3 ms·
Some time ago I read that no radiation exposure might actually be worse for organisms than low radiation exposure like background radiation. We know the effects
by danbruc 10y ago
Some time ago I read that no radiation exposure might actually be worse for organisms than low radiation exposure like background radiation. We know the effects of high doses and everyone just assumed that the negative effects go to zero as the dose goes to zero and extrapolated it this way from high doses to zero while in reality there might be a very different relation at low doses. I will try to find some sources, I am no longer sure how convincing the argument was.
This does not really change the fact that there seems to be no good evidence that walking around in a cave with elevated Radon levels does any good, but it would be less obviously a bad idea if what I mentioned above has any merits.
EDIT: Found it, it is called radiation hormesis [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis
- TheGRS 10y agoI think what you're getting at is the old adage of doing things in moderation. Little bit of alcohol seems to have more positive effects than none at all, severely negative effects when overdone. Same with many drugs, foods and types of exercises. The one that really comes to mind for me is bacteria. The idea of probiotics is still pretty new to the public. Probably not a great idea to ingest a ton of bacteria all the time, but a little bit can be super beneficial, and much more beneficial than none.