Radioactive Polonium in Tobacco

And we've been told that, through a minor change in the way Tobacco is grown, hundreds of thousands of lives might be saved each year in America alone! The elimination of Radioactive Polonium from Tobacco, stops the process altogether, in 98% of the cases, for it appears to be responsible for the vast majority of the toxicity, that increases the likelihood of Cancer in a Smoker because, they say, constant long term exposure to the Polonium 210 dust in Tobacco smoke, causes the Lung Tissue to MUTATE... making other carcinogens 100s of times more likely to trigger Lung Cancer, leading to 180,000 American deaths from the disease. While science doesn't yet know how many Lung Cancer victims will be saved by eliminating Polonium, evidence appears to suggest "most of the case". Second Hand Smokers are at the same risk for later life Lung Cancer from the same source, too. (read this short article by David Malmo-Levine, a Marijuana advocate, that explains it all in very simple terms: CLICK HERE> )
About the only problem with Mr. Malmo-Levine's article is that the rise of the use of Calcium Phosphate Fertilizer among Mexican, South American and Hawaiian Marijuana growers is starting to cause a rise in Lung Cancer among Marijuana users that correlates with the statistical increase of CPF's use. But he makes an interesting point, because prior to the increased use of CPF by "pot growers", Lung Cancer from it's use was almost non-existent. This 'non-scientific' observation does make a serious point about Polonium's contribution. Please note: due to the likelihood that excessive smoking of it produces negative psychological consequences, dramatic increases in estradiol (estrogen in males), feminizing of men, inappropriate behavioral patterning, premature aging, heart disease, hair color loss, oxygen deficiency, mental anxiety and paranoia attacks, loss of income and neural toxicity, the ACSA does NOT advocate the legalization of Marijuana or any other so-called dangerous control substance. While certain things are a matter of personal choice, some have very negative consequences that are at once both illegal and inappropriate, despite the pleasure associated with them. In our opinion, Marijuana is not appropriate except under strict medical care for specific conditions it is used to treat, day to day stress not being one of them.
NOW: PLEASE SIGN OUR ONLINE PETITION TO THE
US GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM: HERE >
Ever wonder why the Cancer Rate among Smokers was so much higher than the threat posed by Carcinogens in Cigarettes? According to Robert Martin (his article is below) the Polonium 210, a highly bioactive, radiogenic agent, is being steadily deposited in minute quantities in your lungs as you smoke. The Polonium 210 deposited in the average "pack a day" smoker, which has a half life of 158+ days (that means half of it's mass is converted into lead, and the radioactive emissions are delivered directly to your lungs), delivers enough radiation as it decays; to be equal to the amount of radiation you'd get if you had between 300 and 8000 Chest X-Rays per year.
According to Mr. Martin and other experts:
The Polonium decays gradually (1/2 of its mass per 158 days) into Lead (which is also a poisonous toxin and carcinogen). The Polonium comes from the Calcium Phosphate based fertilizer, Tobacco plants love it (because Polonium is metabolized like Calcium by the Plants, the confuses it for one of the nutrients the needs). That amount of Polonium 210 is enough to cause your Lungs to become riddled with Tumors over 2 to 6 decades, depending upon your susceptibility to the mutations in your tissues all the radioactivity being delivered to your Lungs will ultimately lead to. And it effects almost 90% of all smokers, at least those who by their mid life to elder years, have not already succumbed to heart disease, stroke, mouth and gum cancers, emphysema and other Tobacco related diseases.
150,000 American's die each year of Lung Cancer (Tobacco linked illnesses are the #1 killer in our country, by the way). Globally, between 700 and 800,000 people die annually of Lung Cancer. Smoking is considered its #1 cause. And yet, Tobacco could be grown in ammonium-phosphate based or Organic fertilizers, ELIMINATING most of the toxic radioactive substance (Polonium 210) which is generally not found in such fertilizer. It has been estimated that such could reduce Cancers among Tobacco Smokers by as much as nearly 85-95% !! That is because for Cancer to occur, changes that lead to it need to take place in the biophysiology of an otherwise healthy person, so that the normal immunities to cancer development are defeated. Like "elevating the noise" in a noisy room, Polonium 210 radiation exposure appears to elevate the amount of toxic-factors in the cells of the Lungs at the molecular level, causing changes and damage that could lead to very severe Cancers, changes that allow other carcinogenic effects of smoking and lifestyle to take root, leading to vastly higher probability of all out Lung Cancer in the Smoker.
So, why aren't the Tobacco Growing and Brokering Companies quickly moving to remedy this problem? It has been suggested that this is because, once you eliminated the vast number of cancers made possible by the constant exposure in Smoker's Lungs to radioactive Polonium 210, deposited in minute quantities over the decades in all active and passive smokers' lungs, then the Cigarette Companies would resultantly be responsible for the remaining thousands upon thousands of lung cancer cases that were caused just by Tobacco smoke's own potentially health hazardous, carcinogenic elements! Can you imagine the audacity of the Tobacco Brokers who, knowing this, hide their own responsibility for some of the Cancer by ignoring the methods of their Tobacco Growers who use calcium phosphate based fertilizer, in order to avoid legal culpability by skewing the statistical correlation? One set of responsibility hidden behind equal degrees of negligence, leading to such murderous consequences? Astonishing and frightening, isn't it?
Could it be that the Tobacco Brokering Companies and the Cigarette Manufacturers, through negligence or premeditated conspiracy with the Tobacco Growers, thereby ultimately responsible for the small doses of Radiation delivered to their customers in every breath they take in when smoking their products? Are they thereby knowingly responsible for the murder of millions of people every decade, all in order to attempt to reduce their own direct legal liability for the lung and throat cancers Cigarette Smoking has been allegedly more directly causing thousands from the tar and ash? They've known since 1963, according to Mr. Martin, that the use of cheap calcium phosphate based fertilizers by the Tobacco growers in the past 50 years has changed Tobacco into a progressive radiation delivery vehicle that may be the single most overwhelming contributor to Lung Cancer over the course of the life of a Smoker by virtue of "across the threshold" mutation of Lung tissue into a fertile bed for massive tumorous growths (as evidenced by the unusually degenerated state of the Lungs when removed post mortem from a Lung Cancer sufferer, go to any medical library and take a look at smoker's cancer ridden Lungs, if you don't believe this!) But the Tobacco Industry has done nothing at all to change that. Why?
We even asked the world's largest Tobacco products producer, and ended up being funneled off to a technology company to answer our question, by their Customer Service Department, which technology company had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with tobacco in any way.
That company, Phillip Morris, was singled out in Israel for a lawsuit by one of the leading Legal experts in that tiny country, by the son of the prosecutor who brought many Nazi's to justice in Nurenburg, Germany, after the end of WWII. Amos Hausner sued Phillip Morris in June 2000 for "poisoning Israelis with radioactive Tobacco" citing memos that Phillip Morris knew about the Polonium contamination due to calcium phosphate fertilizer, but did not convince any of the Tobacco Growers who supplied it, to switch to Polonium 210 free fertilizer, thereby leading to 10,000 deaths among Israelis every year. An article in the Middle East Times conveys the gravity of this situation more clearly: click here.
In the USA, with almost 20 times the death rate, it has been estimated that Lung Cancer kills about 500 people every day of the week 365 days per year, on the average. Recently, on 9/11/2002, in the horrific World Trade Center disaster, some 3000 people were reported killed when Al Qaeda / Osamma Bin Laden Terrorists, flew four jet liners into the Trade Centers and the Pentagon, killing many, many innocent people, firemen, policemen, Ems workers and government officials.
While the comparisons are between entirely different circumstances, and no one is attempting to minimize either of them, just for the sake of magnitude, were one to compare the losses in that National Tragedy to the losses to Lung Cancer each year, one would have to fly 200 Jetliners into 50 Trade Centers, and the Pentagon, every year indefinitely, just to have the same number of deaths as Lung Cancer is causing. The notion is staggering.
Any expert in Radiation and its consequences, can tell you that the constant exposure to decaying Polonium 210 and Radon gasses found in Cigarette Smoke is ultimately going to be fatal in 90% of the cases of long term exposure that a lifetime of smoking brings about. We asked the United States Nuclear Regulatory Agency's top scientists who not only confirmed that the radioactivity and the Polonium 210 was found in Tobacco. And our interviews with experts in cancer have brought us to conclude that this factor has to be responsible for the vast, vast majority of the Lung Cancer among lifelong Smokers? What could possibly justify the position of the Tobacco Industry to allow this situation to continue? Read on...
NOW: PLEASE SIGN OUR ONLINE PETITION TO THE
US GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM: HERE >
-------------- ABOUT POLONIUM -------------------------------------------------------------
Most people do not realize how deadly Polonium is: it is about the most deadly isotope on earth, even tiny, trace quantities of this rare element can kill if properly administered, and minute traces steadily administered, cause living tissue to mutate.
By the way, Polonium (210) is element number 84 in the periodic chart with an atomic weight of 208.98, it's standard state is solid at 298 degrees Kelvin and it is silvery colored.
Description: Polonium has more isotopes than any other element, all of which are radioactive. Polonium dissolves readily in dilute acids, but is only slightly soluble in alkalis. Weight for weight it is about 2.5 x 10 to the 11th power times as toxic as hydro cyanic acid (HCN or Cyanide, the stuff used by spies to commit suicide in those little tooth shaped capsules in James Bond films). Polonium has been found in tobacco as a contaminant and in uranium ores.
Polonium is radioactive and excessively rare in nature. It is made in very small quantities through a nuclear reaction of bismuth. Neutron irradiation of 209bismuth (atomic number 83) gives 210polonium (atomic number 84).
*
209Bi + 1n 210Po + e-
Metallic polonium can be fractionally distilled from the bismuth or electrodeposited onto a metal surface such as silver.
NOW: PLEASE SIGN OUR ONLINE PETITION TO THE
US GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM: HERE >
The below article was written by Mr. Robert Martin (rob.m@lycos.com)
It is excellent and has been reprinted here for your reference.
This web page offers a summary of information concerning radioactive elements in tobacco, food, and water. Each footnote contains either a research reference/abstract or a hypertext link followed by a short excerpt from the web page. A further discussion of polonium in food and water is linked at the bottom of the page.
It’s an established but little known fact that commercially grown tobacco is contaminated with radioactive elements (1). The contamination is sourced in naturally occurring radioactive radon gas (2) which is absorbed and trapped in apatite rock (3). Apatite is mined for the purpose of formulating the phosphate portion of most chemical fertilizers(4). Polonium releases ionizing alpha radiation which is at least 20 times more harmful than either beta or gamma radiation when exposed to internal organs(5).
Lung cancer rates increased significantly during most of the 1900's (6). Although it has been conclusively proven that tobacco causes lung cancer, researchers have not established that the carcinogens in tobacco are present in high enough levels to explain the numbers of cancer cases(7). Its no coincidence that between 1938 and 1960, the level of polonium 210 in American tobacco tripled commensurate with the increased use of chemical fertilizers and Persistent Organic Pollutant (POP) accumulation(8).
Conservative estimates put the level of radiation absorbed by a pack-and-a-half a day smoker at the equivalent of 300 chest X-rays every year (9). The Office of Radiation, Chemical & Biological Safety at Michigan State University state in their newsletter that the radiation equivalent was as high as 800 chest X-rays per year(10). The author of the study linked at the bottom of the page stated in an interview that a typical nicotine addict might be getting the equivalent of almost 22,000 chest X-rays per year(11). At one point, US Surgeon General C. Everett Koop stated that this radiation might be responsible for 90% of tobacco-induced cancer(12). Researchers have induced cancer in animal test subjects that inhaled polonium 210 but have not caused cancer through the inhalation of any of the non-radioactive chemical carcinogens found in tobacco(13).
Internal Phillip Morris memos indicate that the tobacco corporation was well aware of radiation contamination in 1974(14), and that they had means to remove polonium from tobacco in 1980 (15).
Radon gas occurs naturally in most places on the planet so most exposure to radiation is unavoidable and relatively harmless(16). The needless additional radiation delivered via fertilizer can be reduced through the use of alternative phosphate sources (17) or organic farming techniques (18) [ed- and Ammonia Fertilizer].
It may be possible to reduce your polonium intake through smoking cessation or merely switching to an organic brand of tobacco.
NOW: PLEASE SIGN OUR ONLINE PETITION TO THE
US GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM: HERE >
VISIT OUR VIRTUAL HOSPITAL
*
Lung Cancer Information... Is Cancer Big Business?
*
Lung Cancers classified by the experts...
*
Tumor Grading, not an Academic Exercise...
*
Lung Cancer Websites and eOrgs...
*
Visit "the Truth . com", a site dedicated to public education about Tobacco Smoking.
*
New Health Warnings required by Law in Canada...
*
Lung Cancer from the perspective of the Mayo Clinic
FOOTNOTES:
1. Click here for Tobacco information website
That phosphate fertilizer contains natural radioactivity is a well established fact. Natural uranium accumulates in the phosphate rock...Uranium and its daughters are thus carried through the mining and manufacturing process and appear in the commercial product [the fertilizer used on tobacco plants]. Soils to which these products are applied show an increase in radioactivity over that naturally present and this increase is a function of the rate of application and the number of years that the fertilizers have been used....Thus, the smaller particles [of the fertilizer] which would be more likely to be made airborne by normal farming practices, would be expected to settle out on the tobacco leaves during the growing season and/or be more readily taken up by the plant root system.
The recommendation of using ammonium phosphate instead of calcium phosphate as fertilizer is probably a valid but expensive point...
2. BC Government Health website
Radon is a naturally-occurring, radioactive gas which is given off by traces of uranium in soil and rock. It is found at varying levels all over the world….The Ministry of Health estimates that about 100 people a year die of radon induced lung cancer in the Province of British Columbia. Radon likely causes more lung cancers than second hand tobacco smoke.
US Government geology website
Radon is a gas produced by the radioactive decay of the element radium….Radon itself is radioactive because it also decays, losing an alpha particle and forming the element polonium.
Polunium is also radioactive - it is this element, which is produced by radon in the air and in people's lungs, that can hurt lung tissue and cause lung cancer.
3. Australian Geology Website
...natural uranium-bearing minerals, such as apatite
4. Mining and Oil Industry Newsletter
The phosphate rock is commercially available as "apatite"….Phosphogypsum is a by-product or tailings product of phosphate production into phosphoric acid. It is created when sulfuric acid is used with phosphate rock to produce phosphoric acid. Phosphoric acid is used in the production of phosphatic fertilizers. Because of other elements present in phosphates deposits such as uranium and cadmium, phosphogypsum typically contains radon and other radioactive materials and can be extremely hazardous.
5. Types of radiation
The three main types of radiation, alpha, beta, and gamma have different penetrating abilities. Alpha radiation to external skin is no hazard because it is likely that the outer (dead) layer of the skin stops all alpha radiation. But if alpha radiation is received internally than the damage to the surrounding tissue is expected to be 20 times more harmful than the expected damages from beta or gamma radiation.
6. Dr. Smith's Health Newsletter
The evidence is definite. Cancer statisticians have had trouble explaining the increased lung cancer rate despite the almost 20 percent reduction in tobacco use in males. It was 4/100,000 in 1930, then 40/100,000 in 1960, and by 1980 it had climbed to about 72/100,000. The same with women, despite the fact that ladies smoke filtered cigarettes which filters out benzopyrine and nitrosamine, two acknowledged carcinogens.
7. Scientific American
Hardly any researchers doubt that repeatedly exposing parts of the body to, for example, chemicals in tobacco smoke, may eventually bring about the cellular damage that can lead to cancer. But the details of how most exposures give rise to such damage remain elusive.
8. Dr. Smith's Health Newsletter
Here may be an explanation: Dr. Jerome Marmorstein found radioactive polonium in the lungs of smokers and in tobacco grown since 1950. Polonium levels tripled in American tobacco between 1938 and 1960.
This radioactive polonium, plus some lead and radium found in cigarettes and the lungs is directly related to the fertilizer used in tobacco farm soil. The Tennessee Valley authority helped fund apatite rock grinding factories for the tobacco farmers. That's where the polonium came from.
Polonium emits the most carcinogenic form of radioactivity known, but has a short half-life (four months). However, it binds with radioactive lead which has a 22 year half-life, and then breaks down into radioactive polonium.
Link to PubMed abstract of Dr. Marmorstein's research
9. Typical School Anti-smoking Campaign Information
POLONIUM: radiation dosage, equal to 300 chest x-rays in one year
10. Safe Science Newsletter, Michigan State University
When you light up a cigarette the polonium is volatilized, you inhale it, and it is quickly deposited in the living tissue of the respiratory system. It is estimated that if you smoke one and a half packs of cigarettes a day for one year the bronchial tissues will receive approximately 16,000 millirem of radiation exposure (one chest x-ray could deliver 20 - 30 millirem to the same tissue). In comparison, the federal limits of radiation exposure to the general public from man-made occupational radiation may not exceed 100 millirem per year or 2 millirem in any one hour.
11. Healthweek Magazine - Interview with Gustave Kilthau
"Smokers of one-and-a-half packs of cigarettes a day receive approximately 60 millirads of radiation daily (as much as 60 chest X-rays), which is 21.9 rads per year (as much as 21,900 chest X-rays) or 547.5 rads over a course of 25 years (equivalent to 547,500 chest X-rays). Bear in mind that we are considering the inhaling of smoke from U.S. grown tobacco. Divide that by five and a half for tobacco grown in India."
12. Dr. George - Health Information
It is accepted by a growing number of scientists today that all American cigarettes contain significant levels of polonium-210, the same sort of radiation given off by the plutonium of atom bombs (ionizing alpha radiation). It just so happens that the tobacco plant's roots and leaves are especially good at absorbing radioactive elements from uranium-containing phosphate fertilizers that are required by U.S. law, and from naturally occurring radiation in the soil, air, and water.
In fact, this radioactivity, according to C. Everett Koop, not tar, accounts for at least 90% of all smoking-related lung cancer.
Dr. R.T. Ravenholt, former director of World Health Surveys at the Centers for Disease Control, agrees with the risk, asserting that "Americans are exposed to far more radiation from tobacco smoke than from any other source."
13. Click here for several informative letters written by tobacco researchers
The importance of proper assessment of the risk to cigarette smokers from radionuclides in the smoke cannot be overstated. In view of the present knowledge, it is improbable that a single area of a few square millimeters of high alpha activity in the bronchial tree is important. Nonetheless, Po210 is the only component in cigarette smoke tar that has produced cancers by itself in laboratory animals as a result of inhalation exposure.
14. Phillip Morris internal memo regarding radioactive content of tobacco (many more available using search function)
15. Phillip Morris internal memo regarding removal of polonium from tobacco
16. Uranium Information Centre
"Naturally occurring background levels of radiation can typically range from 1.5 to 3.5 millisieverts (muSv) a year and in some places can be much higher. The highest known level of background radiation affecting a substantial population is in Kerala and Madras States in India where some 140,000 people receive an annual dose rate which averages over 15 millisieverts per year from gamma, plus a similar amount from radon."
"Any dose of radiation, no matter how small, is assumed to involve a possibility of risk to human health, but at doses below 50 millisieverts per year the risks are so small the effects are not measurable and may be negligible."
17. Florida Institute of Phosphate Research
Results indicate that the radionuclides associated with phosphogypsum do not report to the ammonium sulfate product but are found instead almost exclusively in the by-product calcium carbonate.
18. Environment Canada - Organic Farming
Organic certification standards permit farmers to use only organic or natural rock forms of phosphate. Animal manures are an excellent organic source of phosphorous; however, rock phosphate is essentially unavailable to plants, similar to much of the phosphate already present in the soil. Application of rock phosphate is, therefore, not very effective.
NOW: PLEASE SIGN OUR ONLINE PETITION TO THE
US GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM: HERE >
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES:
Pediatrics 1993 Sep;92(3):464-5
Cigarette smoke = radiation hazard.
Evans GD, Department of Pediatrics, Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Vallejo, CA 94589-2485.
Ohio Med 1987 Feb;83(2):113-6
Tobacco's radiation: its sources and potential hazards.
Rahman SM, Albert CP, Reehal BS
Radiat Res 1980 Jul;83(1):190-6
Alpha Radioactivity in cigarette smoke.
Cohen BS, Eisenbud M, Harley NH
Nature 1974 May 17;249(454):215-7
Radioactivity of tobacco trichomes and insoluble cigarette smoke particles.
Martell EA
Boothe GF. The need for radiation controls in the phosphate and related industries. [Journal Article] Health Physics. 32(4):285-90, 1977 Apr.
Morgro-Campero A. Fleischer RL. Upper limits of alpha-radioactivity per particle of cigarette smoke. [Journal Article] Health Physics. 32(1):39-40, 1977 Jan
Free Webpages at Webspawner.com
Radioactivity in Tobacco
Radioactivity in Food
Radiation WasteLink
NOW: PLEASE SIGN OUR ONLINE PETITION TO THE
US GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM: HERE >

