Re: blood irradiation UV

[Guest guest]

Hi, ,

>I appreciate your input. But, I beg to disagree. I will share what I've

>read. The ultraviolet stays in your blood for up to 40 days. As you know

>from holding your hand up to the sun, light can penetrate our tissues,

>though it's not known how far. So, the ultraviolet is reaching beyond just

>the blood that is irradiated, and it is reaching into the tissues for some

>time after the treatment. And, obviously, it crosses the blood brain

>barrier, which is more than you can say for many drugs and >supplements. I

>don't know about bone marrow.

I hope this is just sloppy language - the UV is a wavelength of light, and

travels at the speed of light - it isn't going to " stay " in anything. The

effects it has on the cells can stay, but not the UV light.

UV has two principle effects on tissues: it breaks down proteins (especially

those with tryptophan in them), and it creates a cross-link in DNA that can

cause mutation if it is not corrected. The enzyme to correct this type of

damage is missing in a condition called xeroderma pigmentosum.) This damage

causes repair mechanisms to activate in the damaged cells. White blood cells

are the only ones capable of this - RBCs don't have the genetic mechanism

left to be able to do so since they don't have a nucleus left.

The altered WBCs can cross the blood-brain barrier; they will last a couple

of months in circulation.

There are a group of scientists & doctors who think that slightly damaging

cells (like with UV) will induce repair mechanisms that will not only cope

with the UV damage but also damage from low levels of others toxins - levels

low enough that they don't induce the repair, but do cause some long-term

damage. The name of the theory is 'hormesis' and it is applied with not only

UV, but also ionizing radiation (X-rays, gamma rays, etc.) and alcohol.

(That may be why one-drink-a-day folks live longer than teetotalers?)

As far as the effects of UV irradiation of blood, I haven't seen the

original research, but believe that it has not been shown to be beneficial

in a tightly controlled study. That doesn't mean it doesn't work - just that

it isn't conclusively known to yet.

Jerry

________________________________________________________________________________\

_____

Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

[Guest guest]

OK, Jerry, we really are on the same side here, you know. I freely admit you

know more about science than I do. It's true as I think about it that the

book/my doc claim the " effects of the UV treatment " last for some time after

the treatment. They also say they don't know why the treatment works.

You say UV can't stay in the cells because it's light. That makes some

sense. It must be changing to another form of energy, right, because it's

not passing all the way through us (I'm assuming we have UV shadows, which I

think is true)? Visible light, for example, makes things warmer. Other

materials flouresce (spelling?) when exposed to flourescent light. How does

that work? Perhaps something similar is going on here. In your knowledge,

when the proteins are changed, etc., is the same amount of UV

leaving/passing through the cell as went in? It can't be--because it's doing

some work there. I was flipping through the book this afternoon and noticed

that at one point it explicitly said estrogen absorbs UV. What does that

mean that some parts of us absorb more UV than others? You're suggesting

that " absorption " equals chemical alteration, right?

your explanation fits with the book's claim that UV awakens the body's

natural defense system; however, you're also suggesting that it could be

harmful (yes, is that what you're saying?)

So, I'm not sure about the mechanism that's going on, and I'm not sure about

long-term effects and potential for damage, but right now I'm willing to

take some risks (I think lots of drugs and supplements are risky, too).

Clearly you understand at least part of what's going on--and I qualify my

statement only because I think the science in this area is not well advanced

yet. There may be more going on than what you describe.

But I have to say the treatments so far are helping me, as you noted that

possibility's neither proven nor disproven. I still have doubts about

whether or not the benefits will hold when I stop the treatment. I also have

to say that times in my life when I've been outdoors alot I've been happier

and healthier than when I've been indoors alot. You can argue that that's a

difference in air quality not light quality. It's not exercise, because I

grew up dancing ballet daily in cavern-like studios with no natural light,

and I felt better when I spent a summer backpacking (equivalent amounts of

exercise). I certainly don't know what effects light has on us, and I don't

think anyone else does either, but I'm making an effort to get more sun than

I used to.

I know for sure I have intracellular nasties, and I know for sure my gut

could not tolerate antibiotics. I'm also using whey protein and transfer

factors. this UV is an acceptable risk to me; but it's wonderful that you're

posting the other side to the group.

Thanks for the education. I hope more about this procedure will be revealed

as time passes.

I'm leaving tomorrow on vacation, so this is the last you'll hear from me on

this topic. If you have more to say, or anyone else, would you mind sending

it to me backchannel, too, so I can follow?

Crane

> Re: blood irradiation UV

>

>

>

> I hope this is just sloppy language - the UV is a wavelength of

> light, and

> travels at the speed of light - it isn't going to " stay " in anything. The

> effects it has on the cells can stay, but not the UV light.

> UV has two principle effects on tissues: it breaks down proteins

> (especially

> those with tryptophan in them), and it creates a cross-link in

> DNA that can

> cause mutation if it is not corrected. The enzyme to correct this type of

> damage is missing in a condition called xeroderma pigmentosum.)

> This damage

> causes repair mechanisms to activate in the damaged cells. White

> blood cells

> are the only ones capable of this - RBCs don't have the genetic mechanism

> left to be able to do so since they don't have a nucleus left.

> The altered WBCs can cross the blood-brain barrier; they will

> last a couple

> of months in circulation.

> There are a group of scientists & doctors who think that slightly

> damaging

> cells (like with UV) will induce repair mechanisms that will not

> only cope

> with the UV damage but also damage from low levels of others

> toxins - levels

> low enough that they don't induce the repair, but do cause some long-term

> damage. The name of the theory is 'hormesis' and it is applied

> with not only

> UV, but also ionizing radiation (X-rays, gamma rays, etc.) and alcohol.

> (That may be why one-drink-a-day folks live longer than teetotalers?)

>

> As far as the effects of UV irradiation of blood, I haven't seen the

> original research, but believe that it has not been shown to be

> beneficial

> in a tightly controlled study. That doesn't mean it doesn't work

> - just that

> it isn't conclusively known to yet.

>

> Jerry

>