, , , , , , , , , ,

The deadline for comment to the US NRC on the 100 mSv per year exposure proposal, also known as one or more cancers for everyone, is November 19th at 11.59 pm Eastern Time. http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NRC-2015-0057 However, complaint to government officials and education should continue after this date.

Whether through millions of years of evolution and/or because God made everything and it was good, radiation induced mutations are likely to have either damaging effects or no impact.

Dr. Timothy Mousseau explains that the idea that radiation is good for you (hormesis) is flawed from a basic biological and evolutionary point of view: “From an evolutionary point of view, from a fundamental genetics point of view, it [hormesis] makes no sense… Our genetic systems have been refined and optimized… the truth is most mutations that occur in all organisms either have no effect because of the redundancy in the basic genetic code, or they have a slightly deleterious effect“. Starts around 43 min: http://youtu.be/V6beUgyJPJ4

Transcription (may not be word for word but follows the general sense):
At 43 minutes:
John Boyd freelance writer asked: “I wonder if there are any scientific links that you can make from animals and plants being affected by radiation to human health?…” Dr. Timothy Mousseau: “… Most medical research in the world is conducted on animal model systems of one sort, …, they share fundamental biological properties with humans. [44 min.] “We are, after all, just an animal. We share 99% of our DNA sequence with chimps. We share 100% of our fundamental biochemical machinery with other primates and other mammals. We all work the same way … And, so of course what we see in plants and animals has relevance for humans…

Fundamentally, anything we see with these animals has relevance for the humans in the area. It’s just the humans have a much lower dose rate and so they are likely … to require much longer for any consequences show up“.

45.50: [Question re fruitflies, ALARA, low dose, Wade Allison]:
[47 min.]
Timothy Mousseau response: “Let’s start with fruitflies. You know it’s funny, I actually spent some time in Chernobyl looking for fruitflies, because my training is actually in genetics and entymology, and so I figured as an entymologist and geneticist, I should be doing work on fruitflies. And, you can bring them into the lab and do all these things. And, we got to Chernobyl, I went to Chernobyl one fall looking for them and I couldn’t find any fruitflies. And, I was kind of baffled because there are fruit trees all over Chernobyl. And, they weren’t being picked of course, and so the fruit should have been just falling to the ground and rotting. But, then I looked at the fruit trees and there was no fruit or very little on the ground and then I looked around and realized there weren’t any bees there weren’t any butterflies, or very few. And, that’s really what instigated, what started, many of these census studies. And, so it took us some time to get going on fruitflies. But, we have been doing some work on fruitflies. And, as far as I know, they do have repair on certain of their chromosomes, but, the sex chromosome, where there is only one copy has less repair but I’m sure there is some repair capability.

The more important question concerns whether or not there is any evidence of
1) a threshold below which there are no negative effects of radiation and
2) you bring up a word that I don’t like to use because there is really very little evidence for it, but since I’ve used it recently, I will mention it: hormesis – this notion that a little bit of radiation is actually potentially good for you because it turns on DNA repair. And, there are a few folks out there who bring this up and suggest that this is what’s happening. The truth is there are no good scientific, experimental scientific data to demonstrate that this is indeed the case.

From an evolutionary point of view, from a fundamental genetics point of view, it makes no sense. And, the reason is that there have been billions of years of evolution on this planet. Our genetic systems have been refined and optimized over these billions of years and the truth is most mutations that occur in all organisms either have no effect because of the redundancy in the basic genetic code, or they have a slightly deleterious effect. Any mutation of large effect is usually deleterious and kills the carrier and so they disappear very quickly.

And, so most of the machinery in our cells in fact is associated with repairing the damage that occurs everyday all the time just by being alive. Our basic fundamental metabolic processes generate oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is a primary cause of genetic damage. So, much of our biochemical machinery is there in place to repair the damage caused by day to day living. Radiation simply adds to that. In fact, one of the effects of ionizing radiation is to increase oxidative stress…. Many of our recent studies are related to the fact that this oxidative stress actually is probably one of the universal underlying causes to the deleterious effects that we’re seeing in many of these organisms. The radiation raises oxidative stress, the organisms can’t cope with it, there’s genetic mutations that result, and phenotypic consequences or fitness consequences. So, the notion that a little radiation is helpful is silly because it is just adding to the same kinds of mutagens that are already in our body that we are doing our very best, every day to repair and is ultimately the cause of aging and death in most organisms. So, hormesis is a very unlikely hypothesis for which there is no support.

Follow-up Question: “If so, the result that you just showed us, is it not because of radiation but because of stress of the evacuation (etc). Dr. Mousseau: “Thank you for raising that issue. And, that is precisely why we’re working with barn swallows and butterflies and grasshoppers and mice. As far as I know they don’t smoke, they don’t drink vodka and I don’t think they get stressed psychologically stressed. Now, of course, they do experience other kinds of stress like avoiding being eaten by other animals or finding food to eat. Life in the wild is probably much more stressful than life in the laboratory where many of these past studies have been conducted…” Dr. Mousseau notes an apparently much higher level of susceptibility to ionizing radiation in the wild than predicted by laboratory studies. The previous transcription is generally accurate but may have a few errors. Always go to the original to be certain. See original here: http://youtu.be/V6beUgyJPJ4

Creation, “young earth” scientists date the advent of man as about 6,000 years ago, and evolutionary scientists date human like species from 2.3 to 2.4 million years ago, and modern human forerunners from 250,000 to 400,000 years ago. However, life is believed to predate this.

Important posts about new study showing that a mere 10 years of 100 mSv per year will lead to an estimated extra cancer for everyone. https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/new-study-of-us-uk-french-nuclear-workers-supports-linear-no-threshold-model-radiation-is-bad-for-you-increased-dose-is-increased-risk-hormesis-debunked-funding-from-pro-nuclear-govts-nuclea/