All About Radiation is one of the books by L. Ron Hubbard that form the canonical texts of Scientology.[1] Its first printing was from HASI (Hubbard Association of Scientologists International) by way of the Speedwell Printing Company, Kent, England, 1957. Later editions were published by the Church of Scientology's in-house publisher Bridge Publications. It is controversial for its claims, amongst other things, that radiation poisoning and even cancer can be cured by courses of vitamins. There is no known cure for radiation poisoning and current medical practice is to provide palliative care until the symptoms subside or the patient dies.[2]
Contents |
Early printings of the book were credited on the cover as simply "By a nuclear physicist and a medical doctor", while subsequent ones credited L. Ron Hubbard as being the nuclear physicist and "Medicus" as being the doctor.
By the 1979 edition, the "medical doctor" was credited as being Richard Farley.
In the book's most recent edition, the book's authorship is attributed to Hubbard and Dr. Gene Denk and Dr. Farley R. Spink.
The book has gone through a number of printings since its initial run, and has undergone a few modifications over the years, mostly to remove controversial assertions made in the original lectures. As it is a fundamental Scientology tenet that Hubbard's works are considered immutable Standard Tech, not to be altered in any way, except by Hubbard himself, these changes are considered evidence for Freezone practitioners that the current Church alters the text. It is to be noted that the first part of the book is not by Hubbard and that the second part was not written by Hubbard but edited from four of his lectures given in April 1957 in London. These lectures are available since March 2005 with a transcription which makes it possible to see how the book text was edited from the lectures. The book was not reissued in June 2007 as part of the Golden Age of Knowledge program. Among the text removed from the book in later editions:
Despite calling himself a nuclear physicist (some editions of the book even call him "one of America's first nuclear physicists" on the dustjacket), Hubbard was in no way a qualified physicist, nuclear or otherwise. His only degree was from Sequoia University, an unaccredited diploma mill. The only course in nuclear physics Hubbard ever took was in 1931 at George Washington University, whose records indicate that he scored an F in the course. [3] Hubbard dropped out of school shortly thereafter, with a 2.28 grade point average. [4]
Hubbard referred to himself as a nuclear physicist on many occasions in the 1950s, such as in the tape-recorded 1956 lecture A Postulate Out Of A Golden Age, where he not only claimed to be a nuclear physicist, but that he was offered (and turned down) a U.S. Government post as one. This comment has been edited out of the CD version of the lecture currently offered by the L. Ron Hubbard Classic Lectures series.
In February 1966, Hubbard defended his mail-order degree: "I was a Ph.D., Sequoia's [sic] University and therefore a perfectly valid doctor under the laws of the State of California". But only a month later, he announced: "having reviewed the damage being done in our society with nuclear physics and psychiatry by persons calling themselves "Doctor" [I] do hereby resign in protest my university degree as a Doctor of philosophy (Ph. D.)" [1]
The final results of the Anderson Report in 1965 declared:
"The Board heard evidence from a highly qualified radiologist who has made a special study of radiation and its effects. He said that Hubbard's knowledge of radiation, as displayed by his writings in All About Radiation, was the 'sort of knowledge that perhaps a boy who has read Intermediate Physics might, with a lot of misapprehensions and lack of understanding, demonstrate'.... From this witness's evidence it is apparent that Hubbard is completely incompetent to deal with the subject of radiation and that his knowledge of nuclear physics is distorted, inaccurate, mistaken and negligible. No evidence was called which disputed in any way these conclusions." [5]