433:
provide compelling evidence of a threshold, as highlighted by the fact that no national or international authoritative scientific advisory bodies have concluded that such evidence exists. Therefore, based upon the stated positions of the aforementioned advisory bodies; the comments and recommendations of NCI, NIOSH, and the EPA; the
October 28, 2015, recommendation of the ACMUI; and its own professional and technical judgment, the NRC has determined that the LNT model continues to provide a sound regulatory basis for minimizing the risk of unnecessary radiation exposure to both members of the public and occupational workers. Consequently, the NRC will retain the dose limits for occupational workers and members of the public in 10 CFR part 20 radiation protection regulations.
304:(BEIR), an expert panel who reviewed available peer reviewed literature, supported the LNT model on pragmatic grounds, noting that while "dose-effect relationship for x rays and gamma rays may not be a linear function", the "use of linear extrapolation ... may be justified on pragmatic grounds as a basis for risk estimation." In its seventh report of 2006, NAS BEIR VII writes, "the committee concludes that the preponderance of information indicates that there will be some risk, even at low doses".
183:
487:), in a 2018 report, "concludes that the recent epidemiological studies support the continued use of LNT model for radiation protection. This is in accord with judgments by other national and international scientific committees, based on somewhat older data, that no alternative dose-response relationship appears more pragmatic or prudent for radiation protection purposes than the LNT model."
540:
since it is not based on biological concepts of our current knowledge, it should not be used without precaution for assessing by extrapolation the risks associated with low and even more so, with very low doses (< 10 mSv), especially for benefit-risk assessments imposed on radiologists by the
European directive 97-43.
83:. The model assumes a linear relationship between dose and health effects, even for very low doses where biological effects are more difficult to observe. The LNT model implies that all exposure to ionizing radiation is harmful, regardless of how low the dose is, and that the effect is cumulative over lifetime.
511:
The
Committee concluded that there remains good justification for the use of a non-threshold model for risk inference given the robust knowledge on the role of mutation and chromosomal aberrations in carcinogenesis. That said, there are ways that radiation could act that might lead to a re-evaluation
419:
Many expert scientific panels have been convened on the risks of ionizing radiation. Most explicitly support the LNT model and none have concluded that evidence exists for a threshold, with the exception of the French
Academy of Sciences in a 2005 report. Considering the uncertainty of health effects
539:
In conclusion, this report raises doubts on the validity of using LNT for evaluating the carcinogenic risk of low doses (< 100 mSv) and even more for very low doses (< 10 mSv). The LNT concept can be a useful pragmatic tool for assessing rules in radioprotection for doses above 10 mSv; however
432:
Based upon the current state of science, the NRC concludes that the actual level of risk associated with low doses of radiation remains uncertain and some studies, such as the INWORKS study, show there is at least some risk from low doses of radiation. Moreover, the current state of science does not
403:
A 2011 research of the cellular repair mechanisms support the evidence against the linear no-threshold model. According to its authors, this study published in the
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America "casts considerable doubt on the general assumption that
268:
The early studies were based on higher levels of radiation that made it hard to establish the safety of low level of radiation. Indeed, many early scientists believed that there may be a tolerance level, and that low doses of radiation may not be harmful. A later study in 1955 on mice exposed to low
475:
stated: "The report concludes that while existence of a low-dose threshold does not seem to be unlikely for radiation-related cancers of certain tissues, the evidence does not favour the existence of a universal threshold. The LNT hypothesis, combined with an uncertain DDREF for extrapolation from
415:
per sievert (ERR/Sv), is "broadly applicable" to low dose or low dose-rate exposure, "although the uncertainties associated with this estimate are considerable". The study also notes that "epidemiological studies have been unable, in general, to detect the influence of natural background radiation
130:, which are caused by tissue damage. Deterministic effects reliably occur above a threshold dose and their severity increases with dose. Because of the inherent differences, LNT is not a model for deterministic effects, which are instead characterized by other types of dose-response relationships.
618:
database, divided into "exposed" and control groups were assessed in 1999. As no
Chernobyl impacts were detected, the researchers conclude "in retrospect the widespread fear in the population about the possible effects of exposure on the unborn was not justified". Despite studies from Germany and
329:
component of sunlight, with no safe level of sunlight exposure being suggested, following the precautionary LNT model. According to a 2007 study submitted by the
University of Ottawa to the Department of Health and Human Services in Washington, D.C., there is not enough information to determine a
497:
Underlying the risk models is a large body of epidemiological and radiobiological data. In general, results from both lines of research are consistent with a linear, no-threshold dose (LNT) response model in which the risk of inducing a cancer in an irradiated tissue by low doses of radiation is
252:
in 1928, suggesting that genomic mutation was induced by cosmic and terrestrial radiation and first introduced the idea that such mutation may occur proportionally to the dose of radiation. Various laboratories, including Muller's, then demonstrated the apparent linear dose response of mutation
165:
model, which claims that radiation at very small doses can be beneficial. Because the current data is inconclusive, scientists disagree on which model should be used, though most national and international cancer research organizations explicitly endorse LNT for regulating exposures to low dose
153:
policies. Whether the LNT model describes the reality for small-dose exposures is disputed, and challenges to the LNT model used by NRC for setting radiation protection regulations were submitted. NRC rejected the petitions in 2021 because "they fail to present an adequate basis supporting the
650:
Such great psychological danger does not accompany other materials that put people at risk of cancer and other deadly illness. Visceral fear is not widely aroused by, for example, the daily emissions from coal burning, although as a
National Academy of Sciences study found, this causes 10,000
564:
states that the LNT model may not adequately describe the relationship between harm and exposure and notes the recommendation in ICRP-103 "that the LNT model not be used for estimating the health effects of trivial exposures received by large populations over long periods of time…" It further
118:, but whose severity is independent of the dose. The LNT model assumes there is no lower threshold at which stochastic effects start, and assumes a linear relationship between dose and the stochastic health risk. In other words, LNT assumes that radiation has the potential to cause harm at
476:
high doses, remains a prudent basis for radiation protection at low doses and low dose rates." In a 2007 report, ICRP noted that collective dose is effective for optimization, but aggregation of very low doses to estimate excess cancers is inappropriate because of large uncertainties.
