[ExI] Evidence-based medicine lacks solid supporting evidence

Dan danust2012 at gmail.com
Thu Sep 17 23:26:26 UTC 2015

On Sep 17, 2015, at 4:12 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
> From Adrian:  Our bodies were designed to function in the slightly radioactive natural world.  It is entirely possible - and arguably is being done in many parts of the world - to overprotect in the drive for zero radiation, and get an intake below what is healthy.

Not designed! Evolved. It's an important difference.

This seems like all kinds of stuff happens and we can manipulate things to our benefit, though we must be careful. Removing X might seem to be a good thing in the short term but have unintended consequences. Radiation might be an example. Avoiding hunger might be another. 

> Is it established that we actually need some radiation?  I mean just because it's been going on forever doesn't mean we need it.

It's more a matter that low doses seem to trigger beneficial processes. This seems similar to how some stress is better than either no stress or very high stress. For instance, exercise moderately to maintain health. Don't be either a couch potato or a extreme athlete. There seems to be actual evidence for this and some theoretical backing -- as opposed to some maxim about moderation. (The latter might lead to bad outcomes depending on what anyone considers moderate.)


 Sample my Kindle books via:

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20150917/b2e111d2/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list