• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • Welcome to the discussion on all things nuclear
  • This site is updated daily.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Radiation Cellular Impacts
#1
Copied over from Fukushima observations, post by Horse:

Comments from the first page of the latest ENENews post.
http://enenews.com/hidden-fukushima-nucl...xpected-th

Quote: Wrote:stock
October 6, 2017 at 9:15 pm • Reply
Japan USGS Earthquakes

http://www.nukepro.net/2017/10/earthquak...y-not.html

Compare the maps, these earthquakes are targeting Fukushima. The 2011 monster EQ started with a bunch of earthquakes, a "Swarm" with the notable one being three 6's and a 7.

Quote: Wrote:Horse
October 6, 2017 at 10:50 pm • Reply
Swarms of EQ's aimed at Fuku should be a warning to Japan that starting up two more nuke plants is not the right direction to go and slowing the 'decommissioning' of Dai-ichi risks worsening the global disaster of radiation contamination. Gambling in an earthquake zone, Japan has lost and is taking the rest of the world down with it.

Earthquakes just happen and prediction is just guess work.  The scary part is seeing more spark activity after 6+ earthquakes.  Don't forget Majia sees signs of emissions after large quakes.  I'm afraid anything over 7 could cause serious problems.  

Wanted to add this too, Code Shutdown makes a strong case for radiation damage to cellular communications causing more disruption than just accounting for damage to a cell or two.  

Quote: Wrote:CodeShutdown
October 5, 2017 at 11:31 pm • Reply
I think its key to realize that just adding free radical de activators is not the be all and end all of why herbs and vit c and stuff can combat cancer from low level radiation. Gerson found that the cell voltage had to be high to combat cancer…but later research found that the intercellular communication that relies on the ion channels, the bioelectric fields has a primary role. Cancer isnt a single cell disease. Low level radiation is not a DNA double strand break problem for the most part. Added free radical load has an effect but what it is EXACTLY? It is the cascade of effects, resulting in a breakdown of intercellular communications which ultimately leads to a metasticized cancer.

The fact that chitin and other endogenous material have this ion exchange property that bioaccumulates radiation of high specific activity seems like a VERY good line of research.

You see, the high specific activity shouldnt come into play if the cesium is evenly distributed at the atomic level (not totally true, but for the point). One atom out of six million. But if the cesium accumulates into hot regions of fungi, or amino acid neurotransmitters, or parasites, then the inter-cellular communication system is disrupted. Kill the parasites, the fungi (not very easy!!), get the heavy metals out, fortify the body with its required nutrition and low level radiation will not have the cancerous effect

There's more but I'll summarize.

Quote: Wrote:Horse
October 6, 2017 at 5:32 am
Thanks CS, K-40 is incorporated into cellular communication where CS-137 disrupts cellular communication; thus a 5000 to 1 toxicity of Cesium to Potassium. Additionally, micro-organisms are concentrating the amount of CS-137 we take internally to get close enough to disrupt cellular communications.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
Pia
Jitsi chat: enfo.pia@gmail.com
 
Reply
#2
Thanks Pia, CodeShutdown has researched how ionizing radiation affects biological processes using published research.  Code's postulation that ionizing radiation disrupts the ion channels that cells use to communicate goes a long way to explaining the vast amount of damage a radioactive element can do to the body and examines a contamination pathway that I hadn't thought of.  Code's stuff is scattered throughout ENENews and needs a better write up to get people to quit staring at one spot and look at the whole picture.  We see biological systems being affected by ionizing radiation but somehow all of it is declared safe for man by mainstream science sources.  The medical use of radio-isotopes bothers me a bit but they were selected for minimal impact whereas other radio-isotopes should never be taken internally because the body readily stores some of the bad ones like cesium and strontium and plutonium.  It's the bad ones that are released in bombs and by nuclear reactor accidents.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#3
More from CodeShutdown and a link to page one of the thread,
http://enenews.com/hidden-fukushima-nucl...1#comments
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 5, 2017 at 11:48 pm
I should say, one radioactive cesium atom out of six million radioactive potassium atoms in the cell…which has some 37 trillion atoms…how much harm can it do? As it turns out, this has been epidemiologically and even lab tested to have an effect. A very tiny shooter, put one radioactive decay into a cell and a systemic cellular response was observed. Moreover, if you take a cell that has been 'hit' by a track of fallout decay, and just take some of the fluid that the cell was in and transfer it to the fluid bathing other cells, there will be an effect. The other cells, untouched by radiation, may decide to commit suicide, so drastic is the communication note held in that fluid
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 6, 2017 at 12:27 am
'Overall, several studies challenge the traditional paradigm that the important biological effects of ionizing radiation are due to DNA damage induced as a result of direct interaction of the radiation track with the cell nucleus. They indicate that irradiated and non-irradiated cells interact, and oxidative metabolism and intercellular communication have an essential role in signaling events leading to radiation-induced bystander effects.'
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/art...0715000333
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 5, 2017 at 7:49 pm · Reply
parasites have been found to be associated with cancer. Allopathy recognizes a few, but outliers like Hulda Clark and Simoncini see parasites or fungi as primary to most cancer. Many of these are chitin based organisms. Cancer is a multicellular breakdown in cell communication. That one atom per cell of cesium takes on a new dimension if it is all bioaccumulated in parasites or fungi. I have been wondering about this for some time…specifically the hot spots of internal cesium. They arent 'supposed' to be there. Chitinous microorganisms present a possible confluence of causation in cancer. Consider that cancer was relatively rare before the nuclear era. Parasites were causing illnesses of all kinds throughout history. Heres the point; the cellular communication, and of particular interest, the bioelectric field may be 'short circuited' by the combined action of fungi, parasites and their bioaccumulated hot spots of radiation

