IMVA - Radiation at Extremely Low Levels - June 6, 2006

[Guest guest]

Mark Sircus Ac., OMD

Tuesday, June 06, 2006 10:49 AM

Medical News - IMVA - Radiation at Extremely Low Levels -

June 6, 2006

 

Radiation at Extremely Low Levels

 

International Medical Veritas Association

 

 

 

Radiation at extremely low levels is a health hazard

that medicine is not dealing with because it uses dangerous levels of

radiation in both its diagnosis and treatment of disease. Radiation

hazards have been grossly underestimated because they have to be. If

they were not then both the medical industry and the atomic power

industry would be vulnerable to staggering liabilities. Radiation is

an invisible terror that works insidiously in the background so it is

easy to hide its place in the deterioration of the publics' health.

But slowly and steadily radiation hazards are destroying not only our

health but that of our children and our children's children and many

more generations to come. (This week the IMVA will publish about

mercury in the air as a similar hazard. But coming next is Uranium

Causes Cancer)

 

 

 

" Chernobyl " remains what it became 20 years ago,

the name of a horror that doesn't show itself.

 

Serge Schmemann

 

NY Times

 

 

 

" The results of surveys and biological monitoring of

children and adults of Chernobyl point unambiguously to a steady,

rapid and dramatic deterioration of health of all victims of the

radiation impact of the Chernobyl accident " wrote doctors E.B.

Burlakova & A.G. Nazarov of the Emanuel Institute of Biochemical

Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow. Most interestingly they

continue saying, " The dose dependence of the radiation effect may be

non-linear, non-monotonic and polymodal in character. Over certain

dose ranges, low-level irradiation is more devastating with regard to

the results of its action on an organism or a population than acute

high-level radiation. "

 

 

 

In July of 2005 the National Academy of Sciences came

to the conclusion that the preponderance of scientific evidence shows

that even very low doses of radiation pose a risk of cancer or other

health problems and there is no threshold below which exposure can be

viewed as harmless. Many scientists generally assumed that low

levels of radiation are harmless, since they produced no immediately

observable effects. However during the past few decades tremendously

improved radiation measurement techniques coupled with detailed

laboratory studies revealed many previously unsuspected hazards from

low levels of ionized radiation. Some researchers have even added the

view that chronic low level exposure to radiation poses a greater risk

than short term high level exposure.[ii]

Radiation is normally classified into ionizing and

non-ionizing types. Non-ionizing radiation comes in the form of light,

radio waves, microwaves and radar. These types of radiation generally

do not cause tissue damage, though there are those who would argue

rationally about that. Ionizing radiation is radiation that produces

immediate chemical effects (ionization) on human tissue. X-rays, gamma

rays, and particle bombardment (neutron beam, electron beam, protons,

mesons, and others) give off ionizing radiation. This type of

radiation can be used for medical testing and treatment, industrial

testing, manufacturing, sterilization, weapons and weapons

development, and many other uses. Radiation sickness results when

humans (or other animals) are exposed to ionizing radiation.

Radiation exposure can occur as a single large

exposure (acute), or a series of small exposures spread over time

(chronic). Radiation sickness is generally associated with acute

exposure and has a characteristic set of symptoms that appear in an

orderly fashion. Chronic exposure is usually associated with delayed

medical problems such as cancer and premature aging, which may develop

over a long period of time

Ionizing radiation is a proven and ubiquitous mutagen

to which humans everywhere are exposed (medically, environmentally,

and occupationally). Moreover, unlike some chemical mutagens,[iii]

ionizing radiation is capable of inflicting every possible kind of

mutation, from a single " base-change " to deletion of entire genes. It

is especially potent at inducing the kind of complex genetic injuries

which cannot be repaired.

The degree of illness (acute radiation sickness)

depends on the dose and the rate of exposure. Exposure from x-rays or

gamma rays is measured in units of roentgens. For example: Total body

exposure of 100 roentgens causes radiation sickness. Total body

exposure of 400 roentgens causes radiation sickness and death in half

the individuals. 100,000 rads causes almost immediate unconsciousness

and death within an hour.

Through the decades much effort was put into reducing

the dose from medical X-rays when it was realized that only a few rads

per year received by radiologists in the course of their work had been

found to decrease their life spans significantly, while among their

children there had been a definite increase in congenital defects.

Clearly all forms of radiation are dangerous. When all the different

forms of exposure are combined with heavy metal toxicity from other

metals like lead, aluminum, arsenic and mercury, we have the makings

of a health disaster.