297:" (ALARA). ALARA would become a fundamental principle in radiation protection policy that implicitly accepts the validity of LNT. In 1959, the United States Federal Radiation Council (FRC) supported the concept of the LNT extrapolation down to the low dose region in its first report.
626:
than radiological. Because damage from very-low-level radiation cannot be detected, people exposed to it are left in anguished uncertainty about what will happen to them. Many believe they have been fundamentally contaminated for life and may refuse to have children for fear of
578:
The
Scientific Committee does not recommend multiplying very low doses by large numbers of individuals to estimate numbers of radiation-induced health effects within a population exposed to incremental doses at levels equivalent to or lower than natural background
353:
detection, is translated into a number of lives saved. When the doses are very low the model predicts new cancers only in a very small fraction of the population, but for a large population, the number of lives is extrapolated into hundreds or thousands.
277:, and studies were conducted on the survivors. Although compelling evidence on the effect of low dosage of radiation was hard to come by, by the late 1940s, the idea of LNT became more popular due to its mathematical simplicity. In 1954, the
428:
upheld the LNT model in 2021 as a "sound regulatory basis for minimizing the risk of unnecessary radiation exposure to both members of the public and radiation workers" following challenges to the dose limit requirements contained in its
455:
The assumption that any stimulatory hormetic effects from low doses of ionizing radiation will have a significant health benefit to humans that exceeds potential detrimental effects from the radiation exposure is unwarranted at this
534:) published a report in 2005 (at the same time as BEIR VII report in the United States) that rejected the linear no-threshold model in favor of a threshold dose response and a significantly reduced risk at low radiation exposure:
289:(UNSCEAR) assessed the LNT model and a threshold model, but noted the difficulty in acquiring "reliable information about the correlation between small doses and their effects either in individuals or in large populations". The
554:
The Health
Physics Society advises against estimating health risks to people from exposures to ionizing radiation that are near or less than natural background levels because statistical uncertainties at these low levels are
190:, from BEIR report. Notably, this exposure pathway occurred from essentially a massive spike or pulse of radiation, a result of the brief instant that the bomb exploded, which while somewhat similar to the environment of a
101:
Scientific organizations and government regulatory bodies generally support use of the LNT model, particularly for optimization. However, some caution against estimating health effects from doses below a certain level (see
1193:
Lorenz E, Hollcroft JW, Miller E, Congdon CC, Schweisthal R (February 1955). "Long-term effects of acute and chronic irradiation in mice. I. Survival and tumor incidence following chronic irradiation of 0.11 r per day".
380:, it was known at the time that radiation can cause a physiological increase in the rate of pregnancy anomalies; however, human exposure data and animal testing suggests that the "malformation of organs appears to be a
570:
503:
286:
2141:
International Dose-Response Society – dedicated to the enhancement, exchange, and dissemination of ongoing global research in hormesis, a dose-response phenomenon characterized by low-dose stimulation and high-dose
736:"Epidemiology Without Biology: False Paradigms, Unfounded Assumptions, and Specious Statistics in Radiation Science (with Commentaries by Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake and Christopher Busby and a Reply by the Authors)"
619:
Turkey, the only robust evidence of negative pregnancy outcomes that transpired after the accident were these elective abortion indirect effects, in Greece, Denmark, Italy etc., due to the anxieties created.
1834:
Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) 2012 Report: Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes A and
461:
In 2005 the United States National Academies' National Research Council published its comprehensive meta-analysis of low-dose radiation research BEIR VII, Phase 2. In its press release the Academies stated:
392:(birth defects) concludes that "there is no substantive proof regarding radiation‐induced teratogenic effects from the Chernobyl accident". It is argued that the human body has defense mechanisms, such as
606:, Europe-wide anxieties were fomented in pregnant mothers over the perception enforced by the LNT model that their children would be born with a higher rate of mutations. As far afield as the country of
1704:
634:
Forced evacuation from a radiation or nuclear accident may lead to social isolation, anxiety, depression, psychosomatic medical problems, reckless behavior, or suicide. Such was the outcome of the 1986
1770:
480:
278:
98:
model, which says that radiation at very small doses can be beneficial, and the supra-linear model. It has been argued that the LNT model may have created an irrational fear of radiation.
122:
dose level, however small, and the sum of several very small exposures is just as likely to cause a stochastic health effect as a single larger exposure of equal dose value. In contrast,
1229:
300:
By the 1970s, the LNT model had become accepted as the standard in radiation protection practice by a number of bodies. In 1972, the first report of National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
290:
886:
472:
171:
863:
1321:
407:
A 2011 review of studies addressing childhood leukaemia following exposure to ionizing radiation, including both diagnostic exposure and natural background exposure from
1786:
UNSCEAR 2000 REPORT Vol. II: Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation: Annex G: Biological effects at low radiation doses. page 160, paragraph 541. Available online at
466:
The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of exposure below which low levels of ionizing radiation can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial.
