Literature DB >> 10745295

Radiation hormesis: the demise of a legitimate hypothesis.

E J Calabrese1, L A Baldwin.   

Abstract

This paper examines the underlying factors that contributed to the marginalization of radiation hormesis in the early and middle decades of the 20th century. The most critical factor affecting the demise of radiation hormesis was a lack of agreement over how to define the concept of hormesis and quantitatively describe its dose-response features. If radiation hormesis had been defined as a modest overcompensation to a disruption in homeostasis as would have been consistent with the prevailing notion in the area of chemical hormesis, this would have provided the theoretical and practical means to blunt subsequent legitimate criticism of this hypothesis. A second critical factor undermining the radiation hormesis hypothesis was the generally total lack of recognition by radiation scientists of the concept of chemical hormesis which was markedly more advanced, substantiated and generalized than in the radiation domain. The third factor was that major scientific criticism of low dose stimulatory responses was galvanized at the time that the National Research Council (NRC) was organizing a national research agenda on radiation and the hormetic hypothesis was generally excluded from the future planned research opportunities. Furthermore, the criticisms of the leading scientists of the 1930s which undermined the concept of radiation hormesis were limited in scope and highly flawed and then perpetuated over the decades by other 'prestigious' experts who appeared to simply accept the earlier reports. This setting was then linked to a growing fear of radiation as a cause of birth defects, mutation and cancer, factors all reinforced by later concerns over the atomic bomb. Strongly supportive findings on hormetic effects in the 1940s by Soviet scientists were either generally not available to US scientists or disregarded as part of the Cold War mindset without adequate analysis. Finally, a massive, but poorly designed, US Department of Agriculture experiment in the late 1940s to assess the capacity for low dose plant stimulation by radionuclides failed to support the hormetic hypothesis thereby markedly lessening enthusiasm for research and funding in this area. Thus, the combination of a failed understanding of the hormetic hypothesis and its linkage with a strong chemical hormesis database, flawed analyses by prestigious scientists at the critical stage of scientific research development, reinforced by a Cold War mentality led to marginalization of an hypothesis (i.e., radiation hormesis) that had substantial scientific foundations and generalizability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10745295     DOI: 10.1191/096032700678815611

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Exp Toxicol        ISSN: 0960-3271            Impact factor:   2.903


  25 in total

1.  Hormesis: a revolution in toxicology, risk assessment and medicine.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  Early effects of low dose C ion or x-ray irradiation on peripheral blood lymphocytes of patients with alimentary tract cancer.

Authors:  Yingtai Chen; Xuezhong Chen; Yumin Li; Hong Zhang; Yi Xie; Xiaowei Zhang; Huizi Ren; Yanling Wang; Shiqi Liao; Mingyan He; Jinyu Ren; Jieyu Zhang; Xiadong Zhou; Tongzhang Zheng; Briseis A Kilfoy; Yawei Zhang
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-08-02       Impact factor: 2.658

3.  Effects of acute low doses of gamma-radiation on erythrocytes membrane.

Authors:  Sherif S Mahmoud; Eman El-Sakhawy; Eman S Abdel-Fatah; Adel M Kelany; Rizk M Rizk
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2010-09-24       Impact factor: 1.925

4.  What becomes of nuclear risk assessment in light of radiation hormesis?

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2006-08-25       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  Hormesis and Cellular Quality Control: A Possible Explanation for the Molecular Mechanisms that Underlie the Benefits of Mild Stress.

Authors:  F A C Wiegant; S A H de Poot; V E Boers-Trilles; A M A Schreij
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-11-16       Impact factor: 2.658

6.  Evidence for radiation hormesis after in vitro exposure of human lymphocytes to low doses of ionizing radiation.

Authors:  Kanokporn Noy Rithidech; Bobby R Scott
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 2.658

7.  Hormesis: from mainstream to therapy.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  J Cell Commun Signal       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 5.782

8.  Craniocervical chiropractic procedures - a précis of upper cervical chiropractic.

Authors:  H Charles Woodfield; Craig York; Roderic P Rochester; Scott Bales; Mychal Beebe; Bryan Salminen; Jeffrey N Scholten
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2015-06

Review 9.  Cellular stress responses, the hormesis paradigm, and vitagenes: novel targets for therapeutic intervention in neurodegenerative disorders.

Authors:  Vittorio Calabrese; Carolin Cornelius; Albena T Dinkova-Kostova; Edward J Calabrese; Mark P Mattson
Journal:  Antioxid Redox Signal       Date:  2010-08-28       Impact factor: 8.401

Review 10.  Hormesis and medicine.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2008-06-28       Impact factor: 4.335

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.