Send E-Mail to: rob.m@lycos.com
(c) 2002 American Computer Scientists Association Inc.
REPRINTED from copyrighted material belonging to Robert Martin, the Middle East Times,
and other sources.
Please note: the opinions expressed by the Authors are not necessarily those held by the American Computer Scientists Association Inc. or it's staff. As a Charitable Association, the ACSA investigates claims and complaints made by the Public and its membership that might represent adverse consequences happening to the membership or the Public or which might be in violation of Public Law and Safety, or the United States Constitution or International Law.
In all regards, this opinion document, all of it's parts, and the associated Petition, are expressly protected speech under the United States Constitution for: Freedom of Speech, Lawful Assembly, Expression of Public Opinions in the Town Square Assembly, the Town Hall Meeting, expressions of Public Concern over Issues to the United States Congress, the Department of Agriculture, the President of the United States and the other bodies of State and Government, including Law Enforcement Agencies involved in the investigation of various complaints of unlawful behavior. In all regards, this publication is the same as the historical Town Cryer engaged in lawful speech, public inquiry and announcement.
Any inquires about this piece, the website or it's content may be addressed to: websmaster@acsa2000.net"

"Radioactive" cigarettes cited in Israeli lawsuit

"Radioactive" cigarettes cited in Israeli lawsuit: ""Radioactive" cigarettes cited in Israeli lawsuit
Megan Goldin JERUSALEM June 2000
An Israeli lawsuit against U.S. cigarette companies is citing an alleged internal Philip Morris memo as evidence that the biggest U.S. cigarette maker made cigarettes containing naturally radioactive tobacco.
Attorney Amos Hausner, son of the prosecutor who sent Nazi Adolf Eichmann to the gallows, is fighting the biggest suit in Israel's history to make one Israeli and six U.S. tobacco companies pay up to $8 billion for allegedly poisoning and possibly irradiating Israelis with cigarettes.
"Whether the amount of radioactivity is harmful or not, we don't know but it is quite possible it is harmful because of the simple reason that nobody is checking," Hausner said in an interview with Reuters on Thursday.
The case was brought on behalf of the Clalit national health fund which represents 60 percent of Israelis.
It will be the first major suit to use what is alleged to be an internal Philip Morris memo found in the Minnesota archive that cigarette companies were forced to establish by U.S. court order, Hausner said.
Marked "Confidential", the purported memo dated April 2, 1980, says that phosphate fertilisers and especially superphosphate fertilisers used in tobacco fields can contain natural uranium.
"Soils to which these products (the fertilisers) are applied show an increase in radioactivity," the document says, adding that the by-products of decaying uranium, lead and polonium, were present in tobacco and smoke. Polonium is radioactive.
The document concludes that while it is unlikely that a person would get lung cancer by inhaling the polonium present in the tobacco, "evidence to date, however, does not allow one to state that this is an impossibility".
The alleged memo, a copy of which Hausner provided to Reuters, notes that suggestions that Philip Morris use a different fertiliser would be "a valid but expensive point".
SUIT SEEKS $8 BILLION
Hausner said cigarette makers usually defended themselves in court by claiming that smokers knew the risks and chose to smoke anyway. But he pointed out that smokers never knew or in any way agreed to smoke radioactive cigarettes.
"Nobody, but nobody, assumes the risk of inhaling something radioactive," Hausner said.
Philip Morris attorney Chuck Nunley told Reuters the issue of polonium in tobacco has been studied by scientists and even the U.S. surgeon-general who, the lawyer said, concluded in 1971 that it was significant only if found in relatively high concentrations.
"As I understand it, polonium is a naturally occurring element that there is a background level of in the environment. It's present in trace amounts in lots of things that we eat," Nunley said.
Hausner is seeking $2 billion in damages allegedly caused by the tobacco products and by the companies' actions and around $6 billion as damages for smokers who he says will die or become ill in the future.
The case, filed in 1998, is still at a preliminary stage. Once it goes to trial, Hausner said, he will demand that Philip Morris provide details about how widely the fertilizers were used and whether they are still used.
"Since cigarettes are not regulated, nobody knows what's inside them and what's not inside them," Hausner said.
He said that it was possible the radioactive fertiliser was used by other cigarette companies besides Philip Morris.
"The document makes no distinction between different manufacturers. It's according to where the tobacco has been grown and what fertilisers were used," he said.
Hausner has campaigned against smoking for years, first forcing Israel's army to ban cigarette advertising from a magazine given to soldiers and then helping make El Al Israel Airlines implement a non-smoking policy on its flights.
About 10,000 people die every year in Israel from smoking- related illnesses.
"In Israel, if you put together all the deaths from wars, terror activities, road accidents, murders, suicide, illegal drugs – all of these together – you wouldn't even reach one half of the number of deaths from smoking," Hausner said.
Reuters"

