Radioactive Superheroes: Trump affiliated interest group thinks you deserve superpowers

The tide of deregulation in the Trump era continues to creep up the shore. Thanks to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and a special interest group, Scientists for Accurate Radiation Information, or SARI, the legally permissible amounts of radiation allowed to persist in our daily lives could increase significantly as regulators consider the validity of a concept touted by SARI called "hormesis".
Proponents of hormesis believe things that are damaging in high doses, such as radiation, are actually beneficial in regular, low doses. This defies all conventional wisdom, especially around something as recognizably toxic as radiation.
Radiation persists in our daily lives in all kinds of ways- the food chain, radioactive medicine, airports and airplanes, just to name a few. And until recently, the EPA, NRC, and the Department of Labor have upheld regulations limiting the permissible amount of radiation emitted by machinery, and acceptable in food, as well as acceptable levels of exposure for workers who make their living in these radioactive industries. Since President Trump's election, however, and the influx of pro-deregulation officials in the EPA and other regulatory agencies these limitations are at serious risk.
Furthermore, the true motives of these hormesis advocates should be considered next to their benefactors- tobacco moguls, DOW chemical, ExxonMobil, and utility companies.
Could little bits of radiation truly be "good" for us? Or does it make more sense that industry giants continue to try to protect their bottom line by relaxing costly regulations at the expense of the health of millions.

Thoughts on Duality after Biochemistry Class

Now that my very first day of Acupuncture school is under my belt, I look forward to the next three years of my education with a few broader questions taking shape.
During that first class my TCM cohorts embarked on a miniature debate about, basically, integration of TCM as appropriation. It seems that several fall readily on the side of traditionalism, believing that the integration of TCM, especially a sloppy integration, into Western medical practice does a disservice to the principles that our system of medicine is founded on. Basically, an all or nothing idea. Several others in the class seem to still be considering these questions.
Personally, I am happily undecided in this issue. It fits in nicely with the themes of this journey to becoming a healer that Ive been on. In considering this question- traditionalism vs integration, Im reminded of other seemingly polar relationships Ive encountered- physical vs. psycho-spiritual, energetic vs. biological, forceful vs. non-forcing, etc.
I think Rebecca Rupp's article in the Guardian paints the picture of these dichotomous ideas in a beautiful dance. Speaking about the formation of our star, the Sun, our planet Earth, and indeed, ourselves she spins a tail of elements, metaphorical and periodical flying, spinning, and joining together in space. She says, "We are the stuff of stars." Which to me harkens one of the most woo-woo statements Ive heard certain hippies make. But the statement that Rupp is making is a literal one! Now, depending on who you are, the truth of this may strike you as incredible, or even divine, or you may find its truth to be whats makes it so banal. That one statement, and Rupp's pontifications around it, illustrate the duality I find bouncing back and forth in every worthwhile thing I know and do.
Its a duality I hope to see wrestling, back and forth, as I continue on this journey toward becoming a healer.