Some potentially amazing news is being passed around the Internet today from the Israeli site Ynet:
Medication that can protect humans against nuclear radiation has been developed by Jewish-American scientists in cooperation with a researcher and investors from Israel. The full story behind the dramatic discovery will be published in Yedioth Ahronoth’s weekend edition.
The ground-breaking medication, developed by Professor Andrei Gudkov – Chief Scientific Officer at Cleveland BioLabs – may have far-reaching implications on the balance of power in the world, as states capable of providing their citizens with protection against radiation will enjoy a significant strategic advantage vis-à-vis their rivals.
Wow, talk about game-changers – this one has implications on several levels. Not only is this drug, which is apparently being fast-tracked, capable on immunizing people against nuclear radiation before and after an attack (tough luck, Mahmoud), it also has obvious medical implications (heavier doses for cancer treatments will be practicable).
Those two great benefits are mentioned in the Ynet article, but it stuck me there is a third at least as important. Anti-radiation medication could shut up the anti-nuclear energy crowd that has set back nuclear power plants in this country for decades. Obama’s highly traditional (as in ye olde liberale) energy legislation oddly omits the single greatest weapon against anthropogenic global warming (assuming you believe in that) – the development of a siginificant amount of nuclear power in the US similar to France and Japan. It would probably outrun cap-and-trade in its usefulness by a factor of a thousand. And if you don’t believe in AWG, you surely believe in energy independence and lower cost electricity. Nuclear is the obvious answer to that. But the fuddy-duddy left, still rapturous over the first time they saw the China Syndrome, has never allowed it to happen here. [You think those pills would be stopped by a pill?-ed. I think things are about to change in a lot of areas.]
Cool.
It’s funny how the usual suspects are always saying we should be more like the French — except when it comes to nuclear power. We should be building new plants, updating the shakey grid, drilling and refining, and expanding coal all at the same time, rather than giving lip service about jobs “saved or created” by our humungous government. Alas, ass-backwards is the order of the day, so we shouldn’t expect any of it to happen any time soon.
Don’t hold your breath. We’ve been there, done that. Back in the 50′s, the DOD developed a compound,which scavenges free radicals, called WR 2721 to protect troops against radiation. It’s effect was limited and it was fairly toxic. Today it has limited use for protecting cancer patients from some radiotherapy toxicity. The drug is now called Amifostine. There is no drug that will ever protect you from lethal radiation doses.
Astonishing.
Chris, Check out the article on Ynet that Roger has posted above. This is a newer project that has been worked on for the past 6 years with new findings and testing going on in multpie labs here and out of the country, seemingly non-toxic. As of this date and reading a name has not been given to it.
The anti-nuke crowd is driven by total technophobia.
It wouldn’t matter if the safety of modern nuclear technology is approaching 100% (it is), is more safe than existing fossil fuels (it is), and is far more environmentally friendly (yep, it is this, too). Even Chernobyl, a site run by communist incompetents indifferent to the environment and safety, and using tech the US never risked in its power program, is now one of the most ecologically healthy areas in the western area of the former USSR.
The main priority of the modern eco-movement is to oppose whatever is used now (fossil fuels), throw the lion’s share of their opposition against whatever new practical technology is being pushed (nuke and now hydropower), but support technologies not yet ready for prime time (solar and wind at the moment).
Rest assured, we’ll know when solar really is practical and cost-effective, because that will be the day greenpeace starts pushing to have it banned. It’s not about the environment, it’s about power, and stopping technological and economic progress.
Incidentally, I think I have a theory about what the US policy towards Israel and Iran is going to be.
Remember Osirak? The US loudly opposed Iraqi nukes, and Israel took military action. The US openly opposed the strike, but tacitly supported it. It was win-win. We provided diplomatic cover for the Israelis, the Israelis took the tough, unpopular but necessary action, and both countries’ security benefited.
Consider now a variation on this. The Obama administration loudly opposes a strike, quietly gives their approval. Then Israel strikes. Obama openly condemns it, but then does a switcheroo and uses the uproar to push his Palestinian agenda by supporting international retribution. He gets to have his cake and eat it too.
Or put another way, he eats the feast, and Israel is left taking the shit for him.
It isn’t immediately obvious that this treatment can be used long term to counteract the health effects of environmental contamination (eg, from war or spillage). It may be truly revolutionary for anti-cancer radiation therapy though.
This drug in no way immunizes against radiation, regardless of what the article says. If it keeps 300 REM from killing you, it probably will not keep 3000 REM from doing the same. Radiation comes in a very wide range of levels (put more mathematically, the level of radiation that a nuclear weapon can inflict on an individual varies by many orders of magnitude).
Since radiation damage is highly non-linear, it would have been far more interesting if we heard results about various levels from the 50% lethal dose to many times that.
As far as the anti-nuke crowd, the radiation levels they fear are not even harmful – just scary. Low level radiation is mostly harmless and sometimes (ironically) beneficial.
See here for some related info.
I know a Russian (now American)nuclear engineer, long retired, who suddenly began getting calls to consult last year from several sources around the country. Leads him and me to believe that at long last something may be happening in the industry.
