When Liberals Lie
2012-04-26 04:54:59 UTC
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/02/10/lawrence-solomon-the-
fallout-of-the-nobel-scam-of-1946/
Why do most people today, scientists included, believe that
small doses of radiation are harmful to human health when no
proof for this theory exists, and when mountains of evidence
show the opposite that small amounts of radiation actually
promote health? After years of sleuthing into historical
records, a scientist at the University of Massachusetts has
found a smoking gun, involving a scientific scam in 1946 at the
very highest echelons the Nobel Prize ceremonies in Stockholm.
In an august Nobel hall one year after the end of the Second
World War, the scientific world was knowingly misled by Hermann
J. Muller, winner that year of the Nobel Prize in Physiology and
Medicine. This is the verdict from a forensic review entitled
Mullers Nobel Prize Lecture: When Ideology Prevailed Over
Science, just published by the Society of Toxicology in the
Oxford University Presss Toxicological Sciences. Had Muller
spoken the truth and revealed the existence of contradictory
research in the worlds most prominent scientific gathering, we
might today have an entirely different view of radiation and its
effects, preventing immense human suffering and the loss of
countless lives.
Prior to the Second World War, the world of medicine saw
radiation as a life-giving therapy as well as a diagnostic tool:
Ordinary X-ray machines were widely used to zap more than two
dozen different types of infections, gangrene among them,
miraculously eliminating the need to amputate limbs. But science
didnt understand how exactly radiation worked its wonders,
leading to conjecture that radiation, a known killer at very
high doses, might do harm as well as good. One theory that arose
held that radiation also killed at low doses, only in smaller
proportions. This theory that there is no safe dose for
radiation became the focus of a hot dispute, with one medical
camp accepting it, the other rejecting it, and both
investigating it.
Muller was in the ascendant no safe dose camp that claimed
that there is no threshold below which radiation stops being
harmful. As he told the distinguished attendees in Stockholm in
accepting his Nobel Prize, the evidence now leaves no escape
from the conclusion that there is no threshold dose of
radiation. It was a convincing performance in the worlds most
prestigious scientific gathering, except Muller himself knew
that statement to be unsupportable. The historical evidence, as
uncovered by Edward Calabrese, the author of the forensic
review, leaves no escape from the conclusion that Muller was
engaged in duplicity.
Five weeks before Muller delivered his Nobel acceptance speech,
he had received a manuscript from Prof. Curt Stern, a prominent
radiation geneticist who had headed a project for the Manhattan
Project that had also employed Muller as a consultant. The
manuscript confirmed an earlier study that demonstrated a safe
dose. Muller responded to Stern in a private letter, saying he
had no dispute with the study but felt that its findings were so
significant to the debate that the new study needed to be
replicated as soon as possible, a major undertaking that would
take a year.
Muller then went to Stockholm to accept his Nobel Prize as if
the manuscript had never existed. Another several weeks and
Muller again wrote Stern, to again impress on him the importance
of replicating the manuscripts findings. As Calabreses expose
reveals, Muller not only convinced the Nobel Prize assemblage
that the science was settled on the danger of low levels of
radiation, he also succeeded in marginalizing the Stern
manuscript, effectively thwarting important lines of inquiry.
Score one giant victory for scientific deception, one giant loss
for truth in science.
What harm was done by Mullers false assertion in Stockholm?
Although the scientific world has recently rediscovered the
benefits of low levels of radiation in a growing discipline
called radiation hormesis universities now offer courses in
hormesis and scientific journals publish an increasing number of
hormesis studies Mullers role in derailing research over many
decades is undeniable. The costs have been incalculable. As good
as antibiotics have been, for example, they continue to
underperform the pre-Second World War success rate of X-ray
therapy in preventing amputations and deaths from gangrene.
Studies also show that routine exposure to low levels of
radiation act as a tonic, dramatically preventing numerous
diseases, including major killers such as heart disease and
cancer.
Muller is now dead and buried, along with perhaps thousands,
perhaps millions who met an untimely death in part because of
him.