Chapter 15: Radioactive Tobacco

Chapter 15: Radioactive Tobacco: "Tobacco smoking kills more persons each year than AIDS, heroin, crack, cocaine, alcohol, car accidents, fire, and murder combined. Cigarette smoking is as addictive as heroin, complete with withdrawal symptoms, and the percentage of relapses (75%) is the same as for “kicking” cocaine and heroin users.
It is far and away the number one cause of preventable death in the U.S. today. Tobacco smokers have ten times the lung cancer of non-smokers, twice the heart disease, and are three times more likely to die of heart disease if they do develop it.
Yet tobacco is totally legal, and even receives the highest U.S. government farm subsidies of any agricultural product in America, all the while being our biggest killer! What total hypocrisy!
In the U.S. one in seven deaths are caused by smoking cigarettes. Women should know that lung cancer is more common than breast cancer in women who smoke and that smoking on the pill increases cancer and heart risks dramatically.
Seven million dollars a day promotes the tobacco business, and it is estimated that the cigarette industry needs about 3,000 new smokers a day to replace those who quit or die each day from smoking.
Kentucky’s principal business and agriculture for 100 years (until 1890) was the healthful, versatile, and useful cannabis hemp. It has since been replaced by non-edible, non-fibrous, soil-depleting tobacco, which is grown in soil fertilized with radioactive materials.
U.S. government studies have show that a pack-and-a-half of tobacco cigarettes per day over a year for just one year is the equivalent to your lungs of what some 300 chest x-rays (using the old, pre-1980s slow x-ray film and without using any lead protection) are to your skin.
But while an x-ray dissipates its radioactivity instantly, tobacco has a radioactive half-life that will remain active in the lungs for 21.5 years.
Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop said on national television that radioactivity contained in tobacco leaves is probably responsible for most tobacco-related cancer.
No radioactivity exists in cannabis tars.
(National Center for Atmospheric Research, 1964; American Lung Assn.; Dr. Joseph R. DiFranza, U. of Mass. Medical Center; Reader’s Digest, March 1986; Surg. Gen. C. Everett Koop, 1990.)"

Lycaeum > Leda > Radioactive Tobacco

Lycaeum > Leda > Radioactive Tobacco: "Radioactive Tobacco
What's Related >>
A series of letters to the New England Journal of Medicine discussing the role of radioactivity in causing lung cancer in smokers.
Winters-TH, Franza-JR, Radioactivity in Cigarette Smoke, New England Journal of Medicine, 1982; 306(6): 364-365 (reproduced w/o permission)
To the Editor: During the 17 years since the Surgeon General's first report on smoking, intense research activity has been focused on the carcinogenic potential of the tar component of cigarette smoke. Only one definite chemical carcinogen -- benzopyrene -- has been found. Conspicuous because of its absence is research into the role of the radioactive component of cigarette smoke.
The alpha emitters polonium-210 and lead-210 are highly con- centrated on tobacco trichomes and insoluble particles in cigarette smoke (1). The major source of the polonium is phosphate fertilizer, which is used in growing tobacco. The trichomes of the leaves con- centrate the polonium, which persists when tobacco is dried and processed.
Levels of Po-210 were measured in cigarette smoke by Radford and Hunt (2) and in the bronchial epithelium of smokers and nonsmokers by Little et al. (3) After inhalation, ciliary action causes the insoluble radioactive particles to accumulate at the bifurcation of segmental bronchi, a common site of origin of bronchogenic carcinomas.
In a person smoking 1 1/2 packs of cigarettes per day, the radia- tion dose to the bronchial epithelium in areas of bifurcation is 8000 mrem per year -- the equivalent of the dose to the skin from 300 x-ray films of the chest per year. This figure is comparable to total- body exposure to natural background radiation containing 80 mrem per year in someone living in the Boston area.
It is a common practive to assume that the exposure received from a radiation source is distributed throughout a tissue. In this way, a high level of exposure in a localized region -- e.g. bronchial epithelium -- is averaged out over the entire tissue mass, suggest- ing a low level of exposure. However, alpha particles have a range of only 40 um in the body. A cell nucleus of 5 to 6 um that is traversed by a single alpha particle receives a dose of 1000 rems. Thus, although the total tissue dose might be considered negligible, cells close to an alpha source receive high doses. The Po-210 alpha activity of cigarette smoke may be a very effective carcinogen if a multiple mutation mechanism is involved.
Radford and Hunt have determined that 75 per cent of the alpha activity of cigarette smoke enters the ambient air and is unab- sorbed by the smoker, (2) making it available for deposit in the lungs of others. Little et al. have measured levels of Po-210 in the lungs of nonsmokers that may not be accounted for on the basis of natural exposure to this isotope.
The detrimental effects of tobacco smoke have been considerably underestimated, making it less likely that chemical carcinogens alone are responsible for the observed incidence of tobacco-related carcinoma. Alpha emitters in cigarette smoke result in appreciable radiation exposure to the bronchial epithelium of smokers and probably secondhand smokers. Alpha radiation is a possible etio- logic factor in tobacco-related carcinoma, and it deserves further study.
Thomas H. Winters, M.D.
Joseph R. Di Franza, M.D.
University of Massachusetts
Medical Center
Worcester, Ma 01605
1. Martell EA. Radioactivity of tobacco trichomes and insoluble cigarette smoke particles. Nature. 1974; 249:215-7.
2. Radford EP Jr, Hunt VR. Polonium-210: a volatile radioelement in cig- arettes. Science. 1964; 143:247-9
3. Little JB, Radford EP Jr, McCombs HL, Hunt VR. Distribution of po- lonium-210 in pulmonary tissues of cigarette smokers. N Engl J Med. 1965; 273:1343-51.
Responses to this letter:
NEJM 307(5):309-313. reproduced w/o permission
To the Editor: In a letter in the Feb 11 issue, Winters and DiFranza (1) correctly point out that alpha radiation from polonium-210 is a possible causal factor in tobacco-related carcinoma, but they incorrectly state that ``inhaled'' Po210 is a factor and that research on this important possibility has been neglected. I will briefly review recent pertinent research.
Radford and Hunt (2) first suggested that alpha radiation from Po210 in cigarette smoke may be important in the genesis of bronchial cancer. Little et al. (3) found surprisingly high concentrations of Po210 at single bronchial bifurcations in seven of 37 cigarette smokers. Holtzman and others (4 - 6) raised doubts about the validity of these observations because inhaled volatile Po210 is soluble and rapidly cleared. Subsequently, I determined (7) that lead-210 (a beta-emitting precursor of Po210) is highly concentrated in tobacco trichomes and that trichome combustion in burning cigarettes produces insoluble, Pb210-enriched particles in mainstream smoke. Thus, the high concentrations of Po210 observed at segmental bifurcations (4 - 6) can be explained by the persistence of insoluble, Pb210-enriched particles deposited at bifurcations and by the ingrowth of Po210 in these particles. (7,8) Radford and Martell (9) confirmed that the excess Po210 in the bronchial epithelium of smokers is accomplished by a larger excess of Pb210.
Fleischer and Parungo (10) provided experimental evidence indicating that radon decay products and Pb210 are concentrated on trichome tips. Mechanisms of accumulation of Pb210 on tobacco trichomes are discussed by Martell and Poet. (11)
Two recent studies (12,13) indicate that alpha radiation from inhaled indoor radon progeny may explain the incidence of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Martell and Sweder (14) report that indoor radon decay products that pass from the room air through burning cigarettes into mainstream smoke are present in large, insoluble smoke particles that are selectively deposited at bifurcations. Thus, the smoker receives alpha radiation at bronchial bifurcations from these three sources: from indoor radon progeny inhaled between cigarettes, from Po214 in mainstream smoke particles, and from Po210 that grows into Pb210 enriched particles that persist at bifurcations. I estimate that the cumulative alpha dose at the bifurcations of smokers who die of lung cancer is about 80rad (1600rem) -- a dose sufficient to induce malignant transformations by alpha interactions with basal cells.
Edward A Martell, Ph.D.
National Center for Atmospheric Research
Boulder, CO 80307
1. Winters TH, DiFranza JR. Radioactivity in Cigarette Smoke. NEJM 1982 306:364-365 2. Radford EP, Hunt VR. Polonium-210: a volatile radioelement in cigarettes. Science. 1964; 143:247-249
3. Little JB, Radford EP, McCombs HL, Hunt VR. Distribution of polonium-210 in pulminary tissues of cigarette smokers. NEJM. 1965; 273:1343-1351
4. Holtzman RB, Ilcewicz FH. Lead-210 and polonium-210 in tissues of cigarette smokers. Science. 1966; 153:1259-1260
5. Little JB, Radford EP. Polonium-210 in bronchial epithelium of cigarette smokers. Science. 1967; 155:606
6. Holtzman RB. Polonium-210 in bronchial epithelium of cigarette smokers. Science. 1967; 155:607
7. Martell EA. Radioactivity in tobacco trichomes and insoluble cigarette smoke particles. Nature. 1974; 249:215-7
8. Martell EA. Tobacco radioactivity and cancer in smokers. Am Sci. 1975; 63:404-412
9. Radford EP, Martell EA. Polonium-210: lead-210 ratios as an index of residence times of insoluble particles from cigarette smoke in bronchial epithelium. In: Walton WH, ed. Inhaled particles, part 2. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1977:567-580
10. Fleischer RL, Parungo FP. Aerosol particles on tobacco trichomes. Nature. 1974; 250:158-159
11. Martell EA, Poet SE. Radon Progeny on Biological Surfaces and their effects. In: Vohra KG, et al., eds. Proceedings, Bombay Symposium on Natural Radiation in the Environment. New Delhi: Wiley Eastern Ltd., 1982
12. Evans RD, Harley JH, Jacobi W, Mclean AS, Mills WA, Stewart CG. Estimate risk from environmental exposure to radon-222 and its decay products. Nature. 1981;290;98-100
13. Harley NH, Pasternack BS. A model for predicting lung cancer risks induced by environmental levels of radon daughters. Health Phys. 1981; 40:307-16.
14. Martell EA, Sweder KS. The roles of polonium isotopes in the etiology of lung cancer in cigarette smokers and uranium miners. In: Gomez M, ed. Proceedings of a symposium on radiation hazards in mining. New York: American Institute of Mining Engineers, 1982:383-389.
To the Editor: The presence of Po210 and Pb210 in cigarette smoke may help to explain a paradox found in smokers of low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes.
Hammond et al. (1) noted that the number of deaths from lung cancer was greater in subjects who smoked 20 to 39 low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes a day than in those who smoked one to 19 high-tar, high-nicotine cigarettes a day. Thus, the number of cigarettes smoked may be more important than their tar and nicotine content.
Two features of low-tar low-nicotine cigarettes that help to reduce the amounts of tar in inhaled smoke may have little effect or adverse effects on the amounts of Po210 and Pb210 in inhaled smoke. In the first place, the use of higher porosity paper and perforated filters may enhance the completeness of combustion. Although this may decrease the tar and nicotine content in inhaled smoke, it may increase the pyrolysis of trichomes, resulting in smoke particles with higher specific activities of Pb210. Secondly, cigarette filters have been shown to have no noticeable protective effect against Po210 inhalation. (2) If Po210 and Pb210 contribute to tobacco related cancer, then the number of cigarettes smoked may be more important than the tar or nicotine content.
Although intensive effort has been successful in producing low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes, perhaps future research should be aimed toward the development of low Po210, low Pb210 cigarettes.
Jeffrey I. Cohen M.D.
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC 27710
1. Hammond EC, Garfinkel L, Seidman H, Lew EA. Some Recent findings concerning cigarette smoking. In: Origins of Human Cancer. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1977:101-112
2. Rajewski B, Stahlholfen W. Polonium-210 activity in the lungs of cigarette smokers. Nature. 1966; 209:1312-1313
