4 ms·
See my answer here: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/2490/1792 http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/2490/1792 tl;dr: "There is empirical evidence that sugges
by bmh_ca 10y ago
See my answer here: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/2490/1792 http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/2490/1792
tl;dr: "There is empirical evidence that suggests that low to medium amounts of absorbed gamma radiation boosts immunity and resilience to ailments such as heart disease, though it may (or may not) increase rates of cancer. It has been suggested and that the reduction in the probability of death from other diseases offsets the increased probability of death from cancer."
- 0x07c0 10y agoInteresting link. Radiation hormesis seems to be a real thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis
- amelius 10y agoThis makes me wonder what effect absolutely zero radiation would have on an individual. And on a population (e.g. would evolution be harmed by having no radiation at all?)
- dsfuoi 10y agoI would say that ionizing radiation isn't the cause of most genetic mutations. It is just too rare and most of it doesn't penetrate the skin anyway, the rest has to be really lucky to hit the cell in the right place at the right time. DNA copying not being perfect would be the main cause in my opinion. There is one error on average for every billion pairs copied. The human DNA has 3 billion pairs. So every time a single(!) cell is copied, three mistakes are made. You don't need any radiation for evolution.
- api 10y agoWhat about other forms? Radiation is not radiation. There's gamma, X-ray, alpha, beta, neutron, microwave, infrared, etc. and they all have different biophysical effects.
- morning_star 10y agoRisking cancer to diminish heart disease? lol no thanks. I'd rather eat vegetables and take a walk once in a while.
- dsmithatx 10y agoDon't walk in sunlight or you'll get exposed to low doses of radiation that "could" cause cancer. Also be cautious about where you buy those vegetables. There is a good chance they could contain things that also "could" cause cancer.
- DiabloD3 10y agoAnd then we get to the extreme paranoia where everything is generally recognized to cause cancer. And I'm not even convinced they're wrong, given the rates of cancer in people who (most likely) have never been exposed to anything (that they know of). Although, then again, there's the problem of grandchildren of smokers getting cancer, when never having been exposed to the smoking first or second hand, only genetically through their parents.
- e40 10y agoUnless you are getting sunburns, this is not true. In fact, sunlight on skin promotes vitamin D production, which is known to help fight cancer.
- jsmthrowaway 10y agoThe presence of a sunburn is orthogonal to the fact that you do, in fact, become exposed to radiation in sunlight. That is unequivocally true and trivially proven, whether you receive a sunburn or not. I don't think the person you are replying to meant that sunlight exposure unconditionally causes cancer, and was simply addressing radiation scare and putting it in context.
- e40 10y agoAll the downvotes notwithstanding, there is a direct correlation between the number of severe burns you've had and your chances of getting skin cancer[0], unless you have a genetic predisposition to skin cancer. A moderate amount of sunlight on skin, without burning, is actually healthy for you, unless you 1) have various illnesses (lupus, for one), or 2) are genetically predisposed to skin cancer. [0] http://www.webmd.com/melanoma-skin-cancer/news/20140530/5-or-more-bad-sunburns-while-young-tied-to-higher-melanoma-risk http://www.webmd.com/melanoma-skin-cancer/news/20140530/5-or...
- kinkdr 10y agoAh.. So, good guys TSA are just trying to improve public health with their scanners! And everybody is raging against them..