Treatment of Early-Stage Alzheimer's Disease With CT Scans of the Brain: A Case Report.

We report the case of a patient in Massachusetts with early-stage Alzheimer's disease who was treated with low doses of ionizing radiation to the brain. He requested this treatment after reading about a patient with severe Alzheimer's in Michigan who improved remarkably after receiving 4 CT scans. After his first treatment in April 2016, mental clarity improved. His impaired conversation, reading, and sense of humor were restored, especially his virtuosic clarinet jazz-playing. However, executive function remained deficient. He requested a treatment every 2 weeks, but his neurologist denied this, fearing opposition to this treatment, a diagnostic procedure that used ionizing radiation. Limited recovery was observed after each CT scan, lasting from several weeks to months, depending on the endpoints/behavior and the periodicity. Despite the positive responses, the physician was reluctant to continue beyond 6 due to concerns about adverse effects and disapproval for prescribing them. The patient began hyperbaric oxygen therapy as an alternative. But after 43 treatments, no conclusive benefit was observed. The patient died in September 2020 at age 77. This experience suggests CT scans may have value in treating Alzheimer's patients and restoring, at least temporarily, important aspects of normal life activities. Such observations need testing and validation.

What Would Become of Nuclear Risk if Governments Changed Their Regulations to Recognize the Evidence of Radiation's Beneficial Health Effects for Exposures That Are Below the Thresholds for Detrimental Effects?

The 1953 Atoms for Peace Speech to the United Nations proposed applying nuclear energy to essential needs, including abundant electrical energy. The widespread fear of ionizing radiation from nuclear facilities and medical procedures began after the United States National Academy of Sciences performed a study of radiation dangers to the human genome. This study, initiated and managed by an oil industry benefactor, recommended in 1956 that the risk of radiation-induced mutations be assessed using the linear no-threshold dose-response model instead of the threshold model. It was followed by a study that wrongly linked low radiation to cancer among the atomic bomb survivors. The ensuing controversy resulted in a compromise. The National Committee on Radiation Protection adopted the precautionary principle policy in 1959, justified by fear of cancer and lack of knowledge. The United States and all other countries followed this recommendation, which remains unchanged 62 years later. Its impact on nuclear energy and medicine has been profound. Many costly regulations have been enacted to prevent very unlikely human or equipment failures-failures that would lead to radiation exposures that are below the dose thresholds for lasting harmful effects. Potential low-dose radiation therapies, against inflammation, cancer, autoimmune, and neurodegenerative diseases, are shunned.

Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation as a Treatment for Alzheimer's Disease: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, a patient in hospice with Alzheimer's disease (AD) was treated with ionizing radiation to her brain using repeated CT scans. Improvement in cognition, speech, movement, and appetite was observed. These improvements were so momentous that she was discharged from the hospice to a long-term care home. Based on this case, we conducted a pilot clinical trial to examine the effect of low-dose ionizing radiation (LDIR) in severe AD. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the previously reported benefits of LDIR in a single case with AD could be observed again in other cases with AD when the same treatments are given. METHODS: In this single-arm study, four patients were treated with three consecutive treatments of LDIR, each spaced two weeks apart. Qualitative changes in communication and behavior with close relatives were observed and recorded. Quantitative measures of cognition and behavior were administered pre and post LDIR treatments. RESULTS: Minor improvements on quantitative measures were noted in three of the four patients following treatment. However, the qualitative observations of cognition and behavior suggested remarkable improvements within days post-treatment, including greater overall alertness. One patient showed no change. CONCLUSION: LDIR may be a promising, albeit controversial therapy for AD. Trials of patients with less severe AD, double-blind and placebo-controlled, should be carried out to determine the benefits of LDIR. Quantitative measures are needed that are sensitive to the remarkable changes induced by LDIR, such as biological markers of oxidative stress that are associated with AD.

Low-dose ionizing radiation as a hormetin: experimental observations and therapeutic perspective for age-related disorders.

Hormesis is any kind of biphasic dose-response when low doses of some agents are beneficial while higher doses are detrimental. Radiation hormesis is the most thoroughly investigated among all hormesis-like phenomena, in particular in biogerontology. In this review, we aimed to summarize research evidence supporting hormesis through exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation (LDIR). Radiation-induced longevity hormesis has been repeatedly reported in invertebrate models such as C. elegans, Drosophila and flour beetles and in vertebrate models including guinea pigs, mice and rabbits. On the contrary, suppressing natural background radiation was repeatedly found to cause detrimental effects in protozoa, bacteria and flies. We also discussed here the possibility of clinical use of LDIR, predominantly for age-related disorders, e.g., Alzheimer's disease, for which no remedies are available. There is accumulating evidence that LDIR, such as those commonly used in X-ray imaging including computer tomography, might act as a hormetin. Of course, caution should be exercised when introducing new medical practices, and LDIR therapy is no exception. However, due to the low average residual life expectancy in old patients, the short-term benefits of such interventions (e.g., potential therapeutic effect against dementia) may outweigh their hypothetical delayed risks (e.g., cancer). We argue here that assessment and clinical trials of LDIR treatments should be given priority bearing in mind the enormous economic, social and ethical implications of potentially-treatable, age-related disorders.

Unethical not to Investigate Radiotherapy for COVID-19.

The primum non nocere letter by Boon et al. urged caution and careful examination of the evidence and logistics of low-dose radiotherapy in COVID-19 patients. This is exactly what was requested in March and what has occurred since late April 2020 when the first phase I/II clinical trial was approved at the Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University Hospital. The preprint of day-7 interim results by the investigators concluded, "In a small pilot trial of 5 oxygen-dependent patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, low-dose whole-lung radiation led to rapid improvement in clinical status, encephalopathy, and radiographic infiltrates without acute toxicity or worsening the cytokine storm. Low-dose whole-lung radiation appears to be safe, shows early promise of efficacy, and warrants larger prospective trials." Preliminary results from another clinical trial gave similar results. In conclusion, the authors believe it would be unethical not to investigate radiotherapy as a potential remedy against COVID-19 induced pneumonia.

The LNT Issue Is About Politics and Economics, Not Safety.

The Sykes commentary advocates "a more sensible, graded approach for protection from low dose ionizing radiation" until the LNT dose-response issue is resolved. It urges scientists to stop criticizing the LNT model that links radiation to a risk of cancer and accept regulatory use of the threshold model to "protect" people, but with higher limits. It fails to mention the 120-year history of successful low-dose treatments of a wide variety of serious diseases, including cancers. The commentary ignores published evidence of a threshold at 1.1 Gy for radiogenic leukemia and a dose-rate threshold at about 0.6 Gy per year for lifespan shortening. LNT came from politicized science, replete with scientific misconduct and conflict of interest. Its acceptance created a false cancer scare that was likely intended to stop atomic bomb testing, but it has severely damaged human welfare. Many vitally important low-dose therapies were discarded when the radiation scare was disseminated in 1956. The rapid growth of nuclear energy ended with the media-inflamed public panic after the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. Extreme implementation of the precautionary principle made it uneconomic. Availability of a low-dose therapy for lung inflammation could have dramatically decreased the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Application of Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation in Medical Therapies.

The discovery of X-rays and radioactivity in 1895/1896 triggered a flood of studies and applications of radiation in medicine that continues to this day. They started with imaging fractures/organs and progressed to treating diseases by exposing areas to radiation from external and internal sources. By definition, low-dose treatments stimulate damage control (or adaptive protection) systems that remedy diseases. Publications are identified on low-dose ionizing radiation (LDIR) therapies for different cancers, infections, inflammations, and autoimmune and neurodegenerative diseases. The high rate of endogenous DNA damage, due to leakage of oxygen from aerobic metabolism, and the damage control systems that deal with this are discussed. Their stimulation and inhibition by radiation are described. The radium dial painter studies revealed the radium ingestion threshold for malignancy and the dose threshold for bone sarcoma. The radiation scare that misled the medical profession and the public is a barrier to LDIR therapies. Many studies on nasal radium irradiation demonstrated that children are not unduly radiation sensitive. Omissions in the medical textbooks misinform physicians about the effects of LDIR therapy, which blocks clinical trials to determine optimal doses, efficacy, and thresholds for onset of harm. Information from many recent case reports on LDIR therapies, including successes with radon therapy, is provided.

Radon Therapy Is Very Promising as a Primary or an Adjuvant Treatment for Different Types of Cancers: 4 Case Reports.

We report on the application of radon inhalation therapy to patients with 4 types of cancer: colon, uterine, lung, and liver cell. The radon treatments were given to improve the efficacy of chemotherapy and were potent in all 4 cases. Marker values decreased and disease symptoms were alleviated. We include a lengthy discussion on the mechanism that may be responsible for the observed results. While employing the radon generator to treat the patient with hepatocellular carcinoma, we discovered that a concentration of 6 MBq/m3 was very effective, while 1 MBq/m3 was marginal. This implies different, and rather high, radon concentration thresholds for the treatment of different types of cancer. The evidence from these 4 cases suggests that radon inhalation may be beneficial against various cancer types as an important adjuvant therapy to conventional chemotherapy and for local high-dose radiotherapy, which would address the problem of distant metastasis. A previous case report on 2 patients with advanced breast cancer, who refused chemotherapy or radiotherapy, indicates that radon may be effective as a primary therapy for cancer. Clinical trials should be carried out to determine the best radon concentrations for treatment of other types of cancer, at different stages of progression.

Radon Therapy for Autoimmune Diseases Pemphigus and Diabetes: 2 Case Reports.

We report on the application of radon therapy to relieve the suffering of 2 patients with autoimmune diseases, one with pemphigus with an old myocardial infarction and diabetes mellitus and the other with type I diabetes. We include a lengthy discussion of the biological mechanisms that we believe produced the observed benefits. During the 6 to 9 months of the treatments, the marker values decreased to the upper limit of their normal ranges and the symptoms of the diseases were alleviated. Disorders of Th1/Th2 balance are implicated in the onset of many diseases, including autoimmune diseases. Our decision to give radon (222Rn) therapy to these patients was based on the results of 2 similar case reports and our earlier mouse experiments, which indicated that low doses of radiation induce regulatory T cells. Regulatory T cells regulate the T helper 1 cell and the T helper 2 cell balance. There are more than 80 different autoimmune diseases that are treated with anti-inflammatory agents or immune-suppressing drugs because the exact causes of these diseases and the cures are unknown. These and other case reports indicate that proper radon therapy is an effective treatment. We urge physicians to consider radon as a standard therapy for refractory autoimmune diseases.

Evidence of a Dose Threshold for Radiation-Induced Leukemia.

In 1958, Neil Wald presented data on the incidence of leukemia among the Hiroshima atomic bomb survivors. These data, which suggested a dose-response threshold for radiation-induced leukemia, were included in the first UNSCEAR report (1958). However, this evidence of a threshold was not recognized. It was obfuscated and concealed. In 2010, Zbigniew Jaworowski identified these data as evidence of radiation hormesis. A letter to the editor in 2014 and 2 articles in 2014 and 2015 presented a graph of these UNSCEAR 1958 data, which revealed a threshold at about 500 mSv. Since the blood-forming stem cells of bone marrow are more radiosensitive than most other cell types, it is reasonable to expect thresholds for inducing other types of cancer by ionizing radiation-their thresholds are likely higher than 500 mSv. A careful examination of the Wald data reveals the suprisingly low incidence of radiogenic leukemia, only 0.5% of the survivors who were in the high radiation zone. Many articles on radiation risk have been published since 2015 by other authors, but none makes reference to this evidence of a threshold, either to challenge or endorse it. In this commentary, the author addresses the comments from a colleague.

X-Ray Imaging is Essential for Contemporary Chiropractic and Manual Therapy Spinal Rehabilitation: Radiography Increases Benefits and Reduces Risks.

To remedy spine-related problems, assessments of X-ray images are essential to determine the spine and postural parameters. Chiropractic/manual therapy realignment of the structure of the spine can address a wide range of pain, muscle weakness, and functional impairments. Alternate methods to assess such spine problems are often indirect and do not reveal the root cause and could result in a significant misdiagnosis, leading to inappropriate treatment and harmful consequences for the patient. Radiography reveals the true condition and alignment of the spine; it eliminates guesswork. Contemporary approaches to spinal rehabilitation, guided by accurate imaging, have demonstrated superiority over primitive treatments. Unfortunately, there are well-meaning but misguided activists who advocate elimination or minimization of exposures in spine radiography. The radiation dose employed for a plain radiograph is very low, about 100 times below the threshold dose for harmful effects. Rather than increasing risk, such exposures would likely stimulate the patient's own protection systems and result in beneficial health effects. Spine care guidelines need to be revised to reflect the potential benefits of modern treatments and the lack of health risks from low X-ray doses. This would encourage routine use of radiography in manual spine therapy, which differs from common pharmacologic pain relief practice.

Recovery From Rheumatoid Arthritis Following 15 Months of Therapy With Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation: A Case Report.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an inflammatory autoimmune disease that occurs commonly in old people. Hot spring radon therapy is widely practiced in Central Europe and Japan for relief from the painful symptoms. The usual duration of a spa treatment is a week or two, and the relief is temporary. This article reports on the near-complete recovery of a patient who had been suffering from RA for 10 years. The patient received 15 months of low-dose radon and γ-radiation therapy in a room that reproduced the conditions of a radon spa. The daily 40-minute exposure in the therapy room was supplemented by ten 6-minute radio-nebulizer treatments. The inflammation markers C-reactive protein and matrix metalloproteinase 3 declined strongly to the normal level of 0.07 mg/dL and the near-normal level of 48.9 ng/mL, respectively. After the patient's return to good health, the frequency of the visits was reduced to twice each month. The patient's protection systems appear to have adapted to stimulated conditions, sufficiently to sustain the recovery from RA. Such a long-term course of treatments and follow-up maintenance could be carried out in any hospital that has these low-dose radiation therapy rooms. The therapy could be scheduled to suit patient availability.

Biological Effects From Low Doses and Dose Rates of Ionizing Radiation: Science in the Service of Protecting Humans, a Synopsis.

There is considerable controversy regarding risk of health detriment after low-level exposure to ionizing radiation. This stems in part from a sort of distance between radiation biologists, epidemiologists, and radiation protection professionals, as well as regulatory institutions. Also, there is a lack of overview of the relevant data and their origins regarding health risks at low doses of ionizing radiation. This feeds seriously into a somewhat hazy fear of ionizing radiation that besets large portions of the public. The current synopsis aims at presenting a holistic view in a concise yet comprehensive manner in order to help people understand the full extent of inputs into attempting to relate low-dose radiation exposure to health risk. It emerges again that different approaches must be found for optimal radiation protection replacing the use of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model.

Present and Future Prospects of Radiation Therapy Using α-Emitting Nuclides.

Therapy with α-radiation has issues associated with internal exposure; its clinical use has been avoided. However, phase III clinical tests of the α-emitting nuclide 223Ra on patients with cancer have been conducted, and results were reported in 2011 to 2012. Since then, research has being carried out on targeted internal therapy by introducing α-emitting nuclides directly into the cancers. For many decades, nontargeted radon therapy has been carried out and is controversial because its mechanism of action is stimulation. The low-level radiation sends powerful signals to upregulate many biological protection systems, which protect against the effects of radiogenic and nonradiogenic toxins. These vital systems prevent, repair, and remove DNA and other biomolecular damage being produced endogenously at a very high rate by the very abundant reactive oxygen species associated with aerobic metabolism. Stimulation of protection systems results in beneficial effects, including a lower risk of cancer. This article reports the results of treatments on 4 patients with cancer and reviews the clinical use of α-radiation from 223Ra and radon. It discusses the prospect of using the novel 225Ac-prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand-617 ligand as a therapeutic agent for prostate cancer. It presents a new treatment system that we developed, α-Radiorespiro-Rn, which seems to be extremely effective in treating cancer.

Evidence of a Dose-Rate Threshold for Life Span Reduction of Dogs Exposed Lifelong to γ-Radiation.

Our return to a study on dogs exposed lifelong to cobalt-60 γ-radiation was prompted by a comment that data in dog studies have large statistical errors due to the small number of dogs. We located an earlier article on the same study that had a better mortality curve for the dogs in each dose-rate group. The median life span of the dogs in each group was tabulated, and the standard error of each was calculated. No statistically significant shortening of median life span was observed for the lowest dose-rate group at any reasonable significance level (P value: .005-.05), whereas for dogs with higher irradiation rates, life span shortening was statistically significant at highest reasonable significance level (P value: .005). The results were entered on a graph of life span versus dose rate, assuming a threshold dose-response model. The fitted line indicates that the dose-rate threshold for γ-radiation induced life span reduction is about 600 mGy per year, which is close to the value we found previously. Making allowance for the calculated standard errors, we conclude that this threshold is in the range from 300 to 1100 mGy per year. This evidence is relevant for emergency measures actions (evacuation of residents) and for nuclear waste management.