To the Editor: Contrary to the contention of Winters and DiFranza that research into the carcinogenic potential of the radioactive component of cigarette smoke is conspicuous by its absence, we and others have studied and reported on this risk since the theory was first proposed by Radford and Hunt in 1964. (1) Within five years of the initial report that the radioactive alpha emitter Po210 was present in mainstream smoke and in samples of bronchial epithelium from cigarette smokers, results from over two dozen related studies were published. The source of the Po210 and Pb210 (The beta emitter Pb210 is the long lived precursor that supports the Po210) was investigated, (2) the contents of these nuclides in various tobaccos documented, (3) the fraction transferred to the mainstream or sidestream smoke (or both) determined, (4) and the concentration in the whole lungs of smokers and nonsmokers measured. (5)
Measurements made with cigarette smoke condensate demonstrate that although radium and thorium are also present in cigarette smoke, 99% of the alpha activity is from Po210. (6) Measurements of the whole lungs of smokers and exsmokers show that the inhaled Po210 is retained in the lower lung. (7)
A relatively new detection technique using nuclear-track-etch film has allowed us to determine the amount and microdistribution of alpha activity on the bronchial mucosa in fresh autopsy specemins. (8) We examined about one-fourth of the upper respiratory tract in each of seven persons (Three smokers, two exsmokers, and two nonsmokers). A few areas of slightly elevated alpha activity were found in each of the bronchial trees examined except that of one young smoker, in which efficient bronchial clearance would be expected. The average dose rate to the basal cells of the bronchial epithelium from alpha activity in these seven persons ranged from 2.0 to 40mrem per year. For comparison, the natural background dose from inhaled radon-daughter alpha activity is about 2000mrem per year. One area of a few square millimeters, containing markedly elevated activity, was found in the bronchii of an older smoker. This area could deliver an annual dose of about 20,000mrem, comparable to the results originally reported by Bradford and Hunt. This activity can lead to a lifetime dose similar to the alpha dose that appears to yield an elevated risk of lung cancer in underground miners. However, the total dose cannot be calculated, since the residence time of such an alpha emitting spot on the bronchial tree is not known.
The importance of proper assessment of the risk to cigarette smokers from radionuclides in the smoke cannot be overstated. In veiw of the present knowledge, it is improbable that a single area of a few square millimeters of high alpha activity in the bronchial tree is important. Nonetheless, Po210 is the only component in cigarette smoke tar that has produced cancers by itself in laboratory animals as a result of inhalation exposure. (9)
We firmly believe that the role of alpha radiation in tobacco related carcinogenesis deserves further study. The techniques to define its role in this disease are now available.
Beverly S. Cohen, Ph.D.
Naomi H. Harley, Ph.D.
New York University School of Medicine
New York, NY 10016
1. Radford EP, Hunt R. Polonium-210: a volatile radioelement in cigarettes. Science. 1964; 143:247-249
2. Tso TC, Harley NH, Alexander LT. Source of Pb210 and Po210 in tobacco. Science. 1966; 153:880-882
3. Black SC, Bretthauer EW. Polonium in tobacco. Radiat Health Data Rep. 1968;9:145
4. Ferri ES, Christiansen H. Lead-210 in tobacco and cigarette smoke. Public Health Rep. 1967; 82:828
5. Hill CR. Polonium-210 in man. Nature 1965; 208:423-428
6. Cohen BS, Eisenbud M, Harley NH. Alpha radioactivity in cigarette smoke. Radiat Res. 1979;83:190-196
7. Cohen BS, Eisenbud M, Wrenn ME, Harley NH. Distribution of polonium-210 in the human lung. Radiat Res. 1979;79:162-168
8. Cohen BS, Eisenbud M, Harley NH. Measurement of the alpha activity on the mucosal surface of the human bronchial tree. Health Phys. 1980:619-632.
9. Yuille CL, Berke HL, Hull T. Lung cancer following Pb210 inhalation in rats. Radiat Res. 1967;31:760-774
To the Editor: The letter of Winters and DiFranza has renewed the earlier suggestion that the radioisotope Po210 may have an important role in the induction of lung cancer in smokers. In particular, it is claimed that the radionuclide may be deposited very inhomogeneously in the bronchial epithelium, in the form of a limited number of relatively ``hot'' particles, and that such hot particles may be much more effective carcinogenically than the same amount of radioactivity would be if it were more uniformly distributed. The basis of both these claims must be questioned.
Evidence on the question of the carcinogenicity of hot particles has been reviewed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection, (1) which found the actual situation to be just the reverse of that suggested by the correspondents. The evidence cited for the actual formation of hot particles (2) comes from a study of the Po210 in a series of several very small samples of bronchial epithelium (usually less than 25mg) collected from smokers' lungs. In these measurements, the activities in individual samples were so low that for a proportion at least, only about 20 counts were recorded in a counting period of three to seven days against a background of 40 counts. Proper analysis of the statistical validity of these observations was not given by the original authors and is not possible from their reported data. Contrary evidence, not cited by the correspondents, is provided by a somewhat earlier paper (3) that reported the results of auto radiographic examination of excised segments of bronchial epithelium; this study found no evidence of surface concentrations of alpha activity of more than 0.01pCi per square centimeter, corresponding to a mean dose rate of about 10mrem per year. Finally, the correspondents' suggestion that the ``major source of the polonium is phosphate fertilizer'' is not substantiated and is at variance with published data (3,4) indicating that it originates as atmospheric fallout of the decay products of natural radon-222.
C.R. Hill, M.D.
Institute of Cancer Research
Royal Marsden Hospital
Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PX,
England
1. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Biological effects of inhaled radionuclides, ICRP Publication 31, Section G, 86-92. Ann ICRP. 1980;4 (No. 1/2)
2. Little JB, Radford EP, McCombs HL, Hunt VR. Distribution of polonium-210 in pulminary tissues of cigarette smokers. NEJM 1965;273:1343-1351
3. Hill CR. Polonium-210 in man. Nature. 1965; 208:423-428
4. Hill CR. Lead-210 and polonium-210 in grass. Nature, 1960; 187:211-212
To the Editor: The Surgeon General's recent denunciation of tobacco smoking and the American Cancer Society's pessimistic prognosis that lung cancer will be the number one cause of death from cancer in women by 1985 (1) provide timely emphasis on the recent NEJM letter on radioactive alpha emitters in tobacco smoke. Some of the further study encouraged by Winters and DiFranza has in fact been performed, yielding results far more foreboding than expected.
In two separate studies, Little et al. (2,3) have induced respiratory tumors in hamsters by intratracheal instillation of Po210 in various amounts down to less than one-fifth that inhaled by a heavy cigarette smoker (one who consumes two packs a day) during 25 years. The incidence of tumors at the lowest dose was 13%, including borderline carcinomas, and was 11% for frankly malignant tumors.
Contrary to the expected results of most radiobiologists, dose reduction did not result in either a constant dose-response ratio (the linear response hypothesis) or a larger dose-response ratio (The threshold or sigmoid hypothesis) but instead produced a marked decrease in the dose-response ratio. In one study, a reduction in activity from 0.700microCi of Po210 instilled to 0.00375microCi of Po210 instilled -- about a two hundred-fold decrease -- resulted in a decrease in the incidence of tumors from 61% to 13% (including borderline cases) -- only a fourfold decrease.
This decrease in the dose-response ratio with decreasing dose has also been observed in other studies of the effects of low dose alpha radiation and other radiation particles with high linear energy transfer (LET). In a study of osteosarcoma induction by alpha radiation, Muller et al. (4) had over a 100-fold decrease in the dose-response ratio from their highest dose (1500rad) to their lowest dose (15rad). For neutron radiation, Rossi et al. (5) found similar results, with leukemia induction having the smallest dose-response ratio in the lowest dose in survivors of the atomic bomb. Similarly, Hall et al. (6) found that both dose protraction and dose reduction for neutron radiation increased the cell-lethality-dose ratio of hamster cells in vitro.
The importance of these results with low dose irradiation by high LET particles should not be overlooked. Doses in the range of several thousand to 10^5 rad have generally been necessary for the experimental induction of lung cancer by beta or gamma radiation (with low LET), (7,8) as compared with the studies by Little et al., in which the lowest dose of 15rad (0.00375microCi in the lung volume for the lifetime of the hamsters) induced cancer at an incidence of about 13%.
Presumably, the high density of ionization along the track of alpha radiation (about one ion pair for every 2 Angstrom traveled) and other high-LET radiation is the prime factor causing Po210 to be an extremely efficient carcinogen.
Clearly, further work is warranted in this area, but we should not hesitate to disseminate the information already at hand -- that the alpha-radiation exposure to the lungs of tobacco smokers is extremely important.
Walter L. Wagner, B.A.
Veterans Administration
Medical Center
San Francisco, CA 94121
1. American Cancer Society. Ca: a cancer journal for clinicians. Jan/Feb 1981;Vol 31, No. 1
2. Little JB, Kennedy AR, McGandy RB. Lung cancer induced in hamsters by low doses of alpha radiation from polonium-210. Science. 1975; 188:737-738
3. Little JB, O'Toole WF. Respiratory tract tumors in hamsters induced by benz(a)pyrene and Po210 radiation. Cancer Res. 1974; 34:3026-3039
4. Muller WA, Gossner W, Hug O, Luz A. Late effects after incorporation of the short-lived alpha-emitters Ra224 and Th227 in mice. Health Phys. 1978; 35:33-55
5. Rossi HH, Mays CW. Leukemia risk from neutrons. Health Phys. 1978; 34:355-360
6. Hall EJ, Rossi HH, Roizin LA. Low-dose-rate irradiation of mammalian cells with radium and californium-252. Radiology. 1971; 99:445-451
7. Cember H. Radiogenic Lung Cancer. Prog Exp Tumor Res. 1964; 4:251.
8. Sanders CL, Thompson RC, Blair WJ. AEC Symp Ser. 1970; 18:285.
To the editor: The letter by Winters and DiFranza rivets much needed attention on the earlier finding of Radford and Hunt, (1) which is crucial to an understanding of the pathogenesis of smoking diseases. (2,3)
Although Winters and DiFranza tellingly describe the mechanisms by which Po210 on insoluble particles in cigarette smoke causes lung cancer, they neglect the even more important matter of how Po210 and other mutagens from tobacco smoke cause malignant neoplasms, degenerative cardiovascular diseases, and other diseases throughout the body of smokers (Table 1).
TABLE 1. Effects of Smoking on Tissues Directly and Indirectly Exposed to Radiation in Current Cigarette Smokers*
Cause of Death Number of Deaths Observed/
Expected
(ratio)
Observed Expected
All causes 36,143 20,857 1.73
Emphysema 1,201 81 14.83
Cancer:
Of directly exposed tissue 3,061 296 10.34
- Of buccal cavity 110 26 4.23
- Of pharynx 92 7 13.14
- Of larynx 94 8 11.75
- Of lung and bronchus 2,609 231 11.29
- Of esophagus 156 24 6.50
Of indirectly exposed tissue 4,547 3,292 1.38
- Of stomach 390 257 1.52
- Of intestines 662 597 1.11
- Of rectum 239 215 1.11
- Of liver and biliary passages 176 75 2.35
- Of pancreas 459 256 1.79
- Of prostate 660 504 1.31
- Of kidney 175 124 1.41
- Of bladder 326 151 2.16
- Of brain 160 152 1.05
- Malignant lymphomas 370 347 1.07
- Leukemias 333 207 1.61
- All other cancers 597 407 1.47
All cardiovascular diseases 21,413 13,572 1.58
- Coronary heart disease 13,845 8,787 1.58
- Aortic aneurysm 900 172 5.23
- Cor pulmonale 44 8 5.50
- All other cardiovascular 6,624 4,605 1.44
Ulcer of stomach, duodenum or jejunum 289 93 3.10
Cirrhosis of liver 404 150 2.69
*Data adapted from Rogot and Murray. (4)
Volatilized, soluble Po210, produced at the burning temperature of cigarettes, (1) is cleared from the bronchial mucosa at the expense of the rest of the body, being absorbed through the pulmonary circulation and carried by the systemic circulation to every tissue and cell, causing mutations of cellular genetic structures, deviation of cellular characteristics from their optimal normal state, accelerated aging, and early death from a body-wide spectrum of diseases, reminiscent of the disease and mortality patterns afflicting early radiologists and others with long-term exposure to x-rays and other forms of ionizing radiation. (5,6)
The proof of circulating mutagens from smoking is that Po210 and other mutagens can be recovered not only from tobacco smoke and bronchial mucosa, but also from the blood and urine of smokers. (1,7)
R.T. Ravenholt M.D., M.P.H.
Centers For Disease Control
Washington Office
Rockville, MD 20857
1. Radford EP Jr, Hunt VR. Polonium-210: a volatile radioelement in cigarettes. Science. 1964; 143:247-249
2. Ravenholt RT. Malignant cellular evolution: an analysis of the causation and prevention of cancer. Lancet. 1966; 1:523-526
3. Ravenholt RT, Lavinski MJ, Nellist D, Takenaga M. Effects of smoking upon reproduction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1966; 96:267-281
4. Rogot E., Murray JL. Smoking and causes of death among U.S. veterans: 16 years of observation. Public Health Rep. 1980:213-222
5. Warren S. Longevity and causes of death from irradiation in physicians. JAMA. 1956; 162:464-468
6. National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council. Long term effects of ionizing radiation from external sources. Washington D.C.: National Research Council, 1961.
7. Office on Smoking and Health. Smoking and Health: a report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: Office on smoking and health, 1979. (DHEW publication no. [PHS]79-50066).
To the editor: We concur with Drs. Winters and DiFranza that the scientific and medical community as well as public health officials should be more concerned with the detrimental effects of cigarette smoking. Reviews on the carcinogenic effect of cigarette smoke are made available to United States physicians at regular intervals through the Surgeon General's reports entitled Smoking and Health. (1) From these reports it is clear that benzo(a)pyrene is by far not the only carcinogen identified in cigarette smoke. Benzo(a)pyrene serves merely as an indicator for the wide spectrum of carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons, all of which are pyro synthesized by the same mechanism during smoking. Aside from these hydrocarbons, cigarette smoke contains other carcinogens such as aza-arenes, aromatic amines (including beta-napthylamine), nickel, volatile nitrosamines, and especially tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines. (1-3) The N-nitrsamine compounds are formed by nitrosation of nicotine and other alkaloids; their concentrations in tobacco and smoke exceed those of nitrosamines found in other consumer products by at least several hundred fold. These nitrosamines are probably formed from nicotine in vivo. (2,3) Above all, one needs to consider that the carcinogenic potential of tobacco is a composite effect of tumor initiators, tumor promoters, or co-carcinogens, and organ-specific carcinogens. (1,2)
Dietrich Hoffmann, Ph.D.
Ernst L. Wynder, M.D.
American Health Foundation
New York, NY 10017
1. Office on smoking and health. Smoking and Health: a report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: Office on smoking and health, 1979. (DHEW Publication No. [PHS]79-50066)
2. Wynder EL, Hoffman D. Tobacco and health: a societal challenge. NEJM 1979; 300:894-903
3. Hofmann D, Adams JD, Brunnemann KD, Hecht DD. Formation, occurrence and carcinogenesity of N-nitrosamines in tobacco products. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser. 1981; 174:247-273
To the editor: We thank Dr. Martell and Drs. Cohen and Harley for their reviews of the literature. Judging by the response to our original letter, research into the radioactive component has been in progress since the early 1960's, but the existence of this research is largely unknown outside a small segment of the scientific community. We were gratified to receive hundreds of phone calls from smokers who quit on learning about the alpha radiation in cigarette smoke.
Hill examined the lungs of only two smokers old enough to have metaplastic lesions. In addition, he analyzed whole bronchial specemins weighing 5g to 15g, of which only 2% by weight was epithelium. His result of 0.007 pCi per gram of tissue is in reasonable agreement with Little's result of 0.012pCi per gram of whole bronchus and thus does not disprove the existence of hot spots. In addition, the accumulation of Pb210 on tobacco leaves is from natural and unnatural radon-222 decay products and from phosphate fertilizers.
We thank Dr. Wagner for pointing out that alpha radiation now appears to be 1000 times more carcinogenic than gamma radiation. Standard practice reguards alpha radiation as only 10 to 20 times as carcinogenic as gamma radiation.
The growing list of malignant diseases associated with smoking, presented by Dr. Ravenholt, begs for causal explanation. Smokers have higher levels of Po210 in the lungs, bone blood and urine. (1-3) Higher levels of Po210 have been consistently found in smokers in the liver, kidney, spleen, pancreas, and gonads. (4,5) A study with an adequate number of subjects would probably demonstrate a significant difference. The Po210 must be strongly considered as a cause of these cancers.
Drs. Cohen and Harley report finding one ``hot spot'' on studying the alpha activity of alpha Po210 in tracheal autopsy specemins of seven people, three of whom were smokers. (6) This supports Little and his colleagues' previous findings of ``hot spots'' in 7 out of 37 smokers.
We thank Drs. Hoffmann and Wynder for correcting us about the variety of chemical carcinogens present in cigarette smoke. It is possible that chemicals and Po210 act as cocarcinogens in the following manner. Chemical and possibly physical agents create metaplastic nonciliated epithilial lesions. Auerbach demonstrated such lesions in 100% of heavy smokers. (7) The Po210 present on insoluble particles gains entrance to epithelial cells in such non-ciliated areas of mucous stagnation. Ingrowth of Po210 from the decay of Pb210 results in high doses of alpha radiation to already metaplastic cells. (8) Continued smoking ensures a steady delivery of Pb210 to these stagnant sites. Little and his co-workers have demonstrated synergism between benzo(a)pyrene and Po210 in an animal model. (9)
In view of the potential role of alpha radiation in a variety of tobacco related neoplasias, we believe that this area deserves more intense research. We find it surprising that the National Cancer Institute, with an annual budget of $500 million, has no active grants on alpha radiation as a cause of lung cancer (National Cancer Institute: personal communication).
We have found when educating smokers that more are encouraged to quit as they learn of the presence of radiation in cigarette smoke.
Joseph R. DiFranza, M.D.
Thomas H. Winters, M.D.
University of Massachusetts Medical Center
Worcester, MA 01605
1. Little JB, Radford EP Jr, McCombs HL, Hunt VR. Distribution of polonium-210 in pulminary tissues of cigarette smokers. NEJM 1965; 273:1343-1351
2. Radford EP Jr, Hunt VR. Polonium-210: a volatile radioelement in cigarettes. Science. 1964; 143:247-249
3. Holtzman RB, Ilcewicz FH. Lead 210 and Po210 in tissues of cigarette smokers. Science. 1966; 153:1259-1260
4. Blanchard RL. Concentrations of Pb210 and Po210 in human soft tissues. Health Phys. 1967; 13:625-632.
5. Hill CR. Polonium 210 in man. Nature. 1965; 208:423-428
6. Cohen BS, Eisenbud M, Harley NH. Measurement of the alpha radioactivity on the mucosal surface of the human bronchial tree. Health Phys. 1980; 619-32
7. Auerbach O, Stout AP, Hammond EC, Garfinkel L. Changes in bronchial epithelium in relation to cigarette smoking and in relation to lung cancer. NEJM 1961; 265:253-67
8. Radford EP, Martell EA. Polonium 210/Lead 210 ratios as an index of residence times of insoluble particles from cigarette smoke in bronchial epithelium. In: Walton WH, ed. Inhaled Particles. IV. Part 2, Oxford, Pergamon Press, 1977:567-580
9. Little JB, McGrandy RB, Kennedy AR. Interactions between polonium 210 alpha radiation, benzo(a)pyrene, and 0.9% NaCl instillations in the induction of experimental lung cancer. Cancer Res. 1978; 38:1929-1935.
Created 11/6/2000 19:57:41
Modified 11/6/2000 20:01:25 Leda version 1.4.3"

