BACKGROUNDThe current linear-no-threshold paradigm assumes that any exposure to ionizing radiation carries some risk, thus every effort should be made to maintain the exposures as low as possible. Here, we examined whether background radiation impacts human longevity and cancer mortality. METHODSOur data covered the entire US population of the 3139 US counties, encompassing over 320 million people. The data on background radiation levels, the average of 5-year age-adjusted cancer mortality rates, and life expectancy for both males and females in each county, was extracted using publicly available tools from official sources, and analyzed with JMP®™ software. RESULTSWe found for the first time that life expectancy, the most integrative index of population health, was approximately 2.5 years longer in people living in areas with a relatively high vs. low background radiation (≥ 180 mrem/year and ≤ 100 mrem/year, respectively; p < 0.005; 95% confidence interval [CI]). This radiation-induced lifespan extension could to a great extent be associated with the decrease in cancer mortality rate observed for several common cancers (lung, pancreas and colon cancers for both genders, and brain and bladder cancers for males only; p < 0.05; 95% CI). CONCLUSIONSExposure to a high background radiation displays clear beneficial health effects in humans.These hormetic effects provide strong evidence for re-considering the linear no-threshold paradigm, at least within the natural range of low-dose radiation.

BACKGROUNDThe current linear-no-threshold paradigm assumes that any exposure to ionizing radiation carries some risk, thus every effort should be made to maintain the exposures as low as possible. Here, we examined whether background radiation impacts human longevity and cancer mortality. METHODSOur data covered the entire US population of the 3139 US counties, encompassing over 320 million people. The data on background radiation levels, the average of 5-year age-adjusted cancer mortality rates, and life expectancy for both males and females in each county, was extracted using publicly available tools from official sources, and analyzed with JMP®™ software. RESULTSWe found for the first time that life expectancy, the most integrative index of population health, was approximately 2.5 years longer in people living in areas with a relatively high vs.low background radiation (≥ 180 mrem/year and ≤ 100 mrem/year, respectively; p < 0.005; 95% confidence interval [CI]). This radiation-induced lifespan extension could to a great extent be associated with the decrease in cancer mortality rate observed for several common cancers (lung, pancreas and colon cancers for both genders, and brain and bladder cancers for males only; p < 0.05; 95% CI). CONCLUSIONSExposure to a high background radiation displays clear beneficial health effects in humans.These hormetic effects provide strong evidence for re-considering the linear no-threshold paradigm, at least within the natural range of low-dose radiation.data strongly suggest that low-level radiation is not harmful, and is, in fact, frequently 'apparently beneficial' for human health." 28 13

Currently, low dose radiotherapy (LDRT) is being tested for treating life-threatening pneumonia in COVID-19 patients. Despite the debates over the clinical use of LDRT, some clinical trials have been completed, and most are still ongoing. Ultraviolet C (UVC) irradiation has been proven to be highly efficient in inactivating the coronaviruses, yet is considerably safer than LDRT. This makes UVC an excellent candidate for treating COVID-19 infection, especially in case of severe pneumonia as well as the post COVID-19 pulmonary fibrosis. However, the major challenge in using UVC is its delivery to the lungs, the target organ of COVID-19, due to its low penetrability through biological tissues. We propose to overcome this challenge (i) by using pulsed UVC technologies which dramatically increase the penetrability of UVC through matter, and (ii) by integrating the pulsed UVC technologies into a laser bronchoscope, thus allowing UVC irradiation to reach deeper into the lungs. Although the exact characteristics of such a treatment should yet to be experimentally defined, this approach might be much safer and not less efficient than LDRT.

No abstract