Next up, the Obama Nobel scam exposed.
fallout-of-the-nobel-scam-of-1946/
Why do most people today, scientists included, believe that
small doses of radiation are harmful to human health when no
proof for this theory exists, and when mountains of evidence
show the opposite that small amounts of radiation actually
promote health? After years of sleuthing into historical
records, a scientist at the University of Massachusetts has
found a smoking gun, involving a scientific scam in 1946 at the
very highest echelons the Nobel Prize ceremonies in Stockholm.
In an august Nobel hall one year after the end of the Second
World War, the scientific world was knowingly misled by Hermann
J. Muller, winner that year of the Nobel Prize in Physiology and
Medicine. This is the verdict from a forensic review entitled
Mullers Nobel Prize Lecture: When Ideology Prevailed Over
Science, just published by the Society of Toxicology in the
Oxford University Presss Toxicological Sciences. Had Muller
spoken the truth and revealed the existence of contradictory
research in the worlds most prominent scientific gathering, we
might today have an entirely different view of radiation and its
effects, preventing immense human suffering and the loss of
countless lives.
Prior to the Second World War, the world of medicine saw
radiation as a life-giving therapy as well as a diagnostic tool:
Ordinary X-ray machines were widely used to zap more than two
dozen different types of infections, gangrene among them,
miraculously eliminating the need to amputate limbs. But science
didnt understand how exactly radiation worked its wonders,
leading to conjecture that radiation, a known killer at very
high doses, might do harm as well as good. One theory that arose
held that radiation also killed at low doses, only in smaller
proportions. This theory that there is no safe dose for
radiation became the focus of a hot dispute, with one medical
camp accepting it, the other rejecting it, and both
investigating it.
Muller was in the ascendant no safe dose camp that claimed
that there is no threshold below which radiation stops being
harmful. As he told the distinguished attendees in Stockholm in
accepting his Nobel Prize, the evidence now leaves no escape
from the conclusion that there is no threshold dose of
radiation. It was a convincing performance in the worlds most
prestigious scientific gathering, except Muller himself knew
that statement to be unsupportable. The historical evidence, as
uncovered by Edward Calabrese, the author of the forensic
review, leaves no escape from the conclusion that Muller was
engaged in duplicity.
Five weeks before Muller delivered his Nobel acceptance speech,
he had received a manuscript from Prof. Curt Stern, a prominent
radiation geneticist who had headed a project for the Manhattan
Project that had also employed Muller as a consultant. The
manuscript confirmed an earlier study that demonstrated a safe
dose. Muller responded to Stern in a private letter, saying he
had no dispute with the study but felt that its findings were so
significant to the debate that the new study needed to be
replicated as soon as possible, a major undertaking that would
take a year.
Muller then went to Stockholm to accept his Nobel Prize as if
the manuscript had never existed. Another several weeks and
Muller again wrote Stern, to again impress on him the importance
of replicating the manuscripts findings. As Calabreses expose
reveals, Muller not only convinced the Nobel Prize assemblage
that the science was settled on the danger of low levels of
radiation, he also succeeded in marginalizing the Stern
manuscript, effectively thwarting important lines of inquiry.
Score one giant victory for scientific deception, one giant loss
for truth in science.
What harm was done by Mullers false assertion in Stockholm?
Although the scientific world has recently rediscovered the
benefits of low levels of radiation in a growing discipline
called radiation hormesis universities now offer courses in
hormesis and scientific journals publish an increasing number of
hormesis studies Mullers role in derailing research over many
decades is undeniable. The costs have been incalculable. As good
as antibiotics have been, for example, they continue to
underperform the pre-Second World War success rate of X-ray
therapy in preventing amputations and deaths from gangrene.
Studies also show that routine exposure to low levels of
radiation act as a tonic, dramatically preventing numerous
diseases, including major killers such as heart disease and
cancer.
Muller is now dead and buried, along with perhaps thousands,
perhaps millions who met an untimely death in part because of
him.
Next up, the Obama Nobel scam exposed.