dotted spots of radium on watch faces were getting horrible disfiguring and deathly cancers of the mouth because they “tipped” their paint brushes by touching the brush to their lips.
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?
Same
S**t
Different
Day
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.
The dials were hand painted my women with a fine artist’s brush like modelers use. They would dab the brush on the tip of their tongue to give the brush a sharp point. The we’re called “The Radium Girls”. Look it up.
BEIR made a lot of claims regarding the mortality of low level exposure to radiation that haven’t been validated.
Ever study ever cited in attempts to “prove” low dose radiation is good for health has approx 10% of the validity of the BEIR so I’ll go with the decades of large scale state-of-the-art testing compared with “Bob-has-a-pet-theory” science.
Radiation dose accumulates so claiming low dose is harmless is flawed on it’s face.
THe nuclear energy industry would like people like me to “shut up and eat your radiation!” but they have no idea what dose I’ve already accummulated (medical or other exposures I never consented to - there used to be an online video where a car is driving around an urban area with radiation monitoring device and finds a “hot” spot in the back of a big rig. They follow it around and note that the radioactive load is located nearest the driver and he’s just tooling around town, unaware of what he’s hauling)
One of the lessons of Chernobyl is that in an exposed population, approx 10-15% are more sensitive to radiation and suffer greater harm, the largest 70% are Moderately sensitive and suffer harm at lesser numbers (harm but less) and the lowest 10-15% on the chart are much less sensitive to radiation. So that meant that in the early days of the Chernobyl disaster, some people succumbed quickly, some never succumbed at all, and the mid response was mixed. The guy chiefly responsible for the disaster was exposed to shockingly high doses (radioactive dust blew on him) and he lived to old age yet the men next to him, also exposed at the same levels died grisly deaths in a matter of days. It matters who you are, how well you can tolerate depressed immune response, how well your body heals, your age, your gender etc. and I think it’s pointless to imply that “low dose radiation is harmless and may be beneficial” when people have no idea what their immune system is already protecting them from and what their sensitivity to radiation is, what their accumulated dose is etc.
I note that the standard to which proponents of hormesis adhere are nothing compared with national long term longitudinal state-of-the-art science. By this I mean, the same people who critique BEIR will accept “medicine man” levels of fake science when it comes to hormesis - particularly those in the nuclear industry. Decades of information gleaned from Chernobyl and now accumulating in Japan will be ignored in favor of backward high hopes (hormesis). In fact, hormesis has a long way to go before the same population of scientists who critique the BEIR will even deign to critique hormesis wishcraft.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.