-
Sam, please understand I dont ascribe a darwinian explanation to the observed lack of toxicity of K-40.
CodeShutdown
This is a very intersting point; Many, maybe MOST believe that if you find K-40 or background radiation is not dangerous/ healthy/ or very little danger that you give the green light to the nuclear industry. Actually if they would only stop and consider it, the OPPOSITE is the case!
If the danger of sugar is assumed to be the same for all types, then the sugar industry would say their white stuff is no worse than honey or lactose or erythritol. It turns out erythritol is one of the only ways besides brushing and floss that STOPS cavities. A sugar that STOPS cavities, instead of causing. So the sugar industry cant say their white stuff is the same as any sugar. But you, the nuke industry and everybody else is saying one source of radiation is the same as the others, all dangerous.
This is very important; The industry, scientists and media all compare the small amount of fallout to the huge amount of K-40. See Woods Hole to confirm this. This in fact does what you fear I am doing. It lets the nuclear industry off the hook, it gives them the green light. It legally, and conceptually allows them to exist and pollute at levels far below regulation standards because nobody can believe that one radiation source could be different than another. Just because they cant BELIEVE it DOESNT mean it isnt true! Specific activity is the obvious clue but there may be many,…-
Thank you so much for your replies. I in no way want to give any justification for the
the Nuclear Industry to exist and continue this insane irradiation that is ongoing and
deadly. It surely is a conundrum this large amount of K-40 in our bodies and in the
oceans. Twisted psychopathic thinking will find a way to justify deadly man made
radiation as less harmful than this K-40. K-40 exists and definitely less harmful than
in equal doses to other nucliedes. How less harmful would be interesting to know.
If it was detrimental as you say we humans would of perished long ago. Perhaps
the bodily degradation from K-40 is so slow in its weakening effects on the immune
system and cellular matrix that it is not a significant factor in our mortality? Contra-
naturum– our organisms may have successfully adapted to k-40 due our bio energic
fields that may affect breakdown of isotopes differently…… what are the factors that
affect radio active decay of isotopes in our bodies. This could be an angle of investigation.-
SAM, new understanding of cellular biology creates an interesting picture; The potassium with its low level of K-40 creates an onion like layering of molecular thickness in alternating polarities. It conforms to the complex, dense and fractal cytoskeleton and the many proteins and structures like mitochondria. It becomes one interacting unit, as opposed to discrete blobs of stuff in a drop of water. This is the very health and life of the cell. When you puncture it with the smallest of electrodes to measure the electrolyte or whatever, it is enough to release ionic bonds and disrupt this liquid crystal coherent microcosm of man. This shows the fragility of the organized system. Even thought the ionization factor from the K-40 contributed to the free radical load, it is less than free radicals from biological function. Free radicals are REQUIRED for the health of the cell! Some researches find SECONDARY radiation of a very peculiar kind coming from the K-40; biophotons. These have been found to carry information even through quartz barriers. A report posted recently did a meta analysis of frequency effects. Some frequencies are health positive, some health negative. The beta and gamma have frequencies characteristic of different radioisotopes. This could also be a factor. The specific activity or radiation per mass is extraordinarily higher in Cs137 compared to K40. This means on a molecular level you have point sources of high ionization and voltage gradients.
-
SAM, hits to DNA are very few from K-40. The same is true for an equal amount of Cs137. Free radical damage is considered to be the primary mediator in DNA damage. But we have to realize that free radicals are part of the biological process. The deadly morbid effect of nuclear fallout have to be found in the differences, not similarities of background vs fallout.
Free Radicals in the Physiological Control of Cell Function
Wulf Dröge
Physiological Reviews Published 1 January 2002
http://physrev.physiology.org/content/82/1/47
Abstract
At high concentrations, free radicals and radical-derived, nonradical reactive species are hazardous for living organisms and damage all major cellular constituents. At moderate concentrations, however, nitric oxide (NO), superoxide anion, and related reactive oxygen species (ROS) play an important role as regulatory mediators in signaling processes. Many of the ROS-mediated responses actually protect the cells against oxidative stress and reestablish “redox homeostasis.” Higher organisms, however, have evolved the use of NO and ROS also as signaling molecules for other physiological functions. These include regulation of vascular tone, monitoring of oxygen tension in the control of ventilation and erythropoietin production, and signal transduction from membrane receptors in various physiological processes. NO and ROS are typically generated in these cases by tightly regulated enzymes such as NO synthase (NOS) and NAD(P)H oxidase…
continued…NO and ROS are typically generated in these cases by tightly regulated enzymes such as NO synthase (NOS) and NAD(P)H oxidase isoforms, respectively. In a given signaling protein, oxidative attack induces either a loss of function, a gain of function, or a switch to a different function. Excessive amounts of ROS may arise either from excessive stimulation of NAD(P)H oxidases or from less well-regulated sources such as the mitochondrial electron-transport chain. In mitochondria, ROS are generated as undesirable side products of the oxidative energy metabolism.
- You have significantly advanced my understanding on this issue.
I will download the posts, put them in a folder and call it the
Code Copernicus Conumdrum on Differential Effects of Radiation
The next step is to translate all this into a format where
it can be easily understood and slip through defensive
thought structures and help the world to comprehend what
exactly is dangerous in nuclear radiation. A huge endeavor.
I am not too optimistic as I think most people shut down on
this and passively go on living overwhelmed by all things
nuclear and willingly accept the party line that it is not that
dangerous the sea of radiation we now live in.-
Thank you Sam. The details of the biology have been posted before and not included in the above response. Some of my memes;
- "we live in a sea of radiation, the danger was insignificant until man added new radioisotopes.–Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds–"
- we live in a sea of radiation; it caused no cancer or dead zones until man made nuclear fallout. –Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds–
- "The world and our bodies have always been radioactive but only nuclear fallout has caused gargantuanism, deformity and mental retardation"
- Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of fallout, I will fear no nuclear: for thou art with me; thy rad and thy ICRP graph they have retarded me.
-----------------------------
domoic acid, if I recall correctly, is a metal transport medium and also allows algae to detoxify too much UV which is close to an ionizing level of radiation energy. Domoic acid poisoning seems to be on the rise since the nuclear era.
Another interesting possibility; phosphine oxide causes domoic acid like symptoms. Phosphine oxides are also the most effective extraction reagents for uranium. Where do they come from? The most likely source of the uranium absorber phosphine oxide naturally is reduction of phosphate in decaying organic matter. Agriculture, dead animals and fukushima could all contribute to phosphine oxide poisoning.
Phosphine is a constituent of the atmosphere at very low and highly variable concentrations. It may contribute significantly to the global phosphorus biochemical cycle. The most likely source is reduction of phosphate in decaying organic matter, The Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health level of Phosphine is 50 ppm. A convincing demonstration of the prevalence of biological phosphine production was given in 1988 when Devai, examining gases released from a sewage treatment found that 9-20% of phosphorus entering the system was converted to phosphine
boron trichoride reduces ubiquitous phosphorus to phosphine. Phosphine is used to kill insect pests. What if uranyl-borate complexes produced during the fukushima accident caused reduction of biological phosphates to phosphine, causing an uptake/ bioaccumulation of the same
-
During the Fukushima accident boric acid containing sea water was pumped into the reactor core. This created novel uranyl-boron complexes with sea water with potentially powerful redox chemistry that could convert biological phosphate to nerve gas like phosphine oxides, which itself absorbs/extracts uranium. Of course that would be totally dilute now, but other sources could exist
Fumigation with phosphine gas is by far the most widely used treatment for the protection of stored grain against insect pests. Phosphine initially causes agitation followed by convulsions in humans and hyperactivity followed by twitching in nonhuman animals. It acts like a nerve gas
reduction of phosphate by boron trichoride
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=reduction+of+phosphate+by+boron+trichloride&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwipy_rY9pDVAhVD9GMKHdMNBH4QgQMIIjAA
Nuclear Fuel in a Reactor Accident
http://www.earth.lsa.umich.edu/relw/Burns%20Ewing%20Navrotsky%20Science%202012.pdf
-
-
-
-
Wednesday, May 3, 2017
Code Shutdown and Bystander Effect, Voltage gradients, and More
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)