Revival: Biological Effects of Low Level Exposures to Chemical and Radiation (1992)

(Barry) #1
HYPOTHESES ON LONGEVITY HORMESIS 39


  1. Arnold, D. L., C. A. Moodie, S. M. Charbonneau, H. C. Grice, P. F.
    McGuire, F. R. Bryce, B. T. Collins, Z. Z. Zawidzka, D. R. Krewski, E. A.
    Nera, and I. C. Munro. “Long-Term Toxicity of Hexachlorobenzene in the Rat
    and the Effect of Dietary Vitamin A,” Food Chem. Toxicol. 23:779-793
    (1985).

  2. Tomatis, L., V. Turusov, N. Day, and R. T. Charles. “The Effect of Long-
    Term Exposure to DDT on CF-1 Mice,” Int. J. Cane. 10:489-506 (1972).

  3. Matanoski, G. M., A. Sternberg, and E. A. Elliott. “Does Radiation Exposure
    Produce a Protective Effect among Radiologists?” Health Phys. 52:637-643
    (1987).

  4. Gilbert, E. S., G. R. Petersen, and J. A. Buchanan. “Mortality of Workers at
    the Hanford Site: 1945-1981,” Health Phys. 56:11-25 (1989).

  5. Forman, D., P. Cook-Mozaffari, S. Darby, G. Davey, I. Stratton, R. Doll,
    and M. Pike. “Cancer near Nuclear Installations,” Nature 329:499-505
    (1987).

  6. Gilbert, E. S., G. R. Petersen, and J. A. Buchanan. “Mortality of Hanford
    Workers: A Reply,” Health Phys. 57:841 (1989).

  7. McMichael, A. J. “Standardized Mortality Ratios and the ‘Healthy Worker
    Effect’: Scratching beneath the Surface,” J. Occup. Med. 18:165-168 (1976).

  8. McMichael, A. J., R. Spirtas, and L. L. Kupper. “An Epidemiologic Study of
    Mortality within a Cohort of Rubber Workers, 1964-72,” J. Occup. Med.
    16:458-464 (1974).

  9. Weed, D. L. “Historical Roots of the Healthy Worker Effect,” J. Occup. Med.
    28:343-347 (1986).

  10. Stewart, A., and G. Kneale. “Mortality of Hanford Workers,” Health Phys.
    57:839-841 (1989).

  11. Christie, D., K. Robinson, I. Gordon, C. Webley, and J. Bisby. “Current
    Mortality in the Australian Petroleum Industry: The Healthy-Worker Effect
    and the Influence of Life-Style Factors,” Med. J. Aust. 147:222-225 (1987).

  12. Holmes, O. W. “The Poetical Works of Oliver Wendell Holmes, (Boston:
    Houghton, Mifflin, and Co., 1890), p. 298.


Note Added in Proof: Subsequent to submitting this chapter, I became
aware of two papers which seriously challenge the claim that neoteny has
played a key role in human evolution [Shea, B.T. “Heterochrony in
Human Evolution: The Case for Neoteny Reconsidered,” Yearbook of
Physical Anthropology 32:69-101 (1989) and Deacon, T.W. “Problems
of Ontogeny and Phylogeny in Brainsize Evolution,” Int. J. Primatol.
11:237-282 (1990)]. It thus appears that other evolutionary (phylogenetic
and ontogenetic) mechanisms are primarily responsible for the unusually
slow rate of human aging discussed in the context of Hypothesis VIII.

Free download pdf