As early as 1955 Dr. Alice Stewart, head of the

Department of Preventive Medicine at Oxford University, became aware

of a sharp rise in leukemia among young children in England. By May

1957, after the analysis of 1299 cases, half of which involved

leukemia and the rest mainly brain and kidney tumors, her study had

been completed. The data showed that babies born of mothers who had a

series of X-rays of the pelvic region during pregnancy were nearly

twice as likely to develop leukemia or another form of cancer, as

those born of mothers who had not been X-rayed. Dr. Stewart concluded

that the dose from diagnostic X-rays could produce a clearly

detectable increase in childhood cancer when given during pregnancy.[iv]

Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass, who was professor of

radiation physics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine,

in his book Secret Fallout – Low-Level Radiation From Hiroshima to

Three-Mile Island, indicated that the risk increased with each

additional picture, as the studies of Stewart indicated it did. This

clearly implied that there was no significant healing of the damage

and thus that the cancer-causing effects of radiation were

cumulative.[v] This would mean that the effects of a dose received

over a period of time from fallout would be similar to those from an

equal dose received all at once from X-rays. Even worse was the

realization that children whose mothers were X-rayed during the first

third of their pregnancy were found to be ten times more likely to

develop cancer than those whose mothers were X-rayed toward the end of

pregnancy.

Fallout from above ground tests, from nuclear

accidents, from depleted uranium weapons, and even from everyday

radiation from nuclear power plants operating normally would pose a

direct threat to mothers pregnant in their first trimester. Dr.

Sternglass concluded that all the research led to the most tragic

conclusion that the unborn fetus was hundreds or thousands of times

more sensitive to radiation than anyone had ever suspected.

The geographic patterns of the changes in worldwide

leukemia and infant mortality trends between 1945

and 1955 clearly matched the patterns of fallout.

Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass

According to the now antiquated " threshold " theory

there was a certain low level of radiation exposure, a " threshold, "

below which no damage would be caused. If this threshold was about the

same as the yearly dose from background radiation or from exposure to

typical diagnostic X-rays, as various supporters of nuclear programs

maintained it was, then we could all sleep safe knowning that the

military and medical industrial complexes were not doing us harm. But

Dr. Stewart's study implied that if there were any safe threshold for

unborn children and infants it would have to be less than the dose

from a single X-ray picture.

From the simplest x-ray to each particle of uranium inhaled

on the wind or drunk from water we have a problem.

What few doctors and health officials recognize is

that chemicals and radiation combine to act on the very same cellular

enzyme pathways. One type of contamination reinforces and strengthens

the others so medical treatments need to address both chemical

toxicity and radiation poisoning simultaneously. Exposure to radiation

causes a cascade of free radicals that wreak havoc on the body.

Radiation also decimates the body's supply of glutathione, which

allows free radicals to run rampant through our body's tissues and

organs. The health establishment's reactions to radiation dangers are

retarded because, from the beginning, physicians saw radiation as a

promising new therapy for treating nearly every ailment under the sun.

Though science knows well the dangers, modern medicine continues to

use radiation recklessly for diagnosis and for the treatment of cancer.

The International Commission on Radiation Protection

[iCRP] exists

in practice largely to play down the effects of radiation

on human health,

and to shield the nuclear industry from compensation

claims from the public.

Many people will be surprised to find out that the

so-called " fluoride " we use in much of the American water supplies, is

fluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6), and comes from the US fertilizer

industry.[vi] Fluorides and radionuclides are the primary toxic

pollutants from the manufacture of phosphate fertilizer; and according

to health activist Tim Bolen, people living near fertilizer plants and

mines experience lung cancer and leukemia rates that are double the

state average. Radium wastes from filtration systems at phosphate

fertilizer facilities are radioactive.[vii]

In promoting the use of the pollution concentrate as

a fluoridation agent, the American Dental Association, Federal

agencies and manufacturers failed to mention that it was

radioactive,[viii] which is highly strange if not sickening. Whenever

uranium is found in nature as a component of a mineral, a host of

other radionuclides are always found in the mineral in various stages

of decay. Uranium and all of its decay-rate products are found in

phosphate rock, fluorosilicic acid and phosphate fertilizer. While the

uranium and radium in fluorosilicic acid are known carcinogens, two

decay products of uranium are even more carcinogenic: radon-222 and

polonium-210.

It is important to realize how many sources of

radioactive contamination there are. When we present medical

treatments for radiation poisoning, which is similar to treatments for

heavy metal toxicity, we are not going to find much support from the

medical establishment.. To basic science all radiation is dangerous

and life threatening. But according to modern medicine and the United

States government there is nothing to worry about, radiation and heavy

metals are as safe as mothers milk. Actually this is a bad comparisson

because mothers milk itself becomes polluted with the heavy metals and

radiation poisoning of the mother.

It's clear this issue about the health effects is out

there and floating

around. But it's also clear the Pentagon does not want to

study it.

Rep. Jim McDermott

D-Wash.

Mark Sircus Ac., OMD

Director International Medical Veritas Association

http://www.imva.info

http://www.magnesimforlife.com

+55-83-3252-2195

www.skype.com ID: marksircus

International Medical Veritas Association

Copyright 2006 All rights reserved.

IMPORTANT