90:
policies that set regulatory dose limits to protect against the effects of radiation. The validity of the LNT model, however, is disputed, and other models exist: the
639:
in Ukraine. A comprehensive 2005 study concluded that "the mental health impact of Chernobyl is the largest public health problem unleashed by the accident to date".
1799:
491:
614:
were performed on the healthy unborn, out of this no-threshold fear. Following the accident however, studies of data sets approaching a million births in the
269:
dose of radiation suggests that they may outlive control animals. The interest in the effects of radiation intensified after the dropping of atomic bombs on
445:
400:, that would protect it against carcinogenesis due to low-dose exposures of carcinogens. However, these repair mechanisms are known to be error prone.
420:
at low doses, several organizations caution against estimating health effects below certain doses, generally below natural background, as noted below:
651:
premature deaths a year in the US. It is "only nuclear radiation that bears a huge psychological burden – for it carries a unique historical legacy".
647:, saying that "fear of ionizing radiation could have long-term psychological effects on a large portion of the population in the contaminated areas".
301:
216:. When the two environments and cell effects are vastly different. Likewise, it has also been pointed out that bomb survivors inhaled carcinogenic
441:
1585:
2132:
22:
516:
A number of organisations caution against using the Linear no-threshold model to estimate risk from radiation exposure below a certain level:
1868:
1642:
1240:
530:
265:, that mutation frequency is "directly and simply proportional to the dose of irradiation applied" and that there is "no threshold dose".
373:
intentionally ignored an early study that did not support the LNT model when he gave his 1946 Nobel Prize address advocating the model.
1401:
293:(JCAE) similarly could not establish if there is a threshold or "safe" level for exposure; nevertheless, it introduced the concept of "
25:
Different assumptions on the extrapolation of the cancer risk vs. radiation dose to low-dose levels, given a known risk at a high dose:
2122:
2200:
1843:
2010:
1705:"NRCP Commentary No. 27: Implications of Recent Epiedmiologic Studies for the Linear-Nonthreshold Model and Radiation Protection"
1927:"Evaluation of the impact of Chernobyl on the prevalence of congenital anomalies in 16 regions of Europe. EUROCAT Working Group"
1360:
385:
2220:
316:
149:(NRC), commonly use LNT as a basis for regulatory dose limits to protect against stochastic health effects, as found in many
1081:"The linear No-Threshold (LNT) dose response model: A comprehensive assessment of its historical and scientific foundations"
598:, whose observable effects are much more significant than non-observable effects postulated by LNT. In the wake of the 1986
141:
studies support its application, but controversially, also at low doses, which is a dose region that has a lower predictive
2225:
1743:
UNSCEAR 2020/2021 report Volume III: Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation. Paragraph 542. Available online at
425:
224:
The association of exposure to radiation with cancer had been observed as early as 1902, six years after the discovery of
146:
248:
and Alex Olson, based on Muller's discovery of the effect of radiation on mutation, proposed a mechanism for biological
2117:
1584:
Tubiana M, Aurengo A, Averbeck D, Bonnin A, Le Guen B, Masse R, Monier R, Valleron AJ, De Vathaire F (30 March 2005).
1175:
369:
The LNT model has been contested by a number of scientists. It has been claimed that the early proponent of the model
307:
The Health Physics Society (in the United States) has published a documentary series on the origins of the LNT model.
1806:
644:
636:
521:
115:
1719:
1424:
2210:
2148:
1502:
Wakeford R (March 2013). "The risk of childhood leukaemia following exposure to ionising radiation--a review".
675:
561:
333:
The linear no-threshold model is used to extrapolate the expected number of extra deaths caused by exposure to
142:
134:
127:
68:
981:
388:", below which no rate increase is observed. A review in 1999 on the link between the Chernobyl accident and
334:
2149:"On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith"
2137:
Reprinted PowerPoint notes from a colloquium at the Physics Department, Oxford University, 24 November 2006
1744:
1658:
690:
546:
484:
170:
of low-level radioactive contaminations, which is controversial. Such practice has been criticized by the
2123:
ECRR report on Chernobyl (April 2006) claiming deliberate suppression of the LNT in public health studies
1586:"Dose-effect relationships and estimation of the carcinogenic effects of low doses of ionizing radiation"
244:
demonstrated that radiation may cause genetic mutation. He also suggested mutation as a cause of cancer.
2205:
1444:
397:
370:
241:
1966:
Little J (April 1993). "The Chernobyl accident, congenital anomalies and other reproductive outcomes".
787:
114:
Stochastic health effects are those that occur by chance, and whose probability is proportional to the
2118:
Report from the European Committee on Radiation Risk broadly supporting the Linear No Threshold model
1596:
2163:
2041:
1511:
1456:
1141:
996:
823:
Christensen DM, Iddins CJ, Sugarman SL (February 2014). "Ionizing radiation injuries and illnesses".
670:
381:
60:
1771:"American Nuclear Society Position Statement #41: Risks of Exposure to Low-Level Ionizing Radiaiton"
903:"The linear no-threshold relationship is inconsistent with radiation biologic and experimental data"
881:
640:
1676:
2057:
1535:
1352:
1110:
665:
615:
599:
449:
346:
162:
95:
80:
229:
1691:"ICRP-103: The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection"
1622:
1265:
959:"Historical Development of the Linear Nonthreshold Dose-Response Model as Applied to Radiation"
2215:
2179:
1983:
1948:
1907:
1864:
1839:
1638:
1527:
1484:
1405:
1344:
1302:
1211:
1157:
1102:
1061:
1012:
932:
840:
765:
695:
611:
377:
342:
209:
1832:
1554:
2171:
2049:
2006:
1975:
1938:
1897:
1630:
1566:
1519:
1474:
1464:
1445:"Evidence for formation of DNA repair centers and dose-response nonlinearity in human cells"
1397:
1336:
1292:
1203:
1149:
1092:
1051:
1043:
1004:
922:
914:
832:
805:
755:
747:
631:. They may be shunned by others in their community who fear a sort of mysterious contagion.
