Tracking the next pandemic: Avian Flu Talk |
Does Radiation Exposure reduce the risk of Cancer? |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Technologist
Admin Group Joined: May 05 2009 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 1192 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: August 30 2009 at 10:12pm |
Here's another bizarre item that at first you will think I'm wrong about. I don't mind being wrong as I'll learn something new if I am.
Increasing your exposure to radiation seems to lower your risk of getting cancer dramatically. It seems that areas in the united states with the highest background gamma radiation and radon also have the lowest cases of cancer per populous. We have Genes that get activated when exposed to radiation that fight off cancer. I could be wrong but I've found a good deal of evidence that this is true. I'm guessing that over millions of years our bodies have adapted to varying levels of radiation and learned to fight cancer when radiation increases. I'm not talking about massive exposures that will trigger cancer but levels 3-100 times normal background levels. Here is one of many typical Cancer risk maps covering the United States. Here is a Gamma radiation map of the United States. Here is a Radon map of the United States. Note the Higher the Radon and Gamma Radiation the LOWER the Cancer Rates. Some places have 10 times the Cancer risk yet 1/4th the Gamma radiation and 1/3 the Radon. Also note Pilots are exposed to 20 times normal radiation and have no increased risk of cancer. I have a bunch of other data but this should give you something to think about. |
|
Mary008
V.I.P. Member Joined: June 22 2009 Status: Offline Points: 5769 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I'm not amazed to see that area of VA beat red... they fog (spray) every week for about 4
months to keep down the mosquitos. Can't be good for the lungs...and you can be driving
along and see all kinds of crop spraying going on. The sun reacts with polution..auto/truck
exhaust etc. to make it look pretty hazy there all summer.
|
|
Dr.Who
Adviser Group Joined: January 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 392 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
An interesting theory. I would want to see a study that compared the rates from two counties that were similar in other ways - otherwise we might end up just comparing South-East to North-West.
|
|
Technologist
Admin Group Joined: May 05 2009 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 1192 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I can dig up a bunch of older stories that suggest that what I'm postulating might be true. I just don't have time to do it now. Some demonstrate that (highly radioactive) mammals exposed to massive long term radiation. About 100 times the radiation of the bombs dropped on Japan, are in healthy condition.
Here is one of them: Quote: Chernobyl Animals Highly Contaminated But Undeformed ScienceDaily (Sep. 16, 1997) When University of Georgia researchers hold a Geiger counter over rodents living near the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the Ukraine, the clicks grow quickly into a continuous roar. "You wouldn't want to handle an animal like that, and yet they are surviving," said Cham E. Dallas, a UGA associate professor of pharmacology and toxicology, who - with fellow researchers - has made eight expeditions to Chernobyl since 1991. -Snip- Quote: Rodents such as voles show even higher levels of contamination, as much as 10 times the levels found in U.S. rodents. "No one has ever seen levels like that before," Dallas said. UGA researchers also have found genetic changes in these animals. "I use the word change and not damage," Dallas said, because the implications of the changes remain unclear. "We found no deformed animals. None at all." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/09/970916055418.htm My other off the wall theory. Radiation is everywhere and we are constantly bombarded with it and have been for all eternity. What if radiation is what controls genetic mutations and adaptation or put another way. Mutations or RADIATION are the raw materials of evolution? |
|
Mary008
V.I.P. Member Joined: June 22 2009 Status: Offline Points: 5769 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Much of the area of blue and pink is way less populated than areas of red (lung cancer) Red,( lung cancer) in the Sun Belt (sunlight reaction with pollution) and the east coast area is highly populated...especially with elderly...so there are a lot of other exlpanations/factors to explain the incidence of lung cancer in areas of red. ...................
|
|
Technologist
Admin Group Joined: May 05 2009 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 1192 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I'm sure there are endless other reasons for cancer like pollution, income, ethnicity, chemicals in the food, ground and water. The list never ends but I just don't see how you're reading the map. The top map is Cancers per 100,000 People based on each county in the US so it's balanced. New Jersey has the highest population density state in the United States and it's not red, same with very high density areas in California and New York are not red so I don't see your correlation. You can look at other Cancer maps that cover just about every type of cancer and see whey match Radon, Gamma rates like this one does. |
|
Technologist
Admin Group Joined: May 05 2009 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 1192 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Massive amounts of radiation over a short period of time has been proven to cause cancer. Then again It was once believed that drinking radioactive water cured all kinds of ailments. We call it quackery now but it is possible that long term exposure to radiation triggers our genes to fight cancer.
Here is a link of people drinking radioactive water in the 1920's http://www.museumofquackery.com/devices/radium.htm I'm not suggesting anyone expose themselves to radiation. I'm just suggesting that natural cures for cancer might come in opposite ways of traditional thinking. Long term exposure to something we though was harmful "might" actually be helpful. Remember that Radiation is also natural and has been around for billions of years. Salt is a necessity of life. To little and we die, to much and we die. Radiation levels might also have a balance point to reduce cancer. |
|
Mary008
V.I.P. Member Joined: June 22 2009 Status: Offline Points: 5769 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
. It seems that areas in the united states with the
highest background gamma radiation and radon
also have the lowest cases of cancer per populous.
.................. I was thinking that those areas mentioned, gamma radiation (pink) and radon (pink again)
are for the most part...not highly populated
and not highly polluted + SUN
2 large contributing factors to higher L.C. numbers also factors Cheaper ciggs (tobacco states in red area) more smoking North Carolina and Kentucky account for approximately 65 percent of total U.S. production, and four other states (Tennessee, Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia) produce approximately 25 percent of all U.S. tobacco. lower income less education (especially about smoking danger)
stress
......................................................................................... thoughts ... to join in the discussion.
|
|
Medclinician
V.I.P. Member Valued Member Since 2006 Joined: July 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 23322 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I simply could not resist this Tech. My father, in the Navy was there at Bikini Island or whatever when they tested the A-Bomb. Later in life he developed prostate cancer, and they also gave him huge doses of radiation. He was able to tolerate the radiation more and it killed the cancer. He lived for another 25 years. He did get the Cancer- but he was able to fight it off. Working in X-Ray and with my radiation oblivious doctors I have had enough CAT scans and other high radiation procedures I should glow in the dark. No one has ever done a Rad check on me to check. Thank God for MRI.
Now scientifically, it should do the opposite. It would suppress the immune system, and make you more susceptible. So far I don't even have benign prostrate hypertrophy. Maybe there is something to what you are saying. Med |
|
Medclinician
V.I.P. Member Valued Member Since 2006 Joined: July 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 23322 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You haven't been to West Virginia. I had 5 radon tests kits sent to me by EPA and we were getting some real high stuff here near a possible fissure. WV is notorious for Radon gas and we have some of the highest cancer rates in the U.S. Radon gas isn't doing us any favors here. Med |
|
Mary008
V.I.P. Member Joined: June 22 2009 Status: Offline Points: 5769 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
....notice the red...L.C. in W. Virginia... included in my posts :)
( you are quoting Tech. silly )
|
|
abcdefg
Valued Member Joined: September 19 2008 Status: Offline Points: 578 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Medicine does use radiation to burn cancer out. As we know. Also they use it with goiters in Graves Disease, my mother had a toxic goiter and had to use radio active iodine per the Mayo Clinic in the sixties.
When they give this treatment now, they are all dressed in Haz Mat suits when they give the patient the radio active iodine. It is put through a hole in a door of a special room that the patient is expected to reside in during treatment. In my Moms day in the sixties she was handed it to drink with a tongs, she drank it and returned home to us in the family. Now they say it is especially dangerous to children. My sisters and I were all around her. As was my grandmother and Aunt and Dad, and my Aunt and Dad both got cancer but very late in life. My Mom was fine, and so is everyone else from a cancer standpoint, Praise God so far.
I never did understand that that treatment. They still use it.
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum |