Remedy for radiation fear - discard the politicized science

Low-Dose Radiotherapy for Patients with Pneumonia Due to COVID-19: A Single-Institution Prospective Study

Purpose: Results of the low-dose radiation therapy (LDRT) in patients with pneumonia due to COVID-19 has been presented. Methods: Fifteen patients received a single-fraction radiation dose of 1 Gy to the bilateral lungs due to pre-ARDS pneumonia in the course of COVID-19. Follow-up was performed on days 1, 3, 5, 7, 14 after LDRT. Results: Eleven patients (73%) were released up until day 28. Median hospitalization was 20 days; 28-day mortality was 13%. Median O2 saturation improved within 24 h after LDRT in 14/15, with median SpO2 values of 84.5% vs. 87.5% p = 0.016, respectively. At day 14 of hospitalization, 46% did not require oxygen supplementation. Significant decline in CRP and IL-6 was observed within 24 h post LDRT. No organ toxicities were noted. Conclusion: LDRT is feasible, well tolerated and may translate to early clinical recovery in patients with severe pneumonia. Further studies are needed to determine optimal candidate, time and dose of LDRT for COVID-19 patients with pneumonia.

The Threshold Effects of Low-Dose-Rate Radiation on miRNA-Mediated Neurodevelopment of Zebrafish

The biological effects and regulatory mechanisms of low-dose and low-dose-rate radiation are still rather controversial. Therefore, in this study we investigated the effects of low-dose-rate radiation on zebrafish neurodevelopment and the role of miRNAs in radiation-induced neurodevelopment. Zebrafish embryos received prolonged gamma-ray irradiation (0 mGy/h, 0.1 mGy/h, 0.2 mGy/h, 0.4 mGy/h) during development. Neurodevelopmental indicators included mortality, malformation rate, swimming speed, as well as the morphology changes of the lateral line system and brain tissue. Additionally, spatiotemporal expression of development-related miRNAs (dre-miR-196a-5p, dre-miR-210-3p, dre-miR-338) and miRNA processing enzymes genes (Dicer and Drosha) were assessed by qRT-PCR and whole mount in situ hybridization (WISH). The results revealed a decline in mortality, malformation and swimming speed, with normal histological and morphological appearance, in zebrafish that received 0.1 mGy/h; however, increased mortality, malformation and swimming speed were observed, with pathological changes, in zebrafish that received 0.2 mGy/h and 0.4 mGy/h. The expression of miRNA processing enzyme genes was altered after irradiation, and miRNAs expression was downregulated in the 0.1 mGy/h group, and upregulated in the 0.2 mGy/h and 0.4 mGy/h groups. Furthermore, ectopic expression of dre-miR-210-3p, Dicer and Drosha was also observed in the 0.4 mGy/h group. In conclusion, the effect of low-dose and low-dose-rate radiation on neurodevelopment follows the threshold model, under the regulation of miRNAs, excitatory effects occurred at a dose rate of 0.1 mGy/h and toxic effects occurred at a dose rate of 0.2 mGy/h and 0.4 mGy/h.

Radiophobia Overreaction: College of Chiropractors of British Columbia Revoke Full X-Ray Rights Based on Flawed Study and Radiation Fear-Mongering

Fears over radiation have created irrational pressures to dissuade radiography use within chiropractic. Recently, the regulatory body for chiropractors practicing in British Columbia, Canada, the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia (CCBC), contracted Pierre Côté to review the clinical use of X-rays within the chiropractic profession. A "rapid review" was performed and published quickly and included only 9 papers, the most recent dating from 2005; they concluded, "Given the inherent risks of radiation, we recommend that chiropractors do not use radiographs for the routine and repeat evaluation of the structure and function of the spine." The CCBC then launched an immediate review of the use of X-rays by chiropractors in their jurisdiction. Member and public opinion were gathered but not presented to their members. On February 4, 2021, the College announced amendments to their Professional Conduct Handbook that revoked X-ray rights for routine/repeat assessment and management of patients with spine disorders. Here, we highlight current and historical evidence that substantiates that X-rays are not a public health threat. We also point out critical and insurmountable flaws in the single paper used to support irrational and unscientific policy that discriminates against chiropractors who practice certain forms of evidence-based X-ray-guided methods.