245:
549:'s position statement first adopted in January 1996, last revised in February 2019, states:
1690:
237:
208:
is orders of magnitude smaller. LNT does not consider dose rate and is an unsubstantiated
182:
167:
158:
91:
1129:
2167:
2045:
1515:
1460:
1145:
1000:
21:
1979:
1479:
1297:
1284:
1283:
Cranney A, Horsley T, O'Donnell S, Weiler H, Puil L, Ooi D, et al. (August 2007).
1056:
1031:
927:
902:
760:
735:
671:
Nuclear power debate#Health effects on population near nuclear power plants and workers
358:
1322:"Muller's Nobel lecture on dose-response for ionizing radiation: ideology or science?"
1130:"The Effect of Varying the Duration of X-Ray Treatment Upon the Frequency of Mutation"
2194:
2061:
1443:
Neumaier T, Swenson J, Pham C, Polyzos A, Lo AT, Yang P, et al. (January 2012).
882:"The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection"
699:
623:
412:
338:
233:
213:
150:
87:
56:
1539:
1114:
2030:"The radiological and psychological consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi accident"
1523:
1356:
685:
628:
138:
123:
64:
2127:
2093:
UNSCEAR, United Nations Scientific Committee on the effects of Ionizing Radiations
1047:
2175:
1787:
1627:
Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2
1429:
607:
595:
589:
326:
254:
217:
1449:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
1153:
1008:
958:
86:
The LNT model is commonly used by regulatory bodies as a basis for formulating
2029:
1759:
1340:
1097:
1080:
918:
836:
751:
660:
393:
389:
76:
2053:
1207:
1469:
680:
270:
258:
249:
201:
196:
187:
2183:
1952:
1943:
1926:
1720:"EPA Radiogenic Cancer Risk Models and Projections for the U.S. Population"
1570:
1531:
1488:
1409:
1348:
1306:
1215:
1161:
1106:
1016:
936:
844:
769:
512:
of the use of a linear dose-response model to infer radiation cancer risks.
166:
radiation. The model is sometimes used to quantify the cancerous effect of
1987:
1911:
1402:
10.1002/(sici)1096-9926(199908)60:2<100::aid-tera14>3.3.co;2-8
1388:
Castronovo FP (August 1999). "Teratogen update: radiation and Chernobyl".
1230:"Beir VII: Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation"
1065:
864:"Linear No-Threshold Model and Standards for Protection Against Radiation"
322:
274:
72:
1886:"The Chernobyl accident and induced abortions: only one-way information"
1902:
1885:
1745:
https://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications/scientific-reports.html
1593:
Academy of Medicine (Paris) and Academy of Science (Paris) Joint Report
603:
191:
287:
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation
494:
endorses the LNT model in its 2011 report on radiogenic cancer risk:
2108:
NCRP, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, US
1634:
325:
being listed as a carcinogen at all sun exposure rates, due to the
1677:"ICRP-99: Low-dose Extrapolation of Radiation-related Cancer Risk"
1285:"Effectiveness and safety of vitamin D in relation to bone health"
1266:"The History of the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) Model Episode Guide"
408:
350:
294:
225:
181:
20:
2140:
161:, which assumes that very small exposures are harmless, and the
448:) supported the linear no threshold model and stated regarding
2113:
IRSN, Institute for Radioprotection and Nuclear Safety, France
1861:
Communicating Risks to the Public: International Perspectives
1755:
Health Physics Society, 2019. Radiation Risk in Perspective
1629:. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. p. 335.
901:
Tubiana M, Feinendegen LE, Yang C, Kaminski JM (April 2009).
261:
effect of radiation in 1946, asserted in his Nobel lecture,
94:, which assumes that very small exposures are harmless, the
2092:
2107:
481:
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements
279:
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements
2102:
2097:
2087:
2082:
2077:
1425:"The Mythology of Linear No-Threshold Cancer Causation"
622:
The consequences of low-level radiation are often more
291:
United States Congress Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
16:
Deprecated model predicting health effects of radiation
2112:
2078:
ICRP, International Commission on Radiation Protection
1890:
Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health
1863:. Berlin: Springer Science and Media. pp. 160–2.
345:, into a number of lives lost, while any reduction in
220:
from the burning cities, yet this is not factored in.
133:
LNT is a common model to calculate the probability of
404:
risk to ionizing radiation is proportional to dose".
2103:
IRPA, International Radiation Protection Association
2011:"Nuclear Risk and Fear, from Hiroshima to Fukushima"
594:
It has been argued that the LNT model had caused an
1718:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (April 2011).
887:
International Commission on Radiological Protection
473:
International Commission on Radiological Protection
172:
International Commission on Radiological Protection
1032:"Seventy years ago: mutation becomes experimental"
858:
856:
854:
2083:ICRU, International Commission on Radiation Units
1659:"Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation May Cause Harm"
1553:Heyes GJ, Mill AJ, Charles MW (1 October 2006).
2088:IAEA, International Atomic Agency Energy Agency
1665:. National Academies of Sciences. 29 June 2005.
576:
552:
537:
509:
495:
464:
453:
430:
411:, concluded that existing risk factors, excess
361:to set maximum acceptable radiation exposures.
734:Sacks B, Meyerson G, Siegel JA (1 June 2016).
154:request to discontinue use of the LNT model".
145:. Nonetheless, regulatory bodies, such as the
506:stated in Appendix C of its 2020/2021 report:
492:United States Environmental Protection Agency
186:Increased Risk of Solid Cancer with Dose for
79:effects on the human body due to exposure to
8:
1884:Perucchi M, Domenighetti G (December 1990).
1800:"UNSCEAR Fifty-Ninth Session 21–25 May 2012"
1383:
1381:
2098:HPA (ex NCRP), Health Protection Agency, UK
1831:UNSCEAR United Nations (31 December 2015).
825:Emergency Medicine Clinics of North America
786:Emshwiller JR, Fields G (13 August 2016).
643:, a U.S. scientist, commented on the 2011
1942:
1901:
1478:
1468:
1296:
1096:
1055:
952:
950:
948:
946:
926:
759:
337:, and it therefore has a great impact on
200:of living in a contaminated area such as
2028:von Hippel FN (September–October 2011).
2001:
1999:
1997:
1196:Journal of the National Cancer Institute
528:) and the National Academy of Medicine (
302:Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation
1030:Crow JF, Abrahamson S (December 1997).
715:
498:proportional to the dose to that tissue
442:United States National Research Council
311:Radiation precautions and public policy
2128:BBC article discussing doubts over LNT
982:"Artificial Transmutation of the Gene"
963:University of New Hampshire Law Review
416:upon the risk of childhood leukaemia"
126:are radiation-induced effects such as
1968:Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology
1931:International Journal of Epidemiology
1289:Evidence Report/Technology Assessment
781:
779:
702:that low dose radiation is generally
357:A linear model has long been used in
341:. The model is used to translate any
7:
2134:How dangerous is ionising radiation?
729:
727:
725:
723:
721:
719:
1621:National Research Council. (2006).
1176:"Hermann J. Muller - Nobel Lecture"
1079:Calabrese, Edward J. (March 2019).
1980:10.1111/j.1365-3016.1993.tb00388.x
1925:Dolk H, Nichols R (October 1999).
1504:Journal of Radiological Protection
349:, for example as a consequence of
321:Radiation precautions have led to
253:frequency. Muller, who received a
14:
2034:Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
1859:Kasperson RE, Stallen PJ (1991).
1128:Oliver, C. P. (10 January 1930).
281:(NCRP) introduced the concept of
1805:. 14 August 2012. Archived from
378:very high dose radiation therapy
103:
788:"Is a Little Radiation So Bad?"
565:recommends additional research.
295:As Low As Reasonably Achievable
212:approach based solely on total
157:Other dose models include: the
1320:Calabrese EJ (December 2011).
531:Académie Nationale de Médecine
317:Health effects of sun exposure
1:
2147:Calabrese EJ (October 2015).
426:Nuclear Regulatory Commission
147:Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2176:10.1016/j.envres.2015.07.011
1559:British Journal of Radiology
957:Kathren RL (December 2002).
596:irrational fear of radiation
483:(a body commissioned by the
446:National Academy of Sciences
330:safe level of sun exposure.
124:deterministic health effects
1623:"Hormesis and Epidemiology"
1048:10.1093/genetics/147.4.1491
573:stated in its 2012 report:
194:, is wholly unlike the low
2242:
1154:10.1126/science.71.1828.44
1009:10.1126/science.66.1699.84
706:harmful than higher doses.
645:Fukushima nuclear disaster
637:Chernobyl nuclear disaster
587:
522:French Academy of Sciences
314:
263:The Production of Mutation
1341:10.1007/s00204-011-0728-8
1098:10.1016/j.cbi.2018.11.020
919:10.1148/radiol.2511080671
837:10.1016/j.emc.2013.10.002
752:10.1007/s13752-016-0244-4
137:both at high doses where
65:stochastic health effects
49:linear no-threshold model
2201:Radiation health effects
2054:10.1177/0096340211421588
1524:10.1088/0952-4746/33/1/1
676:Radiation-induced cancer
562:American Nuclear Society
283:maximum permissible dose
135:radiation-induced cancer
128:acute radiation syndrome
69:radiation-induced cancer
1470:10.1073/pnas.1117849108
980:Muller HJ (July 1927).
335:environmental radiation
2156:Environmental Research
1329:Archives of Toxicology
1270:Health Physics Society
1208:10.1093/jnci/15.4.1049
810:Health Physics Society
691:Inge Schmitz-Feuerhake
581:
557:
547:Health Physics Society
542:
514:
500:
485:United States Congress
471:In a 2005 report, the
468:
458:
435:
221:
143:statistical confidence
44:
2221:Medical controversies
610:, hundreds of excess
588:Further information:
584:Mental health effects
526:Académie des Sciences
398:programmed cell death
371:Hermann Joseph Muller
185:
24:
2226:Radiation protection
1944:10.1093/ije/28.5.941
1571:10.1259/bjr/52126615
1237:The National Academy
806:"Stochastic effects"
382:deterministic effect
257:for his work on the
61:radiation protection
2168:2015ER....142..432C
2046:2011BuAtS..67e..27V
1516:2013JRP....33....1W
1461:2012PNAS..109..443N
1182:. 12 December 1946.
1146:1930Sci....71...44O
1001:1927Sci....66...84M
792:Wall Street Journal
641:Frank N. von Hippel
1903:10.5271/sjweh.1761
1838:. United Nations.
1085:Chem Biol Interact
666:Dose fractionation
600:Chernobyl accident
450:Radiation hormesis
347:radiation exposure
222:
163:radiation hormesis
104:§ Controversy
96:radiation hormesis
81:ionizing radiation
45:
39:linear-quadratic,
2009:(10 March 2012).