Ingrid Naimans article…one of many…on parasites, herbs and cancer. She is starting a clinic in Equador
http://www.cancerchecklist.com/purificat...blems.html
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 5, 2017 at 10:47 pm · Reply
Dr Clark was all about black walnut and clove. Later she added electronic frequency therapy. Simoncini was right that the cancer science does not know the answer, even though they know 1000 and 1 things about genetics and cancer promoters.

About six or so things are required for cancer…but they all relate to the essential health, integrity and communication of the cells. A healthy diet, exercise, a peaceful mind, herbs…these all over-ride, to a large extent, the 'stochastic' nature of low level radiation.

Only by seeing radiation and the cell in a new way can science over turn the failed ICRP model and the reality of epidemiology of nuclear accidents become accepted, thereby ending the stronghold of the nuclear industry. As it stand, the failed economics of nuclear is our only hope. Its shameful…
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 5, 2017 at 11:11 pm
stock, I think my points here are good. Chitin, fungus, parasites, rise in cancer since the nuclear age, cell communication, and its disruption through bioelectric ion corruption by bioconcentrated fallout containing parasites. It fits together like a big jigsaw puzzle. It has science behind it. Just think of it this way; they USE these fungi or chitin organisms to sop up radionuclides in the industry because they are so good at it. Moreover, many of them (melanized ones) THRIVE off thatshit and actively seek it out. Now, at the same time we have sound clinical evidence that getting rid of those buggers and restoring the cell to health can cure cancer. The evidence that the two are related is de facto; parasites and fungi have been wreaking havoc since forever, but cancer is on the rise since the nuclear era and Chernobyl showed that low levels kill. Ion exchange is a key factor. Amino acids can act as ion exchange material also. The combination of pathogens, fungi and radiation goes a long way to explain the situation. Autoradiographs show INTERNAL hot spots of cesium….how do they get there? The body does not allow anything bigger than some molecules to pass, not hot particles…I would think Our digestive sieve is very very fine!!
Quote:stock, while youre at it, grab the rest of my thread which is here
http://enenews.com/forum-off-topic-discu...69#respond

did you see the amazing cell communication take over of the ant zombie fungus?
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 9, 2017 at 6:10 pm
chitin containing fungus might be a factor in the evolution of cancer from low level nuclear fallout. Thats just a hypothesis but based on the clinical observation of fungus involvement in cancer, the bioconcentration effect of chitin and the emerging view of cancer as a product of over all poor health, and disruption in the cell communication

proper nutrition and healthy lifestyle have been shown to ameliorate nuclear fallout to some extent (chernobyl studies), which is in contrast to the 'random DNA bullet theory' of mainstream dosimetry.

niacin is anti fungal
http://www.knowthecause.com/index.php/co...gal-niacin

niacin is the most potent available lipid therapy to increase high-density lipoprotein
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22037771

Role of Nicotinamide in DNA Damage, Mutagenesis, and DNA Repair
https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jna/2010/157591/
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 9, 2017 at 6:38 pm
Nicotinamide mononucleotide ("NMN" ) is a nucleotide derived from ribose and nicotinamide.

In studies on mice, NMN has shown to reverse age-related arterial dysfunction by decreasing oxidative stress. A long-term study indicates that NMN can slow down the physiologic decline in ageing mice. As a result, the older mice in the study have metabolism and energy levels resembling those of younger mice, with extended life spans.

