| RSH Statement of Principles to the Conference: The Bases Required to Develop a Consensus on Low-Dose
Radiation Health Effects; and Radiation Protection Policy
RSH Input to, and Handout at, the BRPS Conference
Dec. 1-5, 1999
Airlie House,
Warrenton, VA
USA |
|
December 2, 1999
Bridging Radiation Policy and Science
Airlie House
Warrenton, VA
December 1-5, 1999 |
Jim Muckerheide
Low-Level Radiation Health Effects Committee,
American Nuclear Society
Center for Nuclear Technology and Society at WPI
Mass. State Nuclear Engineer
Mass. Governors Advisory Council on Radiation
Protection |
Low Level Radiation Health Effects Science: Animal and Human
Studies
Whereas: Substantial confirmed studies contradict the
linear no-threshold hypothesis (LNTH), specifically for chronic, low-dose-rate, exposures;
and low dose fractionated x-rays.
Whereas: NO substantial confirmed studies that should confirm
the LNT do so, for, e.g., significant natural and medical diagnostic doses. (And some
studies that claim to support the LNT misrepresent the data - subject to "scientific
misconduct"findings.)
Low Level Radiation Health Effects Science: Molecular and Cellular
Biology
Whereas: Low-level radiation (LLR) stimulates immune
functions in "immunologically whole" animals and humans, while higher doses
depress these functions; and suppressed background radiation causes adverse health
effects, equivalent to essential nutrients.
Whereas: LLR-stimulated immune functions improve health, and
prevent and eliminate cancer, and current low-dose radiation (LDR) immunotherapies
eliminate some cancers. (Radiation protection research policy to ignore such results is
responsible for millions of deaths to premature cancer, plus other adverse health effects,
and unjustified costs.)
Low Level Radiation Health Effects Science: Natural Radioactivity
Sources
Whereas: Natural radioactivity
variations far exceed "cleanup" limits (with no adverse effects, and evidence of
beneficial effects). E.g., future Hanford releases to the Columbia River (millions of
times lower than 1946-1975 releases, resulting in trivial doses) are billions of times
below natural river basin radioactivity. (Misrepresenting the hazard defrauds the public
of $100s billions; and causes premature cancers and other consequences.)
- over -
Independent
Individuals Knowledgeable in Radiation Science and Public Policy
Committed to Change
Radiation Science policy in the Public Interest |
The "Bridge to Radiation Policy" is to:
Affirm: That sub-ambient radiation causes adverse health effects, by
shielding, K-40 removed from natural potassium, etc.; that large epidemiological
studies with significant well-known doses result in null or beneficial results at low
doses, contradicting the LNT; and that enhanced immune, enzymatic,
physiological, and tumor-suppression exist in "immunologically whole" organisms,
in human patients, workers, and the 60Co-exposed Taiwanese residents.
Affirm: That radiation
protection-funded/controlled radiation research be redirected to health and medical
research institutions; Apply LDR to clinical trials and life-saving interventions in
advanced cases, and provide valid information to the medical community and the public,
and; Optimize radiation supplements and delivery modalities to prevent/cure cancer
and other diseases.
Affirm: Conduct rulemakings to incorporate LLR
health effects data; Redirect "cleanup" funds to only imminent health and
safety hazards pending revised standards, and; Reengineer radiation
technologies.
Affirm: Investigate studies that misrepresent data for
"scientific misconduct," including official reviews that fail to include all
relevant data, and; Identify the costs of defrauding the public ($100s billions in
direct costs that provide no public health benefit, and for premature cancer deaths, and
other adverse health consequences).
|
|
|