1870:978-0-7923-0601-6
1644:978-0-309-09156-5
740:Biological Theory
612:induced abortions
343:radiation release
210:one size fits all
30:supra-linearity,
2233:
2211:Nuclear medicine
2187:
2153:
2066:
2065:
2025:
2019:
2018:
2003:
1992:
1991:
1963:
1957:
1956:
1946:
1922:
1916:
1915:
1905:
1881:
1875:
1874:
1856:
1850:
1849:
1828:
1822:
1821:
1819:
1817:
1812:on 5 August 2013
1811:
1804:
1796:
1790:
1784:
1778:
1777:
1775:
1767:
1761:
1753:
1747:
1741:
1735:
1734:
1732:
1730:
1724:
1715:
1709:
1708:
1701:
1695:
1694:
1687:
1681:
1680:
1673:
1667:
1666:
1655:
1649:
1648:
1618:
1612:
1611:
1609:
1607:
1601:
1595:. Archived from
1590:
1581:
1575:
1574:
1565:(946): 855–857.
1555:"Authors' reply"
1550:
1544:
1543:
1499:
1493:
1492:
1482:
1472:
1440:
1434:
1433:
1420:
1414:
1413:
1385:
1376:
1375:
1373:
1371:
1366:on 2 August 2017
1365:
1359:. Archived from
1326:
1317:
1311:
1310:
1300:
1280:
1274:
1273:
1262:
1256:
1255:
1253:
1251:
1245:
1239:. Archived from
1234:
1226:
1220:
1219:
1190:
1184:
1183:
1172:
1166:
1165:
1125:
1119:
1118:
1100:
1076:
1070:
1069:
1059:
1027:
1021:
1020:
986:
977:
971:
970:
954:
941:
940:
930:
898:
892:
891:
878:
872:
871:
868:Federal Register
860:
849:
848:
820:
814:
813:
802:
796:
795:
783:
774:
773:
763:
731:
246:Gilbert N. Lewis
188:A-bomb survivors
168:collective doses
2241:
2240:
2236:
2235:
2234:
2232:
2231:
2230:
2191:
2190:
2151:
2146:
2074:
2069:
2027:
2026:
2022:
2005:
2004:
1995:
1965:
1964:
1960:
1924:
1923:
1919:
1883:
1882:
1878:
1871:
1858:
1857:
1853:
1846:
1830:
1829:
1825:
1815:
1813:
1809:
1802:
1798:
1797:
1793:
1785:
1781:
1773:
1769:
1768:
1764:
1754:
1750:
1742:
1738:
1728:
1726:
1722:
1717:
1716:
1712:
1703:
1702:
1698:
1689:
1688:
1684:
1675:
1674:
1670:
1657:
1656:
1652:
1645:
1620:
1619:
1615:
1605:
1603:
1602:on 25 July 2011
1599:
1588:
1583:
1582:
1578:
1552:
1551:
1547:
1501:
1500:
1496:
1442:
1441:
1437:
1423:Schachtman NA.
1422:
1421:
1417:
1387:
1386:
1379:
1369:
1367:
1363:
1324:
1319:
1318:
1314:
1282:
1281:
1277:
1264:
1263:
1259:
1249:
1247:
1246:on 7 March 2020
1243:
1232:
1228:
1227:
1223:
1192:
1191:
1187:
1174:
1173:
1169:
1140:(1828): 44–46.
1127:
1126:
1122:
1078:
1077:
1073:
1029:
1028:
1024:
984:
979:
978:
974:
956:
955:
944:
900:
899:
895:
880:
879:
875:
862:
861:
852:
822:
821:
817:
804:
803:
799:
785:
784:
777:
733:
732:
717:
713:
657:
592:
586:
367:
319:
313:
285:. In 1958, the
238:Henri Becquerel
230:Wilhelm Röntgen
180:
159:threshold model
112:
92:threshold model
35:
26:
17:
12:
11:
5:
2239:
2237:
2229:
2228:
2223:
2218:
2213:
2208:
2203:
2193:
2192:
2189:
2188:
2144:
2138:
2130:
2125:
2120:
2115:
2110:
2105:
2100:
2095:
2090:
2085:
2080:
2073:
2072:External links
2070:
2068:
2067:
2020:
2015:New York Times
1993:
1958:
1917:
1876:
1869:
1851:
1844:
1823:
1791:
1779:
1762:
1748:
1736:
1710:
1696:
1682:
1668:
1650:
1643:
1635:10.17226/11340
1613:
1576:
1545:
1494:
1435:
1415:
1377:
1335:(12): 1495–8.
1312:
1291:(158): 1–235.
1275:
1257:
1221:
1202:(4): 1049–58.
1185:
1167:
1120:
1071:
1022:
995:(1699): 84–7.
972:
942:
893:
873:
850:
815:
797:
775:
714:
712:
709:
708:
707:
696:Biphasic Model
693:
688:
683:
678:
673:
668:
663:
656:
653:
585:
582:
575:
574:
567:
566:
551:
550:
536:
535:
508:
507:
501:
488:
477:
463:
462:
459:
437:
436:
386:threshold dose
366:
363:
359:health physics
312:
309:
242:Hermann Muller
179:
176:
111:
108:
59:model used in
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2238:
2227:
2224:
2222:
2219:
2217:
2214:
2212:
2209:
2207:
2204:
2202:
2199:
2198:
2196:
2185:
2181:
2177:
2173:
2169:
2165:
2161:
2157:
2150:
2145:
2143:
2139:
2136:
2135:
2131:
2129:
2126:
2124:
2121:
2119:
2116:
2114:
2111:
2109:
2106:
2104:
2101:
2099:
2096:
2094:
2091:
2089:
2086:
2084:
2081:
2079:
2076:
2075:
2071:
2063:
2059:
2055:
2051:
2047:
2043:
2039:
2035:
2031:
2024:
2021:
2016:
2012:
2008:
2002:
2000:
1998:
1994:
1989:
1985:
1981:
1977:
1974:(2): 121–51.
1973:
1969:
1962:
1959:
1954:
1950:
1945:
1940:
1936:
1932:
1928:
1921:
1918:
1913:
1909:
1904:
1899:
1895:
1891:
1887:
1880:
1877:
1872:
1866:
1862:
1855:
1852:
1847:
1845:9789210577984
1841:
1837:
1836:
1827:
1824:
1808:
1801:
1795:
1792:
1788:
1783:
1780:
1772:
1766:
1763:
1760:
1758:
1752:
1749:
1746:
1740:
1737:
1721:
1714:
1711:
1706:
1700:
1697:
1692:
1686:
1683:
1678:
1672:
1669:
1664:
1660:
1654:
1651:
1646:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1628:
1624:
1617:
1614:
1598:
1594:
1587:
1580:
1577:
1572:
1568:
1564:
1560:
1556:
1549:
1546:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1521:
1517:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1498:
1495:
1490:
1486:
1481:
1476:
1471:
1466:
1462:
1458:
1454:
1450:
1446:
1439:
1436:
1431:
1430:
1426:
1419:
1416:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1395:
1391:
1384:
1382:
1378:
1362:
1358:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1323:
1316:
1313:
1308:
1304:
1299:
1294:
1290:
1286:
1279:
1276:
1271:
1267:
1261:
1258:
1242:
1238:
1231:
1225:
1222:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1189:
1186:
1181:
1177:
1171:
1168:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1124:
1121:
1116:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1099:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1075:
1072:
1067:
1063:
1058:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1042:(4): 1491–6.
1041:
1037:
1033:
1026:
1023:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1006:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
983:
976:
973:
968:
964:
960:
953:
951:
949:
947:
943:
938:
934:
929:
924:
920:
916:
912:
908:
904:
897:
894:
889:
888:
883:
877:
874:
869:
865:
859:
857:
855:
851:
846:
842:
838:
834:
831:(1): 245–65.
830:
826:
819:
816:
811:
807:
801:
798:
793:
789:
782:
780:
776:
771:
767:
762:
757:
753:
749:
746:(2): 69–101.
745:
741:
737:
730:
728:
726:
724:
722:
720:
716:
710:
705:
701:
700:fringe theory
697:
694:
692:
689:
687:
684:
682:
679:
677:
674:
672:
669:
667:
664:
662:
659:
658:
654:
652:
648:
646:
642:
638:
632:
630:
629:birth defects
625:
624:psychological
620:
617:
613:
609:
605:
601:
597:
591:
583:
580:
572:
569:
568:
563:
559:
558:
556:
548:
544:
543:
541:
533:
532:
527:
523:
519:
518:
517:
513:
505:
502:
499:
493:
489:
486:
482:
478:
474:
470:
469:
467:
460:
457:
451:
447:
444:(part of the
443:
439:
438:
434:
427:
423:
422:
421:
417:
414:
413:relative risk
410:
405:
401:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
374:
372:
364:
362:
360:
355:
352:
348:
344:
340:
339:public policy
336:
331:
328:
324:
318:
310:
308:
305:
303:
298:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
266:
264:
260:
256:
251:
247:
243:
239:
235:
234:radioactivity
231:
227:
219:
215:
214:absorbed dose
211:
207:
203:
199:
198:
193:
189:
184:
177:
175:
173:
169:
164:
160:
155:
152:
151:public health
148:
144:
140:
136:
131:
129:
125:
121:
117:
109:
107:
105:
99:
97:
93:
89:
88:public health
84:
82:
78:
74:
70:
66:
62:
58:
57:dose-response
54:
50:
42:
38:
33:
29:
23:
19:
2206:Radiobiology
2159:
2155:
2133:
2040:(5): 27–36.
2037:
2033:
2023:
2014:
1971:
1967:
1961:
1937:(5): 941–8.
1934:
1930:
1920:
1896:(6): 443–4.
1893:
1889:
1879:
1860:
1854:
1833:
1826:
1814:. Retrieved
1807:the original
1794:
1782:
1765:
1756:
1751:
1739:
1727:. Retrieved
1713:
1699:
1685:
1671:
1663:News Release
1662:
1653:
1626:
1616:
1604:. Retrieved
1597:the original
1592:
1579:
1562:
1558:
1548:
1507:
1503:
1497:
1455:(2): 443–8.
1452:
1448:
1438:
1428:
1418:
1396:(2): 100–6.
1393:
1389:
1368:. Retrieved
1361:the original
1332:
1328:
1315:
1288:
1278:
1269:
1260:
1248:. Retrieved
1241:the original
1236:
1224:
1199:
1195:
1188:
1179:
1170:
1137:
1133:
1123:
1088:
1084:
1074:
1039:
1035:
1025:
992:
988:
975:
966:
962:
913:(1): 13–22.
910:
906:
896:
885:
876:
867:
828:
824:
818:
809:
800:
791:
743:
739:
703:
686:Radiotherapy
649:
633:
621:
593:
577:
553:
538:
529:
525:
515:
510:
496:
465:
454:
440:In 2004 the
431:
429:regulations.
418:
406:
402:
375:
368:
356:
332:
320:
306:
299:
282:
267:
262:
223:
205:
204:, where the
195:
174:since 2007.
156:
139:epidemiology
132:
119:
113:
110:Introduction
100:
85:
63:to estimate
52:
48:
46:
40:
36:
31:
27:
18:
2142:inhibition.
1729:15 November
1510:(1): 1–25.
1180:Nobel Prize
608:Switzerland
590:Radiophobia
365:Controversy
327:ultraviolet
255:Nobel Prize
240:. In 1927,
218:benzopyrene
77:teratogenic
2195:Categories
2162:: 432–42.
1816:3 February
1390:Teratology
711:References
661:DNA repair
394:DNA repair
390:teratology
315:See also:
71:, genetic
2062:218769799
2007:Revkin AC
907:Radiology
681:Radiology
271:Hiroshima
259:mutagenic
250:evolution
206:dose rate
202:Chernobyl
197:dose rate
73:mutations
2216:Oncology
2184:26248082
1953:10597995
1606:27 March
1540:41245977
1532:23296257
1489:22184222
1410:10440782
1349:21717110
1307:18088161
1216:13233949
1162:17806621
1115:73431487
1107:30763547
1091:: 6–25.
1036:Genetics
1017:17802387
937:19332842
845:24275177
770:27398078
655:See also
323:sunlight
275:Nagasaki
67:such as
43:hormesis
2164:Bibcode
2042:Bibcode
1988:8516187
1912:2284594
1757:PS010-4
1512:Bibcode
1480:3258602
1457:Bibcode
1370:25 July
1357:4708210
1298:4781354
1142:Bibcode
1134:Science
1066:9409815
1057:1208325
997:Bibcode
989:Science
928:2663584
890:. 2007.
761:4917595
616:EUROCAT
604:Ukraine
579:levels.
571:UNSCEAR
504:UNSCEAR
424:The US
384:with a
192:CT scan
178:Origins
55:) is a
2182:
2060:
1986:
1951:
1910:
1867:
1842:
1641:
1538:
1530:
1487:
1477:
1408:
1355:
1347:
1305:
1295:
1250:7 June
1214:
1160:
1113:
1105:
1064:
1054:
1015:
935:
925:
843:
768:
758:
555:great.
226:X-rays
34:linear
2152:(PDF)
2058:S2CID
1810:(PDF)
1803:(PDF)
1774:(PDF)
1725:. EPA
1723:(PDF)
1600:(PDF)
1589:(PDF)
1536:S2CID
1364:(PDF)
1353:S2CID
1325:(PDF)
1244:(PDF)
1233:(PDF)
1111:S2CID
985:(PDF)
456:time.
409:radon
351:radon
2180:PMID
1984:PMID
1949:PMID
1908:PMID
1865:ISBN
1840:ISBN
1818:2013
1731:2011
1639:ISBN
1608:2008
1528:PMID
1485:PMID
1406:PMID
1372:2017
1345:PMID
1303:PMID
1252:2018
1212:PMID
1158:PMID
1103:PMID
1062:PMID
1013:PMID
969:(1).
933:PMID
841:PMID
766:PMID
704:more
698:, a
560:The
545:The
520:The
490:The
479:The
396:and
273:and
232:and
116:dose
75:and
47:The
2172:doi
2160:142
2050:doi
1976:doi
1939:doi
1898:doi
1631:doi
1567:doi
1520:doi
1475:PMC
1465:doi
1453:109
1398:doi
1337:doi
1293:PMC
1204:doi
1150:doi
1093:doi
1089:301
1052:PMC
1044:doi
1040:147
1005:doi
923:PMC
915:doi
911:251
833:doi
756:PMC
748:doi
602:in
376:In
236:by
228:by
120:any
106:).
53:LNT
41:(D)
37:(C)
32:(B)
28:(A)
2197::
2178:.
2170:.
2158:.
2154:.
2056:.
2048:.
2038:67
2036:.
2032:.
2013:.
1996:^
1982:.
1970:.
1947:.
1935:28
1933:.
1929:.
1906:.
1894:16
1892:.
1888:.
1661:.
1637:.
1625:.
1591:.
1563:79
1561:.
1557:.
1534:.
1526:.
1518:.
1508:33
1506:.
1483:.
1473:.
1463:.
1451:.
1447:.
1427:.
1404:.
1394:60
1392:.
1380:^
1351:.
1343:.
1333:85
1331:.
1327:.
1301:.
1287:.
1268:.
1235:.
1210:.
1200:15
1198:.
1178:.
1156:.
1148:.
1138:71
1136:.
1132:.
1109:.
1101:.
1087:.
1083:.
1060:.
1050:.
1038:.
1034:.
1011:.
1003:.
993:66
991:.
987:.
965:.
961:.
945:^
931:.
921:.
909:.
905:.
884:.
866:.
853:^
839:.
829:32
827:.
808:.
790:.
778:^
764:.
754:.
744:11
742:.
738:.
718:^
2186:.
2174::
2166::
2064:.
2052::
2044::
2017:.
1990:.
1978::
1972:7
1955:.
1941::
1914:.
1900::
1873:.
1848:.
1835:B
1820:.
1789:.
1776:.
1733:.
1707:.
1693:.
1679:.
1647:.
1633::
1610:.
1573:.
1569::
1542:.
1522::
1514::
1491:.
1467::
1459::
1432:.
1412:.
1400::
1374:.
1339::
1309:.
1272:.
1254:.
1218:.
1206::
1164:.
1152::
1144::
1117:.
1095::
1068:.
1046::
1019:.
1007::
999::
967:1
939:.
917::
870:.
847:.
835::
812:.
794:.
772:.
750::
524:(
452::
51:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