LNT and cancer risk assessment: Its flawed foundations part 1: Radiation and leukemia: Where LNT began

This paper evaluates the scientific basis for the adoption of the linear non-threshold (LNT) dose response model for radiation-induced leukemia. This LNT risk assessment application for leukemia is significant because it: (1) was generalized for all tumor types induced by ionizing radiation and chemical carcinogens at relatively high doses and; (2) it was based on the mechanistic assumption of low dose linearity for somatic cell mutations as determined from responses in mature spermatozoa of fruit flies. A serious problem with the latter assumption is that those spermatozoa lack DNA repair. The acceptance of the LNT dose response model for cancer risk assessment was based on the convergence of recommendations of the BEAR I Genetics Panel (1956a) for reproductive cell gene mutations and those of Lewis (1957a) for somatic cell mutation and its capacity to explain apparent and/or predicted linear dose responses of ionizing radiation-induced leukemia in multiple and diverse epidemiological investigations. Use of that model and related dose response beliefs achieved rapid, widespread and enduring acceptance in the scientific and regulatory communities. They provide the key historical foundation for the sustained LNT-based policy for cancer risk assessment to the present. While previous papers in this series have challenged key scientific assessments and ethical foundations of the BEAR I Genetics Panel, the present paper provides evidence that Lewis: 1) incorrectly interpreted the fundamental scientific studies used to support the LNT conclusion even though such studies show consistent hormetic-J-shaped dose response relationships for leukemia in Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors; and, 2) demonstrated widespread bias in support of an LNT conclusion and related policies, which kept him from making an objective and fair assessment. The LNT recommendation appears to have been uncritically accepted and integrated into scientific and regulatory practice in large part because it inappropriately appealed to existing authority and it garnered the support of those who were willing to risk greatly exaggerating the public's fears of environmentally-induced disease, such as enhanced risk of leukemia, with the goal of stopping the atmospheric testing of atomic bombs. Adoption of the LNT recommendation demonstrated extensive penetration of ideological influence affecting governmental, scientific and regulatory evaluation at the highest levels in the United States. This paper demonstrates that the scientific foundations for cancer risk assessment were inappropriately and inaccurately assessed, unethically adopted and require significant historical, scientific and regulatory remediation.

Radiophobic Fear-Mongering, Misappropriation of Medical References and Dismissing Relevant Data Forms the False Stance for Advocating Against the Use of Routine and Repeat Radiography in Chiropractic and Manual Therapy

There is a faction within the chiropractic profession passionately advocating against the routine use of X-rays in the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with spinal disorders (aka subluxation). These activists reiterate common false statements such as "there is no evidence" for biomechanical spine assessment by X-ray, "there are no guidelines" supporting routine imaging, and also promulgate the reiterating narrative that "X-rays are dangerous." These arguments come in the form of recycled allopathic "red flag only" medical guidelines for spine care, opinion pieces and consensus statements. Herein, we review these common arguments and present compelling data refuting such claims. It quickly becomes evident that these statements are false. They are based on cherry-picked medical references and, most importantly, expansive evidence against this narrative continues to be ignored. Factually, there is considerable evidential support for routine use of radiological imaging in chiropractic and manual therapies for 3 main purposes: 1. To assess spinopelvic biomechanical parameters; 2. To screen for relative and absolute contraindications; 3. To reassess a patient's progress from some forms of spine altering treatments. Finally, and most importantly, we summarize why the long-held notion of carcinogenicity from X-rays is not a valid argument.

Are Continued Efforts to Reduce Radiation Exposures from X-Rays Warranted?

There are pressures to avoid use of radiological imaging throughout all healthcare due to the notion that all radiation is carcinogenic. This perception stems from the long-standing use of the linear no-threshold (LNT) assumption of risk associated with radiation exposures. This societal perception has led to relentless efforts to avoid and reduce radiation exposures to patients at great costs. Many radiation reduction campaigns have been launched to dissuade doctors from using radiation imaging. Lower-dose imaging techniques and practices are being advocated. Alternate imaging procedures are encouraged. Are these efforts warranted? Based on recent evidence, LNT ideology is shown to be defunct for risk assessment at low-dose exposure ranges which includes X-rays and CT scans. In fact, the best evidence that was once used to support LNT ideology, including the Life Span Study data, now indicates thresholds for cancer induction are high; therefore, low-dose X-rays cannot cause harm. Current practices are safe as exposures currently encountered are orders of magnitude below threshold levels shown to be harmful. As long as imaging is medically warranted, it is shown that efforts to reduce exposures that are within background radiation levels and that are also shown to enhance health by upregulating natural adaptive protection systems are definitively wasted resources.

The LNT Issue Is About Politics and Economics, Not Safety

The Sykes commentary advocates “a more sensible, graded approach for protection from low dose ionizing radiation” until the LNT dose-response issue is resolved. It urges scientists to stop criticizing the LNT model that links radiation to a risk of cancer and accept regulatory use of the threshold model to “protect” people, but with higher limits. It fails to mention the 120-year history of successful low-dose treatments of a wide variety of serious diseases, including cancers. The commentary ignores published evidence of a threshold at 1.1 Gy for radiogenic leukemia and a dose-rate threshold at about 0.6 Gy per year for lifespan shortening. LNT came from politicized science, replete with scientific misconduct and conflict of interest. Its acceptance created a false cancer scare that was likely intended to stop atomic bomb testing, but it has severely damaged human welfare. Many vitally important low-dose therapies were discarded when the radiation scare was disseminated in 1956. The rapid growth of nuclear energy ended with the media-inflamed public panic after the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. Extreme implementation of the precautionary principle made it uneconomic. Availability of a low-dose therapy for lung inflammation could have dramatically decreased the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Immunomodulation Through Low-Dose Radiation for Severe COVID-19: Lessons From the Past and New Developments

Low-dose radiation therapy (LD-RT) has historically been a successful treatment for pneumonia and is clinically established as an immunomodulating therapy for inflammatory diseases. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has elicited renewed scientific interest in LD-RT and multiple small clinical trials have recently corroborated the historical LD-RT findings and demonstrated preliminary efficacy and immunomodulation for the treatment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The present review explicates archival medical research data of LD-RT and attempts to translate this into modernized evidence, relevant for the COVID-19 crisis. Additionally, we explore the putative mechanisms of LD-RT immunomodulation, revealing specific downregulation of proinflammatory cytokines that are integral to the development of the COVID-19 cytokine storm induced hyperinflammatory state. Radiation exposure in LD-RT is minimal compared to radiotherapy dosing standards in oncology care and direct toxicity and long-term risk for secondary disease are expected to be low. The recent clinical trials investigating LD-RT for COVID-19 confirm initial treatment safety. Based on our findings we conclude that LD-RT could be an important treatment option for COVID-19 patients that are likely to progress to severity. We advocate the further use of LD-RT in carefully monitored experimental environments to validate its effectiveness, risks and mechanisms of LD-RT.

Diagnostic imaging in pregnancy: Making informed decisions

The use of diagnostic imaging involving ionising radiation may be necessary in pregnancy and requires an assessment of the most appropriate and safest imaging modality which will provide the necessary information balanced with the potential risks to the mother and fetus. In most cases, this will involve a potential fetal radiation dose well below 50 mGy. At these doses, there is no risk of lethality, genetic damage/epigenetic change, teratogenicity, growth impairment or sterility. Older epidemiological data indicating a potential increased cancer risk have been contradicted by newer data and better understanding of the biology of low dose radiation. The linear no-threshold rule has been challenged by many and more realistic estimates of oncogenicity risk along with the potential risks of contrast agents are summarised in this review. Imaging in the pregnant population is increasing in both the number of examinations performed and the number of patients being imaged, with the greatest increase being computed tomography scans. Counselling and obtaining informed consent for imaging that involves radiation requires the clinician to communicate with the woman and her family a realistic estimate of the potential radiation dose to herself and her fetus, to describe and quantitate the risks of this estimated dose, to outline the benefits of the imaging procedure and to respond to any questions or concerns. As almost all diagnostic imaging involves doses below the 50 mGy threshold, clinically indicated investigations should not be withheld during pregnancy. All allied staff must also be well informed to ensure the patient receives a consistent message about the risks and benefits of the proposed test.

The Scoliosis Quandary: Are Radiation Exposures From Repeated X-Rays Harmful?

X-rays have been the gold standard for diagnosis, evaluation, and management of spinal scoliosis for decades as other assessment methods are indirect, too expensive, or not practical in practice. The average scoliosis patient will receive 10 to 25 spinal X-rays over several years equating to a maximum estimated dose of 10 to 25 mGy. Some patients, those getting diagnosed at a younger age and receiving early and ongoing treatments, may receive up to 40 to 50 X-rays, approaching at most 50 mGy. There are concerns that repeated radiographs given to patients are carcinogenic. Some studies have used the linear no-threshold model to derive cancer-risk estimates; however, it is invalid for low-dose irradiation (ie, X-rays); these estimates are untrue. Other studies have calculated cancer-risk ratios from long-term health data of historic scoliosis cohorts. Since data indicate reduced cancer rates in a cohort receiving a total radiation dose between 50 and 300 mGy, it is unlikely that scoliosis patients would get cancer from repeated X-rays. Moreover, since the threshold for leukemia is about 1100 mGy, scoliosis patients will not likely develop cancers from spinal X-rays. Scoliosis patients likely have long-term health consequences, including cancers, from the actual disease entity itself and not from protracted X-ray radiation exposures that are essential and indeed safe.

Evidence of a Dose-Rate Threshold for Life Span Reduction of Dogs Exposed Lifelong to γ-Radiation

Our return to a study on dogs exposed lifelong to cobalt-60 γ-radiation was prompted by a comment that data in dog studies have large statistical errors due to the small number of dogs. We located an earlier article on the same study that had a better mortality curve for the dogs in each dose-rate group. The median life span of the dogs in each group was tabulated, and the standard error of each was calculated. No statistically significant shortening of median life span was observed for the lowest dose-rate group at any reasonable significance level (P value: .005-.05), whereas for dogs with higher irradiation rates, life span shortening was statistically significant at highest reasonable significance level (P value: .005). The results were entered on a graph of life span versus dose rate, assuming a threshold dose–response model. The fitted line indicates that the dose-rate threshold for γ-radiation induced life span reduction is about 600 mGy per year, which is close to the value we found previously. Making allowance for the calculated standard errors, we conclude that this threshold is in the range from 300 to 1100 mGy per year. This evidence is relevant for emergency measures actions (evacuation of residents) and for nuclear waste management.

Evidence of a Dose Threshold for Radiation-Induced Leukemia

In 1958, Neil Wald presented data on the incidence of leukemia among the Hiroshima atomic bomb survivors. These data, which suggested a dose-response threshold for radiation-induced leukemia, were included in the first UNSCEAR report (1958). However, this evidence of a threshold was not recognized. It was obfuscated and concealed. In 2010, Zbigniew Jaworowski identified these data as evidence of radiation hormesis. A letter to the editor in 2014 and 2 articles in 2014 and 2015 presented a graph of these UNSCEAR 1958 data, which revealed a threshold at about 500 mSv. Since the blood-forming stem cells of bone marrow are more radiosensitive than most other cell types, it is reasonable to expect thresholds for inducing other types of cancer by ionizing radiation-their thresholds are likely higher than 500 mSv. A careful examination of the Wald data reveals the suprisingly low incidence of radiogenic leukemia, only 0.5% of the survivors who were in the high radiation zone. Many articles on radiation risk have been published since 2015 by other authors, but none makes reference to this evidence of a threshold, either to challenge or endorse it. In this commentary, the author addresses the comments from a colleague.

Cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of 131 I and 60 Co in follicular thyroid cancer cell (WRO) with and without recombinant human thyroid-stimulating hormone treatment

Normally, differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) tends to be biologically indolent, highly curable and has an excellent prognosis. However, the treatment may fail when the cancer has lost radioiodine avidity. The present study was carried out in order to evaluate the cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of ¹³¹ I and ⁶⁰ Co and radioiodine uptake in WRO cells, derived from DTC, harboring the BRAF^V600E mutation. WRO cells showed a relatively slow cell cycle of 96.3 h with an unstable karyotype containing various double minutes. The genotoxicity assay (micronucleus test) showed a relative high radioresistance to ¹³¹ I (0.07-3.70 MBq/mL), independent of treatment with recombinant human thyroid-stimulating hormone (rhTSH). For the cytotoxicity assay, WRO cells were also relatively resistant to ⁶⁰ Co (range: 0.2-8.3 Gy), but with a gradual decrease of viability as a function of time for higher doses (20 and 40 Gy, starting from the fifth to sixth day). For internal irradiation with ¹³¹ I, WRO cells showed a decline in viability at radioactive concentration higher than 1.85 MBq/mL; this was even more effective at 3.70 MBq/mL, but only when preceded by rhTSH, in coincidence with the highest level of ¹³¹ I uptake. These data show promising results, since the loss of the ability of thyroid cells to concentrate radioiodine is considered to be one of the main factors responsible for the failure of ¹³¹ I therapy in patients with DTC. The use of tumor-derived cell lines as a model for in vivo tumor requires, however, further investigations and deep evaluation of the corresponding in vivo effects. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 58:451-461, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Evidence That Lifelong Low Dose Rates of Ionizing Radiation Increase Lifespan in Long- and Short-Lived Dogs

After the 1956 radiation scare to stop weapons testing, studies focused on cancer induction by low-level radiation. Concern has shifted to protecting "radiation-sensitive individuals." Since longevity is a measure of health impact, this analysis reexamined data to compare the effect of dose rate on the lifespans of short-lived (5% and 10% mortality) dogs and on the lifespans of dogs at 50% mortality. The data came from 2 large-scale studies. One exposed 10 groups to different γ dose rates; the other exposed 8 groups to different lung burdens of plutonium. Reexamination indicated that normalized lifespans increased more for short-lived dogs than for average dogs, when radiation was moderately above background. This was apparent by interpolating between the lifespans of nonirradiated dogs and exposed dogs. The optimum lifespan increase appeared at 50 mGy/y. The threshold for harm (decreased lifespan) was 700 mGy/y for 50% mortality dogs and 1100 mGy/y for short-lived dogs. For inhaled α-emitting particulates, longevity was remarkably increased for short-lived dogs below the threshold for harm. Short-lived dogs seem more radiosensitive than average dogs and they benefit more from low radiation. If dogs model humans, this evidence would support a change to radiation protection policy. Maintaining exposures "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) appears questionable.

Treatment of Alzheimer Disease With CT Scans: A Case Report

Alzheimer disease (AD) primarily affects older adults. This neurodegenerative disorder is the most common cause of dementia and is a leading source of their morbidity and mortality. Patient care costs in the United States are about 200 billion dollars and will more than double by 2040. This case report describes the remarkable improvement in a patient with advanced AD in hospice who received 5 computed tomography scans of the brain, about 40 mGy each, over a period of 3 months. The mechanism appears to be radiation-induced upregulation of the patient's adaptive protection systems against AD, which partially restored cognition, memory, speech, movement, and appetite.

Hormetic use of stress in gerontological interventions requires a cautious approach

Hormesis as a general principle is conceivable only for factors that are present in the natural environment. For such factors, existence of an optimal level can be assumed, which would correspond to the current environmental level or some average of historic levels. Theoretic basis of some hormetic mechanisms has been discussed within the scope of stress response pathways. Impacts of multiple stressing agents may produce combined effects larger than those expected from isolated impacts i.e. act synergistically. Adding the effect of a damaging stress to another damaging stress would possibly augment the damage; but if two mild stresses have positive hormetic effects, their combination can have additive positive effects. Potential adverse effects of excessive doses of hormetic agents should be pointed out particularly for senile age or a state close to decompensation when minor stimuli might be damaging. In conclusion, a hormetic use of stress in gerontological interventions requires a cautious approach.

Craniocervical chiropractic procedures - a précis of upper cervical chiropractic

Presented here is a narrative review of upper cervical procedures intended to facilitate understanding and to increase knowledge of upper cervical chiropractic care. Safety, efficacy, common misconceptions, and research are discussed, allowing practitioners, chiropractic students, and the general public to make informed decisions regarding utilization and referrals for this distinctive type of chiropractic care. Upper cervical techniques share the same theoretical paradigm in that the primary subluxation exists in the upper cervical spine. These procedures use similar assessments to determine if spinal intervention is necessary and successful once delivered. The major difference involves their use of either an articular or orthogonal radiograph analysis model when determining the presence of a misalignment. Adverse events following an upper cervical adjustment consist of mild symptomatic reactions of short-duration (< 24-hours). Due to a lack of quality and indexed references, information contained herein is limited by the significance of literature cited, which included non-indexed and/or non-peer reviewed sources.

Commentary on Inhaled (239)PUO2 in Dogs - A Prophylaxis Against Lung Cancer?

Several studies on the effect of inhaled plutonium-dioxide particulates and the incidence of lung tumors in dogs reveal beneficial effects when the cumulative alpha-radiation dose is low. There is a threshold at an exposure level of about 100 cGy for excess tumor incidence and reduced lifespan. The observations conform to the expectations of the radiation hormesis dose-response model and contradict the predictions of the LNT hypothesis. These studies suggest investigating the possibility of employing low-dose alpha-radiation, such as from ²³⁹PuO₂ inhalation, as a prophylaxis against lung cancer.