Erowid Tobacco Vault : Info on Radioactivity in Tobacco

Erowid Tobacco Vault : Info on Radioactivity in Tobacco: "
Radioactivity in Tobacco
Author Unknown

As I understand it, there are two sources of radioactivity in tobacco. Phosphate in fertilizer and radon.

Can anyone cite or post a study that better describes the mechanism by which tobacco concentrates radioactive elements in it's trichomes and cannabis does not, or, a study that verifies the absence of radioactivity in cannabis smoke?

---- Two recent studies (12,13) indicate that alpha radiation from inhaled indoor radon progeny may explain the incidence of lung cancer in nonsmokers. Martell and Sweder (14) report that indoor radon decay products that pass from the room air through burning cigarettes into mainstream smoke are present in large, insoluble smoke particles that are selectively deposited at bifurcations. Thus, the smoker receives alpha radiation at bronchial bifurcations from these three sources: from indoor radon progeny inhaled between cigarettes, from Po214 in mainstream smoke particles, and from Po210 that grows into Pb210 enriched particles that persist at bifurcations.

Edward A Martell, Ph.D. National Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder, CO 80307 [snip] Finally, the correspondents' suggestion that the ``major source of the polonium is phosphate fertilizer'' is not substantiated and is at variance with published data (3,4) indicating that it originates as atmospheric fallout of the decay products of natural radon-222."

Radioactive tobacco

Radioactive tobacco: "Radioactive tobacco
by David Malmo-Levine (02 Jan, 2002)
It's not tobacco's tar which kills, but the radiation!
Cannabis is often compared to tobacco, with the damage caused by smoking tobacco given as a reason to prohibit use of cannabis. Yet most of the harms caused by tobacco use are due not to tar, but to the use of radioactive fertilizers. Surprisingly, radiation seems to be the most dangerous and important factor behind tobacco lung damage.
Radioactive fertilizer
It's a well established but little known fact that commercially grown tobacco is contaminated with radiation. The major source of this radiation is phosphate fertilizer.1 The big tobacco companies all use chemical phosphate fertilizer, which is high in radioactive metals, year after year on the same soil. These metals build up in the soil, attach themselves to the resinous tobacco leaf and ride tobacco trichomes in tobacco smoke, gathering in small "hot spots" in the small-air passageways of the lungs.2 Tobacco is especially effective at absorbing radioactive elements from phosphate fertilizers, and also from naturally occurring radiation in the soil, air, and water.3
To grow what the tobacco industry calls "more flavorful" tobacco, US farmers use high-phosphate fertilizers. The phosphate is taken from a rock mineral, apatite, that is ground into powder, dissolved in acid and further processed. Apatite rock also contains radium, and the radioactive elements lead 210 and polonium 210. The radioactivity of common chemical fertilizer can be verified with a Geiger-Mueller counter and an open sack of everyday 13-13-13 type of fertilizer (or any other chemical fertilizer high in phosphate content).4
Conservative estimates put the level of radiation absorbed by a pack-and-a-half a day smoker at the equivalent of 300 chest X-rays every year.5 The Office of Radiation, Chemical & Biological Safety at Michigan State University reports that the radiation level for the same smoker was as high as 800 chest X-rays per year.6 Another report argues that a typical nicotine user might be getting the equivalent of almost 22,000 chest X-rays per year.7
US Surgeon General C Everett Koop stated on national television in 1990 that tobacco radiation is probably responsible for 90% of tobacco-related cancer.8 Dr RT Ravenholt, former director of World Health Surveys at the Centers for Disease Control, has stated that "Americans are exposed to far more radiation from tobacco smoke than from any other source."9
Researchers have induced cancer in animal test subjects that inhaled polonium 210, but were unable to cause cancer through the inhalation of any of the non-radioactive chemical carcinogens found in tobacco.10 The most potent non-radioactive chemical, benzopyrene, exists in cigarettes in amounts sufficient to account for only 1% of the cancer found in smokers.9
Smoke screen
Surprisingly, the US National Cancer Institute, with an annual budget of $500 million, has no active grants for research on radiation as a cause of lung cancer.1
Tobacco smoking has been popular for centuries,11 but lung cancer rates have only increased significantly after the 1930's.12 In 1930 the lung cancer death rate for white US males was 3.8 per 100,000 people. By 1956 the rate had increased almost tenfold, to 31 per 100,000.13 Between 1938 and 1960, the level of polonium 210 in American tobacco tripled, commensurate with the increased use of chemical fertilizers.14
Publicly available internal memos of tobacco giant Philip Morris indicate that the tobacco corporation was well aware of radiation contamination in 1974, and that they had means to remove polonium from tobacco in 1980, by using ammonium phosphate as a fertilizer, instead of calcium phosphate. One memo describes switching to ammonium phosphate as a "valid but expensive point."15
Attorney Amos Hausner, son of the prosecutor who sent Nazi Adolf Eichmann to the gallows, is using these memos as evidence to fight the biggest lawsuit in Israel's history, to make one Israeli and six US tobacco companies pay up to $8 billion for allegedly poisoning Israelis with radioactive cigarettes.16
image: Adbusters
image: Adbusters
Organic solutions
The radioactive elements in phosphate fertilizers also make their way into our food and drink. Many food products, especially nuts, fruits, and leafy plants like tobacco absorb radioactive elements from the soil, and concentrate them within themselves.17
The fluorosilicic acid used to make the "fluoridated water" most of us get from our taps is made from various fluorine gases captured in pollution scrubbers during the manufacture of phosphate fertilizers. This fluoride solution put into our water for "strong teeth" also contains radioactive elements from the phosphate extraction.18
Although eating and drinking radioactive products is not beneficial, the most harmful and direct way to consume these elements is through smoking them.19
The unnecessary radiation delivered from soil-damaging, synthetic chemical fertilizers can easily be reduced through the use of alternative phosphate sources including organic fertilizers.20 In one test, an organic fertilizer appeared to emit less alpha radiation than a chemical fertilizer.21 More tests are needed to confirm this vital bit of harm-reduction information.
Organic fertilizers such as organic vegetable compost, animal manure, wood ash and seaweed have proven to be sustainable and non-harmful to microbes, worms, farmers and eaters or smokers. Chemical phosphates may seem like a bargain compared to natural phosphorous, until you factor in the health and environmental costs.
To ensure that cannabis remains the safest way to get high, we must always use organic fertilizers and non-toxic pesticides. We should also properly cure the buds, take advantage of high-potency breeding and use smart-smoking devices like vaporizers and double-chambered glass water bongs. These will all help to address concern over potential lung damage far more effectively than either a jail cell or a 12-step program.
Tobacco smokers can also use this information to avoid radioactive brands of tobacco. American Spirit is one of a few companies that offers an organic line of cigarettes, and organic cigars are also available from a few companies. You can also grow your own tobacco, which is surprisingly easy and fun.
Until the public has an accurate understanding of how phosphate fertilizers carry radiation, and why commercial tobacco causes lung cancer but cannabis does not, there will be many needless tobacco-related deaths, and increased resistance to the full legalization of marijuana.
References
1. Winters, TH and Franza, JR. 'Radioactivity in Cigarette Smoke,' New England Journal of Medicine, 1982. 306(6): 364-365, web
2. Edward A Martell, PhD. 'Letter to the Editor,' New England Journal of Medicine, 1982. 307(5): 309-313, web
3. Ponte, Lowell. 'Radioactivity: The New-Found Danger in Cigarettes,' Reader's Digest, March 1986. pp. 123-127.
4. Kilthau, GF. 'Cancer risk in relation to radioactivity in tobacco,' Radiologic Technology, Vol 67, January 11, 1996, web
5. Maryland Department of Health & Mental Hygiene. Website, 2001, web
6. Office of Environmental Health and Safety, Utah State University. 'Cigarettes are a Major Source of Radiation Exposure,' Safety Line, Issue 33, Fall 1996, web
7. Nursing & Allied Healthweek, 1996,
8. Herer, Jack. The Emperor Wears No Clothes, 11th edition, 1998. p. 110, web
9. Litwak, Mark. 'Would You Still Rather Fight Than Switch?' Whole Life Times, April/May, 1985. pp 11, web
10. Yuille, CL; Berke, HL; Hull, T. 'Lung cancer following Pb210 inhalation in rats.' Radiation Res, 1967. 31:760-774.
11. Borio, Gene. Tobacco Timeline. Website, 2001, web
12. Taylor, Peter. The Smoke Ring. Pantheon Books, NY, 1984. pp. 2-3, web
13. Smith, Lendon, MD. 'There Ought to Be a Law,' Chiroweb.com, November 20, 1992, web
14. Marmorstein, J. 'Lung cancer: is the increasing incidence due to radioactive polonium in cigarettes?' South Medical Journal, February 1986. 79(2):145-50, web
15. Phillip Morris internal memo, April 2 1980. Available online at www.pmdocs.com, web
16. Goldin, Megan. "'Radioactive' cigarettes cited in Israeli lawsuit." Reuters, June 23, 2000.
17. Health Physics Society, 'Naturally occuring radioactive materials factsheet,' 1997. see also: Watters, RL. Hansen, WR. 'The hazards implication of the transfer of unsupported 210 Po from alkaline soil to plants,' Health Physics Journal, April 1970. 18(4):409-13, web and web
18. Glasser, George. 'Fluoride and the phosphate connection.' Earth Island Journal, earthisland.org, web
19. Watson, AP. 'Polonium-210 and Lead-210 in Food and Tobacco Products: A Review of Parameters and an Estimate of Potential Exposure and Dose.' Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1983. Florida Institute of Phosphate Research.
20. Burnett, William; Schultz, Michael; Hull, Carter. 'Behavior of Radionuclides During Ammonocarbonation of Phosphogypsum.' Florida State University, Florida Institute of Phosphate Research. March, 1995, web
21. Hornby, Paul, Dr. Personal communication, 2001.
• David Malmo-Levine: email dagreenmachine@excite.com
• American Spirit: 1-800-332-5595; web www.nascigs.com"

Pharmaceutical Industry Gives Millions to Lobbyists

FOXNews.com - Politics - Report: Pharmaceutical Industry Gives Millions to Lobbyists: "In the past year, the industry hired nearly 1,300 lobbyists, including dozens of former lawmakers and hundreds of people who worked for congressional committees or regulatory agencies.

'It is astonishing to learn that no other interest has spent more money to sway public policy in this time period,' said Roberta Baskin (search), the executive director of the Center for Public Integrity (search). The nonpartisan research group investigated the pharmaceutical industry's spending.

Baskin described the industry's motives for its spending as profit-driven."

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

This blog is dedicated to Jeremy.