A little background on hormesis, if anyone wants to know:
Basically, it comes from the idea that small doses of radiation may have *beneficial* effects not predicted by science and not predicted by linear extrapolation back from lethal doses to zero. (You get instead of a line, a curve with benefit at low doses and death at high). The effect was then supposedly observed with other known poisons and a hypothesis arose that *any* poison could have a stimulating, beneficial effect. From there, it splinters off into folk cures and also, to reputable research into the effect of *very* low doses of toxins. Some people are afraid that the concept will erode environmental laws that use the linear model to determine safety and risk factors. It's a real can o' worms -- like genetic engineering. Everyone has reams of data and experts to back them up.
(What follows are various paragraphs from web sites, cited below each paragraph. Especially read the last one...)
The (BELLE) Advisory Committee is committed to the enhanced understanding of low-dose responses of all types, whether of an expected nature (e.g., linear, sublinear) or of a so-called paradoxical nature. Paradoxical dose-response relationships might include U-shaped dose-response curves, hormesis, and, in some restrictive sense, biphasic dose-response curves. Although there are many scattered reports of such paradoxical responses in the biomedical literature, these have not generally been rigorously assessed, nor have the underlying mechanisms been adequately identified. Laboratory and regulatory scientists have tended to dismiss these paradoxical responses as anomalies inconsistent with conventional scientific paradigms.
http://www.belleonline.com/index.htmi
-------------------------------------
Since the first demonstrations of hormesis in the late 1800's (cf. Stebbing, 1982), a considerable body of literature had led to its acceptance as a generally recognized effect of low doses of toxic compounds, some of which are carcinogenic (Calabrese and Baldwin, 1997). Stebbing defines hormesis as the stimulatory effects caused by low levels of toxic agents. The majority of the work cited in support of this definition related to growth stimulation in plants and bacteria.
http://www.belleonline.com/4_6-3.htmi
-------------------------------------
The first report on hormetic effects in algae appeared more than 100 years ago. More recently published hormetic effects include A-bomb survivors' apparent lower-than-normal incidence of leukemia and their greater longevity. Although more than 2000 scientific papers had been published on radiation hormesis, the phenomenon was forgotten after World War II and was ignored by the radiation-protection establishment.
http://cnts.wpi.edu/RSH/docs/JA99_Radrisk.htm
-------------------------------------
The occurrence of dual effects (both stimulatory and inhibitory) caused by the same agent when used at different doses or for different times has been described in various experimental systems and has been often called "hormoligosis", or "hormesis" (12-16). In 1960 Townsend and Luckey (13) surveyed the field of classic medical pharmacology for examples of hormetic effects and published a list of 100 substances known to be capable of causing an inhibition at high concentrations and stimulation at low concentrations. In general, such cases fell into three categories, those involving muscular response, those involving respiration, and those involving transmission of nerve impulses.
http://chimclin.univr.it/omc/Bellavite/Publications/MEDHIP.html
-------------------------------------
The proponents of "hormesis" suggest that ionizing radiation improves the general health. The leading hormetic is Thomas Luckey, who proposes in his 1991 book (p.236): "The theme of future research and practice in radiation safety should be supplementation of background radiation for health." Luckey worries about "radiation deficiency syndrome," and suggests that "optimum exposures" appear to be about 10 rads per year (p.229, 233).
Fetal Dose -- Percent Increase in Rate of Mental Retardation in Children
4 rads (2.63 / 2.28) = 1.15 15 % increase
10 rads (3.13 / 2.28) = 1.37 37 % increase (at the optimum "hormetic" dose)
15.4 rads (3.77 / 2.28) = 1.65 65 % increase
23.0 rads (4.75 / 2.28) = 2.08 2.08-fold increase
30.8 rads (6.00 / 2.28) = 2.63 2.63-fold increase
46.2 rads (9.12 / 2.28) = 4.00 4-fold increase
61.5 rads (13.36 / 2.28) = 5.86 5.86-fold increase
72.0 rads (16.85 / 2.28) = 7.39 7.39-fold increase
http://www.ratical.com/radiation/CNR/No1EscapesP.html
-------------------------------------
posted by
Peter Borst
Ithaca NY
U S A
|