Chitin, a key factor in immune regulation: lesson from infection with fungi and chitin bearing parasites.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26204004

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18635953/
Finding an "Achilles' heel" of cancer: the role of glucose and glutamine metabolism in the survival of transformed cells.

cancer is a metabolic disease. the ketogenic diet
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3941741/
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 5, 2017 at 10:39 pm · Reply
if cancer was a thing of pure random chance, the one DNA stand that didnt make it and spun out of control, as the science of radiobiology asserts, then your chances of getting cancer would not depend on your over all health, your immune system, diet and exercise. But this is not the case.

The new science of radiation physics will realize that the cell wall plays an important role, not just the nucleus. Simoncini was right about genetics…they arent 'written in stone', they are expressed depending on extracellular and intracellular communication. The cell wall is key because of the ion channels, the proteins and the extracellular matrix which extend the function of the cell to act in synch with the rest of the body. You are one animal, and so the cells have to act as one. The cell is not a jumble of tinker toys, its a functional unity…a little animal as it were.

Cancer isnt a genetic disease, its not a singular cell gone wrong, its a problem of cellular communication and cellular health over many cells.

The banana equivalence 'lie' is actually very complicated. The lie is that all ionizing radiation fits into one category of bodily influence. Simple observation shows this is not correct. A dose of radiation from one type of radionuclide can cause systemic ill health, while a larger dose of radiation from another radionuclide can be benign, even healthy

Our radioactive ocean, our radioactive body. The danger is not in the dose, the danger is in the…
Quote:CodeShutdown
October 6, 2017 at 3:43 am · Reply
see these six fundamental things required for tumorigenisis

https://www.nature.com/scitable/content/...esis-38276

Cell communications is at the base of all of them. It invalidates the ICRP idea that radiation results in a certain mathematical probability for a cell to mutate to cancer.

Lets be clear; nobody knows for sure why low level nuclear fallout causes cancer. Cancer is still the big mystery for science. A new paradigm is emerging; it involves the cell surface and communication factors, ROS as well as cytoplasm and nucleus. Im adding the clinical observations of people like Simoncini and the fungal connection

This is how we are trying to grasp the fundamental difference in toxicity of different radioisotopes, which are so far off those given by scientific extrapolation from the Hiroshima bomb survivors
Horse
October 6, 2017 at 6:18 am
Yes, agree Code, disrupting cellular communications can do far more damage than a damaged cell or two. The ICRP model was argued by the ECRR with evidence and still the nukers cling to the flawed model. I have thought that the ECRR didn't go far enough and you postulate a good mechanism for even greater concern. Keep up the great work Code and I'll try to keep up.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#4
CodeShutdown
October 12, 2017 at 3:14 pm · Reply
Horse, add this link, as it goes into some depth explaining all the background of what Ive been trying to mention about how the ICRP model is flawed at the basis of cancer etiology, the multi cellular communications as the new paradigm.

'Cell-cell communication is crucial for morphogenesis, cell differentiation, homeostasis, cell growth, and cell-cell interaction. McCrea described cell-cell communication as “the music that the nucleus hears” and, when dissonant, aberrant cell-cell communications may damage the health of the organism. “Biological processes as well as cell-cell communication and signaling are themselves a multidimensional musical opera in different acts, which are played differently by different symphony orchestras rather than by a soloist.

Mutations are most likely later events, or epiphenomena, in a multistep sequence of events through which the majority of cancers originate [2]. An understanding of cell-cell communication is important to understanding these sequential events that lead to a cancer.

Cell-Cell Communication in the Tumor Microenvironment, Carcinogenesis, and Anticancer Treatment
https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/362978
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#5
OK Code, I read thru that paper, skimming the biology, I did follow the bio-electric field parts.  The electronics tech in me says - they're just getting around to the bio-electric field?  Electronic circuits are destroyed by ionizing radiation, bio-electric circuits would fry too.  

Quote:The orchestration of cell-cell communication during carcinogenesis is not well understood as it encompasses different feedback loops and both activating and inhibiting paths of different forms of communication, as well as a fine-tuning mechanism and disarrangement. “Even the composition of the music, which is needed before it can be played, is not well understood” [2].

Can't play at all with a broken instrument or one so badly out of tune it throws off the instruments around it.

Quote:As our knowledge increases, we may find that bioelectrical networks take a fundamental role in triggering diseases such as cancer. In terms of the recently proposed, new hypothesis for the origin of the majority of cancers, these observations could mean that the proposed primary stimulus, defined as chemical or biological [2], may need to be expanded to include a bioelectrical one as well.

...as chemical or biological [2] or radiological

My bold, I check myself with a voltmeter and yup, I still have potential.   Smile   So not only do we have to get people to notice certain tiny, invisible, hard to measure, man-made elements but also convince them of the damage to networks barely known about.  On top of that the sneaky radionuclides concentrate and slip in with micro-organisms.  Sheesh.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#6
I’ve been a heavy smoker for over fifty years.  I started back when media promoted nicotine and smoking was socially acceptable.  Back then cancer was on the rise and we didn’t have the multitude of treatments we have now.  Anti-smokers pointed to the polonium in cigarettes as the cause of cancer.  A link was established without mentioning where the polonium was really coming from.  The nicotine plant was absorbing and concentrating atomic bomb testing fallout.  Polonium was not part of our natural background radiation until we started blowing up radioactive material and creating new radioactive elements in the process. The amount of polonium in a cigarette was so small that only the latest and greatest radiation detectors of the time could detect it.  Nobody wanted cancer and smokers went from over half the American population down to less than a quarter, yet despite this, cancer continued to increase as atoms for peace brought nuclear energy into our neighborhoods.  It’s been known for a long time that radiation causes cancer yet it hardly gets a mention by science.  Many new man-made chemicals have been found to be carcinogenic and have begun to take the fall so that increasing amounts of man-made nuclear elements in our background radiation can be ignored.  

Funny thing is the increases in cancer are now found in the non-smokers, not the smokers.  Nicotine may have beneficial properties, a topic for another time.  The cigarette story is meant to point out one thing, that one of the man-made radioactive elements, polonium, falling down to earth found a delivery system to enter the lungs and wreck havoc.  

CodeShutdown has presented research on how radiation sources can be internalized and Stock has summarized that at NukePro.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#7
That's a great topic for people to explore and wrap around their minds - cigarettes getting such a bad rap when it's nuclear radiation (weapons and energy) that ultimately results in internal intake of of radioisotopes (through food, water, cigarettes). This study post Chernobyl on tobacco leaves (prior to processing for cigarettes) details the different isotopes found and the likely intake values by smokers:

Radioactivity of Tobacco Leaves and Radiation Dose Induced from Smoking https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2672370/

"Conclusion

The radioactivity in tobacco leaves collected from 15 different regions of Greece before cigarette production has been studied in order to find any association between the uptake of the naturally occurring primordial radionuclides and the radioisotopes of cesium of Chernobyl origin. The activities of the radioisotopes of radium, 226Ra and 228Ra in the tobacco leaves would be either through root uptake or through the fertilizers used for cultivation of tobacco plants in the fields, as the air concentrations of the radioisotopes of radium are extremely low. Lead-210 originating from air was deposited onto the tobacco leaves and trapped by the trichomes. Potassium-40 in the tobacco leaves was due to root uptake either from soils or from fertilizers. The radioisotopes of cesium, 137Cs and 134Cs, in the tobacco leaves were due to root uptake and not to deposition onto the leaf foliage as they still remained in soil four years after the Chernobyl reactor accident but were absent from the atmosphere because of the rain washout (precipitation) and gravitational settling.

In estimating the radiation dose induced from smoking, it was concluded that the annual effective dose to lungs due to inhalation for adults (smokers) averaged to 80 μSv for 226Ra, 67 μSv for 228Ra and 105 μSv for 210Pb, that is 252 μSv in total. The annual effective dose due to 137Cs of Chernobyl origin averaged to about 200 nSv, that is three orders of magnitude lower than that of the naturally occurring radionuclides. The effective dose of 252 μSv per year must be compared with the average worldwide exposure to natural radiation sources due to inhalation 1.26 mSv y−1."

Nuclear industry and colluding agencies and politicians ought be getting the same harsh and unrelenting examination and penalties that tobacco companies got, if not more so.
Pia
Jitsi chat: enfo.pia@gmail.com
 
Reply
#8
Pia, your tweet didn't link right. Its the fallout. It gets in things and messes it all up.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#9
Thanks for your notice! and, haha, great pun, that fallout did and does mess things up. fixed Smile
Pia
Jitsi chat: enfo.pia@gmail.com
 
Reply
#10
Thanks Pia, and thanks for letting me know about those Greek cigs.  I'll be sure to avoid those now.  I never cared much for molds and fungus either, but those spores are everywhere.  It becomes a problem trying to avoid radionuclides in our air, water, and food.  The things fallout gets into...I'll be filtering out radionuclides till I die.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Radiation Cellular Impacts piajensen 0 29 10-12-2017, 06:17 AM
Last Post: piajensen
  Documented Ocean Impacts piajensen 0 109 08-16-2017, 10:32 AM
Last Post: piajensen
  Rad Standards/Impacts piajensen 0 519 12-23-2016, 07:25 AM
Last Post: piajensen

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)