Thread by @g_zwartsenberg

I don't think hormesis should be the central issue.

Here, I agree with Geraldine Thomas, that there may be a hormetic effect, and some statistics are quite intriguing indeed, but the statistics don't seem to show a consistent picture.

https://twitter.com/simonfriederich/status/1047799856969011200

Frankly, I developed a mild case of ARS from studying radiation statistics :-)

For me, the case hit home when I - finally - read about the BIOLOGY of radiation damage.

By far the most radiation damage originates indirectly.

The only 'bad' thing ionizing radiation does, is that it smashes molecules - and since the cell is mostly water, it mostly smashes water molecules.

These pieces of molecule, called 'reactive oxygen species' or ROS do most of the damage that really matters: DNA strand breaks.

But guess what: such ROS are leaking out of the mytochondriae all the time - they are part of the basic energy process of the cell.

In every cell, ROS are business as usual.

So it's the count that matters.

The question is: how much does radiation add the business as usual?

Molecular biologists estimate that the 'business as usual' in a living cell involves a couple of thousand DNA single strand breaks per day. And a couple of dozen double strandbreaks per day.

So how much does radiation add to this?

A dose of 100 millieSievert per year is estimated to raise this 'break rate' by about 0.025 per cent.

Eating a hamburger dwarfs this increase.

It also becomes obvious here that it makes a huge difference whether this dose is delivered as a trickle, or as a flash.

But according to Geraldine Thomas, no health effects on humans have ever been detected below 100 millieSievert - flash or trickle.

Of course, the biological reality is more complicated than described here, but this and several other research findings have been emerging over the last decades.

This article gives a nice overview:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…

Or just watch Geraldine Thomas' public lecture:

Would this work as a comparison?

One day, you lend your friend som money, say a euro.

Years later, you go bankrupt.

Would it make sense to accuse your friend for your misfortune?