The pebble-bed, high temperature reactor, now under development in several places in the world has the potential, in addition to other significant advantages, of producing hydrogen at a cost that would make it a viable clean alternative to carbon-based fuel.
Folks, I hate to have to say this, especially since the research is so promising, but John and Chris are right: Beyond a certain point, radiation damages the cell too fully, and nothing short of one hell of a good lead shield will protect a human from that level. And while the promise of this treatment is indeed wonderful, we have to rationally accept that it does appear to be limited in scope. Note what the stated mechanism is:
“The medication works by suppressing the “suicide mechanism” of cells hit by radiation, while enabling them to recover from the radiation-induced damages that prompted them to activate the suicide mechanism in the first place.”
That mechanism of course merely keeps a cell from dying, and doesn’t necessarily guarantee that the the cell will operate normally afterwards. One of the potential types of damage radiation can induce is to genetic material, and repairs to that are not always accurate. And mistakes of genetic information can be passed along during mitosis and possible be expressed as tumors. While there are several steps between mere damaged DNA and actual cancer, we know the pathway exists because of the prevalence of simple sun-induced melanoma.
Furthermore, that is merely one type of effect. Cells can be damaged and then “recover”, but operate improperly from that point on. And cells operating abnormally can affect an organism in many ways that aren’t necessarily cancerous. As an illustrative example: One of the fears of radioactive iodine exposure is the killing of thyroid cells, and when the thyroid is affected, hormone production drops and an organism – yes, in this case humans – functions improperly. While that’s just an example, it’s illustrative of my point: Damage to cells that causes them to malfunction can adversely affect a system in the human body. What if the damage leaves the thyroid functioning but improperly producing hormones? Or producing altered ones? And moving away from the thyroid, what about a dose of a radiation of a type that, say, suppresses leukocyte production or activity? That would leave a person susceptible to common infections like the flu, and with a reduced ability to fight it off. And it’s not theoretical either; consistent doses of X-rays can produce this exact effect. What about radiation that permanently kills off such “white blood cell” production? While not killing, that would leave a person with a permanent problem.
Look, I don’t want to rain on this parade. Any drug which can mitigate any aspect of radiation-induced illness is a positive thing, even if it’s limited in scope. And again, this is not only promising, but wonderful news; adverse effects from radiation can be offset. But again, let’s also analyze this rationally, and understand that it’s not a “magic bullet” of any sort. Rather, it’s one of a continuous number of small steps towards treating individuals affected by radiation. A wonderful one, and one with much potential, but still a small one that doesn’t prevent all adverse affects or fully cure an affected organism.
Is there an anti-nuclear power movement in China that has a movie called the “America Syndrome” to bolster their cause?
Only until their leaders had their organs harvested for profit.
A pill capable of mitigating the long term effects of moderate exposure would be wonderful indeed, but there will always be a critical exposure level beyond which the damage is irreversible.
That won’t diminish the ardor of the iranian clerics who have vowed imperviousness from reason. There migh be a critical threshold for that, too, and it does not take a huge number of fanatics to inflict a lot of damage.
Stopping the mad mullahs still make sense, because they can kill a lot of people (israeli and palestinians alike) before a treatment is widely available.
This drug will be abandoned when Hyronalin is discovered.
For those who point out that this drug cannot possibly be a cure-all, well obviously. The point is that it can protect some people from fallout, and that’s a good thing. It won’t protect you on the blast site (obviously), or probably those nearby, but it’ll help protect those who sit under the broader zones of fallout, and that’s really your nation-killer. It also reduces the usefulness of a dirty bomb.
It’s kinda like a kevlar vest: no, it won’t stop a determined attack, but it’s a heckuva lot better than nothin’.
As for the anti-nuke crowd, I think many of them, like Green Peace, associate nuclear power with nuclear weapons, and still kinda think of it as all tied up with “the vast, insidious military-industrial complex that secretly rules this nation’s politics” and all that other crap. They’re a little behind the times, though, because I understand you can create nuclear reactors that have no capacity for building nuclear weapons.
I bet some of these yahoos will even oppose the drug on similar grounds (“It makes war too easy, man!”)
Vadept,
You are right that, at least in the case of Israel, fallout would be the “nation killer.” This drug would presumably reduce the mortality and morbidity from fallout to some extent – and that is a good thing. The fact that Israel has lots and lots of underground shelters is probably also very important.
The idea that Israel is a “one bomb” country is simply not true – especially for a fission nuke. It would take quite a few small nukes to destroy Israel and its population, but a lot fewer if they were deployed as ground burst fallout producers rather than air burst optimal blast/heat weapons.
9, sorta. But I don’t want to go off into the off-topic weeds. I’ll just say that commercial scale electrolysis isn’t as trivial as most people think it is.
so odd. I was sure a discovery like this would come from Yemen – you sure you mean Israel? Who would have thought…
guys been stock holder of cbli for long time.. not here to sell you but questions you have asked al have answers on their website or check out the yahoo.com stock board. many longs been on there and have the info to lonks and reports over the past few yrs.
this has protected animals at high levels… thats all i will say.
Anyway you look at it, it sounds a lot more promising than the nuke-defense tactic the good nuns at St Pats in Brooklyn, circa 1950s, insisted we do—squat under our desks.