My View of the US Department of Energy Low Dose Research Project

Hormesis is a religion

PART 1 – WHAT THE ENEMY IS DOING.

TO COUNTER THE ENEMY ONE HAS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ENEMY IS SAYING AND PROPOSING. THE FOLLOWING IS FROM THE PROCLAIMED AIMS OF THE US DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY. THE PROGRAM HAS MADE INROADS INTO SCIENCE AROUND THE WORLD AND IS INCORPORATED FORMALLY INTO SCIENTIFIC ADVICE GIVEN TO THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT, AND I PROPOSE TO THE STH KOREAN GOVERNMENT, AND THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT. THE FUNDAMENTAL AIM IS TO USE MODERN EQUIPMENT AND GENETIC KNOWLEDGE TO OVERTURN THE FINDINGS OF MULLER OF 1927.

THE DOE LOW DOSE PROGRAM COMMENCED IN 1998. THE FIRST GRANT IN THE WORLD WAS AWARDED BY THE DOE LOW DOSE PROGRAM WAS AWARDED TO PAM SYKES OF FLINDERS UNIVERSITY SOUTH AUSTRALIA. SINCE THEN HUNDREDS OF PAPERS HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED, ALL OF WHICH ARE USED BY GOVERNMENTS AS SCIENTIFIC ADVISE. IT IS NOT SURPRISING PEOPLE ARE STUCK IN HOT SPOTS IN FUKUSHIMA. I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO POINT THIS OUT SINCE JOINING THIS FACE BOOK GROUP. AGREE OR DISAGREE AS YOU WILL

The United States Low Dose Radiation Researxh Program

http://lowdose.energy.gov/about_program.aspx

“Focus of program studies: The major type of radiation exposures will be low Linear Energy Transfer (LET) ionizing radiation (primarily X- and gamma-radiation) from fission products. Thus, the Low Dose Program will concentrate on studies of low-LET exposures delivered at low total doses and low dose-rates.

The research program involves using advances in modern molecular biology and instrumentation unavailable during the previous 50 years of radiation biology research. Scientists will be able to examine—at a systems level—the relationship between normal oxidative damage and radiation-induced damage, using studies conducted at very low doses and dose-rates.

The radiation-induced perturbation of normal physiological processes, along with the biological system’s homeostatic responses will eventually be characterized at all levels of biological organization—from genes to cells to tissues to organisms.”

“The use of models was necessary because of our inability to detect changes in cancer incidence following low doses of radiation. Historically, the predominant approach has been the Linear-no-Threshold model (see Wikipedia entry(Offsite link)) and collective dose concept(Offsite link) that assumes each unit of radiation, no matter how small, can cause cancer. As a result, radiation-induced cancers are predicted from low doses of radiation for which it has not been possible to directly demonstrate cancer induction.”

End quote. It can be seen that the DOE program questions the Linear No Threshold Model, and implies that the idea of a threshold below which no harm from exposure to ionising radiation occurs. Homeostasis is the process by which an organism’s system and cells maintain equilbrium in the face of changed inputs. It is not the same as hormesis. However Hormesis and adaptive response major planks which the DOE seeks to re establish as science based concepts via its Low Dose program.

In short the DOE program seeks to over turn the 1927 findings of Muller, who found that genetic damage occurred in target insects (fruit flies) no matter how low the dose of external x rays were applied.

Muller was limited by 1927 equipment. The minimum dose his equipment was capable was high compared to today’s equipment. Today, researcher’s can observe cellular responses – both target and by stander – very closely at extremely powers of magnification.

Sykes advised me in a letter written in reply prior to the commencement of her experiments (previously posted in the forum) that patented cloned mice would be subjected to low dose Low LET external rays. One of her first joint papers, after 3 years work was : The Linear No-Threshold Model Does Not Hold for Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation

Antony M. Hooker, Madhava Bhat, Tanya K. Day, Joanne M. Lane, Sarah J. Swinburne, Alexander A. Morley and Pamela J. Sykes

Radiation Research

Vol. 162, No. 4 (Oct., 2004), pp. 447-452

(article consists of 6 pages)

Published by: Radiation Research Society

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3581207

Since then she has published: Book chapters

Blyth, B.J. & Sykes, P.J., 2011. Low dose radiobiology and radiation risk. In Recent Advances and Research Updates in Medical Physics and Radiation Biology. Australia: International Research Promotion Council, pp. In press-In press.

Sykes, P.J., 2001. Detecting monoclonal immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor gene rearrangements in B- and T-cell malignancies by polymerase chain reaction. In Hematologic Malignancies: Methods and Techniques. Totowa, USA: Humana Press, pp. 117-132.

Refereed journal articles

Blyth, B.J. & Sykes, P.J., 2011. Radiation-induced bystander effects: what are they are how relevant are they to human radiation exposures?. Radiation Research.

Staudacher, A., Blyth, B.J., Lawrence, M.D., Ormsby, R.J., Bezak, E., & Sykes, P.J., 2010. If bystander effects for apoptosis occur in spleen after low dose irradiation in vivo then the magnitude of the effect falls within the range of normal homeostatic apoptosis. Radiation Research, 727-731.

Blyth, B.J., Azzam, E.I., Howell, R.W., Ormsby, R.J., Staudacher, A., & Sykes, P.J., 2010. An adoptive transfer method to detect low-dose radiation-induced bystander effects in vivo. Radiation Research, 173(2), 125-137.

Blyth, B.J., Azzam, E.I., Howell, R.W., Ormsby, R.J., Staudacher, A., & Sykes, P.J., 2010. An adoptive transfer method to detect low dose radiation-induced bystander effects in vivo. Radiation Research, 173.

Staudacher, A., Blyth, B.J., Lawrence, M.D., Ormsby, R.J., Bezak, E., & Sykes, P.J., 2010. If bystander effects for apoptosis occur in spleen after low-dose irradiation in vivo then the magnitude of the effect falls within the range of normal homeostatic apoptosis. Radiation Research, 174.

Morley, A.A., Latham, S.E., Brisco, M., Sykes, P.J., Sutton, R., Hughes, E., Wilczek, V.J., Budgen, B.J., van Zanten, K., Kuss, B.J., et al., 2009. Sensitive and specific measurement of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 11.

Brisco, M., Latham, S.E., Sutton, R., Hughes, E., Wilczek, V.J., van Zanten, K., Budgen, B.J., Bahar, A.Y., Malec, M., Sykes, P.J., et al., 2009. Determining the repertoire of IGH gene rearrangements to develop molecular markers for minimal residual disease in B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 11.

Hooker, A.M., Grdina, D.J., Murley, J.S., Blyth, B.J., Ormsby, R.J., Bezak, E., Giam, K.A., & Sykes, P.J., 2009. Low doses of amifostine protect from chromosomal inversions in spleen in vivo when administered after an occupationally relevant X-radiation dose. International Journal of Low Radiation, 6(1), 43-56.

Has been invited to participate in radiation Hormesis and Adaptie Response seminars at Los Alamos National Labs and around the world, and her Flinders University biography reads: “Biography

A/Prof Pamela Sykes has a PhD in Genetics and has worked in the area of molecular genetics in Australia and the US over the last 25 years. She is currently Department Head of the Flinders Medical Centre site of Molecular Pathology in SA Pathology. She is involved in provision of diagnostic genetic services, teaches in Human Molecular Genetics and heads her own research group of staff and post-graduate students studying the biologiical effects of low doses of ionising radiation. Her current research is focussed on studying the protective role of low dose radiation. She is currently funded by the United States Department of Energy Low dose Radiation Program and Flinders Medical Centre Foundation. Some of her current appointments include membership on state and national committees for radiation protection and she is an Associate Editor for the journal Radiation Research.”

She is one of dozens of such DOE low dose funded researchers around the world.

She is a radiation advisor to the Australian Government on matters of radiation protection. She is quoted by Toros Energy, which maintains its uranium mining and proposed uranium enrichment plant will be good for the health of South Australians.

Since views are put to national governments by DOE funded researchers in South Korea and Japan. Japan has a long traditional of scientific acceptance of Hormesis (the benefit effects of low dose radiation) dating from the US Occupation in 1945. More on that later. In 1945 Japan was a feudal land with political and scientific elites.

I repeat, I do not hold to the views of DOE Low Dose. I ceased working at Flinders Uni in part because of events following my supplying Australian nuclear veterans with a Flinders Uni press release touting its success in obtaining DOE money for Sykes. In her letter to me at the time Sykes stated she knew little aobut radiation.

What this is about is the study of a limited set of cellular interactions in response to low dose radiation which discount harms of radiation tracks on way to the target cells. The outcomes promoted by DOE are selective and ignore 1000s of othe reactions.

THE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY OF THE DOE LOW DOSE RESEARCH PROJECT IS THIS: IT APPLIES SELECT AND HIGHLY DEFINED OBSERVATIONS OF NOx mediated mutant cell death via by stander action INVOKED BY LOW DOSE LOW LET EXTERNAL RADIATION TO a INTERNAL EMITTERS OF b ANY DOSE AND c ANY LET.

In my next post I will list current research which uses the same modern instruments and field and lab observations to find to the contrary of the US DOE,. A department with a mandate to promote nuclear power.

OK, I can move onto the case against DOE and hormesis as per its new millennium agenda The bottom line, as the DOE has stated itself (again, previously posted) is cheap cleanup and cheap reponses to nuclear disaster and terror attacks. (DOE’s own words).

IF US DOE CAN OVERTURN MULLER 1927, THEY LEAVE PAULING, LEWIS AND MAJOR ASPECTS OF GOFMAN WITHOUT APPARENT FOUNDATION. MODEN IN FIELD AND IN LAB FINDINGS HOWEVER CONTRADICT THE PROCLAIMATIONS OF THE HORMESIS AND ADAPTIVE RESPONSE SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT, WHETHER THEY ORIGINATE IN DOE, IRAN, BRAZIL OR WHITEHALL. BEWARE OF SINGLE CELL STUDIES. IT IS THE ORGANISM’S SURVIVAL AND GENETIC FIDELITY WHICH COUNTS. THERE IS A DECEPTION IN MANY SINGLE CELL STUDIES.

ONE POTENTIAL EFFECT OF A CONTAMINATED ENVIRONMENT IS MUTANT VIRUS AND BACTERIA AND NOONE HAS TACKLED THAT ONE YET.

NOTE THAT DOE IS USING GENETICS EXPERTS IN ITS PROPAGANDA.

From my perspective the recent post in the forum regarding the finding of deformed insects some distance from Fukushima is one of the most important. It has profound implications in the war of truth being waged today in Japan.

8 Responses to “My View of the US Department of Energy Low Dose Research Project”

  1. Reference lists for exposing radiation hormesis and quack radiation “science” « nuclear-news Says:

    […] https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2011/09/12/my-view-of-the-us-department-of-energy-low-dose-resea… […]

  2. Reference list on ‘radiation hormesis’ and ‘adaptive radiation’ « nuclear-news.info Says:

    […] https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2011/09/12/my-view-of-the-us-department-of-energy-low-dose-resea… […]

  3. Wendy Says:

    Hi Paul,

    Fri 13 April 2012 Pam Sykes is presenting ‘The benefits of low dose radiation and the hazards of the media’ Are you in Adelaide and can you or someone you suggest attend this to counter the arguments.

    Also Barry Brooks pro nuke view was given to Rotarians by Ben Heard 2 weeks ago at Glenelg. I havent heard of public meetings on any other points of view.

    Cheers,
    Wendy Loneragan

  4. Wendy Says:

    The Pam Sykes talk is at Flinders Uni, Noel stockdale room 3.30 pm
    Wendy

  5. nuclearhistory Says:

    Ok Ill gonna run off some papers which contradict her position etc and have them as a handout. And leave em around Flinders and in the room,. I might crack up before question time and get thrown out.

    She’s gonna present this in terms of cancer therapy and then apply it to contaminated land – her alleged health benefit of nuclear pollution.

    It aint going to easy.

  6. nuclearhistory Says:

    It is my opinion, based on the evidence I have previously found and presented, that the dealiberate presentation of possible medical applications of a “conditioning dose” (adaptive response) with the cult of radiation hormesis, as I believe US DOE contractors do, both here and in the US, is deceptive and dishonest. This is my opinion.

    A conditioning dose has not yet produced the supplementary medical treatment Sykes et al have promised since 2001. The stated aim is to provide a highly defined external dose of Low LET low dose radiation to prime the body’s defences in the context of high treatment dose radiation dose (as in cancer treatment).

    To propose nuclear pollution and contamination is a health benefit (as proponents of hormesis do) on the basis of “adaptive response” is in my view, if Sykes gets her way re nuclear pollution from nuclear industry (ie not cleaning up contaminated sites, and the contamination of clean environments is medically unethical, as I am not her patient and I do not give my informed consent for her to apply her medicine to me, my biosphere and my land. water air and food.

    Hormesis and adaptive are not to be confused. Even before announcing her promised medical treatment, Sykes advocates the non evacuation of people from hot zones in nuclear disaster areas.

    This is not medicine, it is nuclear industry social engineering.

  7. Anon Says:

    This is not medicine, it is nuclear industry social engineering.

    Neither. It’s genocide.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: