Why I Will NEVER Get An X-ray Again!

Keon

New Member
Joined
May 25, 2014
Messages
3
Dr. Peat has written and spoken much about the damaging effects of ionizing radiation. Have you researched this subject yourself? Do you know the mechanisms and potential consequences behind x-ray exposure?

There's a very important study that you need to know about by Carmel E. Mothersill from McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada - one that the nuclear industry will never acknowledge because it would mean its demise. Either we as people research these things for ourselves or we move forward like fools, believing those too greedy to tell us that the routine diagnostic procedure of X-rays occuring at doctors offices worldwide are killing us.

Two Weeks Ago I Injured My Knee and Stood Up Against Medical X-rays

While at work two weeks ago I injured my knee. When I went to the doctor and she recommended an X-ray, I told her I've researched the subject and have chosen not to get one. As a result, I made a video on the subject to explain the research why the worldwide radiation risk model is unsafe.

After that I reviewed my medical doctor on ratemds.com and gave her 5-stars for respecting my decision to not get an x-ray. Then, I linked my video in the review so that the doctor will then see my review - AND LEARN from the research that I guarantee she has never heard before. This will also help educate the public and show them that they too need to have this conversation with their doctor.

You can see the review at this link... mine is at the top talking about the radiation risk model:
Dr. Navneet Sandhu

If we as a civilization are to create a better world, we're going to have to move away entirely from the use of ionizing radiation because it's simply not worth it. Here's the study I used in the video below as an example:

Irradiation of rainbow trout at early life stages results in trans-generational effects including the induction of a bystander effect in non-irradiated fish

Scientist Carmel E. Mothersill and her colleagues from McMaster University, in cooperation with scientists from the University of Guelph conducted a study published in 2016 to see if the damage or 'bystander effects' of ionizing radiation could be transferred multi-generationally. In a 2006 they had already proved that just A SINGLE X-RAY (dose 0.5gy) CAUSES BYSTANDER EFFECTS THAT LAST FOR THE REMAINDER OF THAT FISH'S LIFE. In their 2016 study, they found that the offspring of an irradiated fish - even though it had never been irradiated itself - STILL had the bystander effects occurring inside of it which had been transferred to it from it's mother.
Study: Irradiation of rainbow trout at early life stages results in trans-generational effects including the induction of a bystander effect in non-irradiated fish - ScienceDirect

It is clear that ionizing x-ray radiation is not worth the risk in any form - neither for medical diagnostic tests nor for energy production or weapons. The worldwide radiation risk model is unsafe and we are being annihilated by it. Members of the Ray Peat forum generally like to think more than the average person, it is us who need to take the reigns and lead the way in this by having this conversation with your doctor and teaching them that what the nuclear industry has taught them in school is propaganda.

X-ray ionizing radiation used for diagnostic tests and free and healthy human beings cannot exist simultaneously. If we are to make a better world this conversation needs to be had with every family doctor until we phase out the use of X-rays and replace it with something safer like MRI's (without the use of toxic contrast agent). Carbon dioxide is a safe (and even medicinal) alternative to toxic contrast agent or nothing at all is also safe.

Watch the story unfold below in my video for more information on the study I mentioned earlier.


I have a Dentist that no longer does X-rays. He did in his practice for many years but then noticed that all the kids that he treated in the free clinic, that couldn’t afford insurance and therefore X-rays, never got cavities. He began keeping more detailed records and had a grad student collecting data which he presented at a few Dental Conferences. As you can imagine, it wasn’t well received and the Grad student ended up having an unfortunate accident. The Dentist now keeps a low profile and doesn’t accept new patients.
 
OP
EndAllDisease

EndAllDisease

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2014
Messages
195
Anybody who wants to learn more about ionizing x-ray radiation, this article I just published contains over 160 scientific references. There's never been a more complete or easier-to-understand article written on the subject.

Radiotherapy for Cancer: Medicine or Murder?
 

Sucrates

Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2014
Messages
619
Didn't Ray mention red light being protective against ionising radiation (or did he use the term x-ray?).

"One inescapable feature of life on the earth is exposure to ionizing radiation. The thyroid gland is one of the most sensitive organs to gamma-radiation and endocrine disrupters. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been used to stimulate tissue repair, and reduce inflammation. The aim of this study was to gauge the value of using Helium–Neon laser to repair the damaged tissues of thyroid gland after gamma-irradiation. Albino rats were used in this study (144 rats), divided into control, gamma, laser, and gamma plus laser-irradiated groups, each group was divided into six subgroups according to time of treatment (total six sessions). Rats were irradiated once with gamma radiation (6 Gy), and an external dose of laser (Wavelength 632.8 nm, 12 mW, CW, Illuminated area 5.73 cm2, 2.1 mW cm−2, 120 s, 1.4 J, 0.252 J cm−2) twice weekly localized on thyroid region of the neck, for a total of six sessions. Animals were sacrificed after each session. Analysis included thyroid function, oxidative stress markers, liver function and blood picture. Results revealed improvement in thyroid function, liver function and antioxidant levels, and the blood cells count after LLLT."

Phototherapeutic Effect of Low‐Level Laser on Thyroid Gland of Gamma‐Irradiated Rats
 

Ell

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
152
To me, the worst ones are the dentists. They seem to always want to run a full panel of x-rays, which I always refuse. Their office people become disturbed when I ask whether they're aware of the correlation btw. brain tumors and dental x-rays. I haven't found any who acknowledge it, but its true. Basically, more ignorance at work operating under color of professionalism. Money-grubbers.
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
548
this is also my problem.. If you have an impacted third molar what other methods to use other than xray?
 

x-ray peat

Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
2,343
this is also my problem.. If you have an impacted third molar what other methods to use other than xray?
doesnt seem that an X-Ray should be required to pull a tooth but I would suspect you will have a very hard time finding a dentist willing to do it "blind" so to speak.
 

Lilac

Member
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
636
I found this interview with Ray on one of the Peat Facebook groups.

When Western Medicine Isn’t Working—Different Insights From A Leader In Health

Quote pertinent to this thread:

BTI: Do you think there are ways to prevent cancer, and if so, what would be the top four ways you would recommend?

RP: John Gofman, who in the 1950s was the US Government’s leading propagandists for the safety of ionizing radiation, did a large study* in which he showed that medical radiation contributes to the majority of cancer and heart disease in the US. Several factors (including estrogen, unsaturated fats, and toxic metals) synergize with the carcinogenic effects of radiation, so besides avoiding medical radiation, it’s good to reduce the polyunsaturated fats in the diet, to reduce toxic chemicals and other stressors, and to eat a protective diet, emphasizing calcium, magnesium, the oily vitamins, and moderate amounts of the essential nutrients.
 

Ell

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
152
A single Roentgen ray picture (x-ray) for pulling a tooth is probably ok, and can provide help to the DDS doing an extraction. When I rarely have a Roentgen ray, I ask for the thyroid shield, and they pull it out of a cabinet drawer. Same when I had a chest Roentgen picture taken, I asked for the thyroid shield and also the one for my groin, which they also produced. If you don't ask for these shields, you don't get them.
 

smith

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
386
How might one reverse the damage from long-past CAT scans, rather than just prevent it?
 

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe

haidut

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
19,798
Location
USA / Europe
Anybody who wants to learn more about ionizing x-ray radiation, this article I just published contains over 160 scientific references. There's never been a more complete or easier-to-understand article written on the subject.

Radiotherapy for Cancer: Medicine or Murder?

It's actually much worse than that. The highest scientific bodies in this country (NAS) openly falsified the original research on radiation safety done back in the 1950s and 1960s, under the guidance of GE. The goal to open the world to the idea of buying GE's radiation machines.
NAS falsified data on radiation safety to justify widespread use!
 

Kyle Bigman

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2018
Messages
276
I tried to get an abdominal ultrasound for upper abdominal pain, but they were adamant about the CT. They discovered nothing, so in hindsight this was a terrible decision...

What should I supplement with to counteract effects? Just vitamin E and niacinamide?
 

lvysaur

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
2,286
The airport scanners are really the absolute worst.
 

Momado965

Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
1,003
It really depends on the metabolic state at the time of irradiation, dosage of exposure, and what (if anything) is done after it. Aspirin, niacinamide, vitamin E, inosine, methylene blue, thyroid, cyproheptadine, etc have all been shown to protect from the effects of radiation exposure. The most damaging effects occur when ionizing radiation disturbs PUFA stores in the body, so the lower overall PUFA stores the less dangerous radiation is. A few X-rays commonly done for lung, spine, and abdominal examination are often not harmful long-term for most people, but a full CT scan (especially of the head) can lead to serious long term disturbances and sometimes cancer. Many of the CT machines in the US turned out to be purposefully miscalibrated to deliver more radiation than the patient was told it would in order to give better imaging and protect the doctors from malpractice lawsuits due to missing signs of disease.
Experts: CT Scans Linked To Radiation Overdoses
"...CT scans can be a lifesaving tool, but they also can cause radiation overdoses. Experts say it's happening more and more at hospitals across the country and perhaps in Georgia. Miscalibrated machines or operator error is exposing patients to dangerous doses of radiation. Becky Coudert went to a hospital in Huntsville, Ala., for what doctors called a routine CT scan. She said what happened was anything but routine. "I thought, there is something wrong with me. Then the nausea and headaches started," said Coudert. Radiation from the scan scorched part of her head and burned some of her hair off, she said. Her hair has grown back, but she still suffers from nausea, dizziness and blurry vision. "As time has gone on it's gotten worse. I keep waiting for it to get better," Coudert said."

Could CT scans cause cancer? - CNN

Getting Burned: Radiation Exposure from CT Scans - NWHN
"...Do you know that radiation exposure from one “CAT” scan can be equivalent to the dose received by some survivors of the Nagasaki atomic bombing? No? Chances are, neither does your doctor."

FDA Issues Warning: CT Scans Reported To Cause Hair Loss and Other Serious Injuries
"...The Food & Drug Administration said Tuesday that it will be taking steps to regulate the three most potent forms of medical radiation. With that, it will require that manufacturers of certain CT scanning equipment redesign machines to incorporate safeguards aimed at reducing patients’ exposure to radiation. The decision comes on the heels of several recent alarming reports of accidental overdoses of radiation from miscalibrated CT scanning machines. Last October, Cedars Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles disclosed that more than 200 patients had accidently received extremely high levels of radiation during CT scans of their brains. The FDA later stated that patients were exposed to eight times the amount of radiation typically used during the a CT scan, and that accidental exposure to very high amounts of radiation can cause severe injuries, such as burns, radiation induced hair loss, cataracts, and cancer. The agency has since been investigating similar reports in other states. Companies that would be affected include General Electric Co., Siemens AG and Toshiba Corp."

What about hormones like dhea, pregnenolone and progesterone?
 

revenant

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
300
The "safe" level of radiation exposure from artificial sources is ZERO. Anybody mumbling about "hormesis" from low dose exposure is a paid shill of Big Pharma or is not in their right mind. Often, these two go hand in hand.

Why isn't hormesis relevant with radiation? Seems to work with a lot of other things.
 

Whichway?

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
485
Why isn't hormesis relevant with radiation? Seems to work with a lot of other things.
Probably because hormesis occurs where a small dose of a substance is enough to produce a corresponding adaption which then makes you healthier. The dose is critical and probably relies on all the cellular machinery staying intact and not being damaged by the hormetic agent.

Radiation is like firing a billion steel ball bearings the size of a pinball from one side of a city to another at super high speed. Some will pass and not hit any obstacles. Some will hit something and slow down, and others will not make it through at all. The image is made up from the contrast between those x-rays that make it through vs those that are abosrbed.

When this happens in a cell you have a whole lot of nano scale damage that then has to be repaired. Cells aren’t used to having to repair on such a large scale and things can go wrong and repair errors can be made. The machinery that runs the cell can carry on but now has errors compared to prior to the x-ray. So long term that isn’t good.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
How would you know if you have periodontal infection if you don't submit to an x-ray? What if because of this strict adherence to a personal x-ray abstinence policy, you discover you had this infection for 20 years and you only discovered it because the teeth became loose and you had to remove it? What if I tell you that you would likely have developed plaque all over your vascular system, and there is bacteria biofilm together with the plaque? Wouldn't it worrisome knowing that all those bacteria are just ready to wreak havoc at every opportunity? The only reason you're not feeling it is because your innate immune system is keeping all this bacteria in check. Even so, it is a constant drain on your energy having to have your immune system constantly expending energy on this wasteful task, energy that could be used for better uses such as developing your brain, or your skin, or your hair, or your virility.

All because you didn't want one or two session of a dental x-ray.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom