Literature DB >> 19088900

It's time for a new low-dose-radiation risk assessment paradigm--one that acknowledges hormesis.

Bobby R Scott1.   

Abstract

The current system of radiation protection for humans is based on the linear-no-threshold (LNT) risk-assessment paradigm. Perceived harm to irradiated nuclear workers and the public is mainly reflected through calculated hypothetical increased cancers. The LNT-based system of protection employs easy-to-implement measures of radiation exposure. Such measures include the equivalent dose (a biological-damage-potential-weighted measure) and the effective dose (equivalent dose multiplied by a tissue-specific relative sensitivity factor for stochastic effects). These weighted doses have special units such as the sievert (Sv) and millisievert (mSv, one thousandth of a sievert). Radiation-induced harm is controlled via enforcing exposure limits expressed as effective dose. Expected cancer cases can be easily computed based on the summed effective dose (person-sievert) for an irradiated group or population. Yet the current system of radiation protection needs revision because radiation-induced natural protection (hormesis) has been neglected. A novel, nonlinear, hormetic relative risk model for radiation-induced cancers is discussed in the context of establishing new radiation exposure limits for nuclear workers and the public.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adaptive response; hormesis; radiation; risk assessment

Year:  2007        PMID: 19088900      PMCID: PMC2592992          DOI: 10.2203/dose-response.07-005.Scott

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dose Response        ISSN: 1559-3258            Impact factor:   2.658


  66 in total

Review 1.  Hormesis: U-shaped dose responses and their centrality in toxicology.

Authors:  E J Calabrese; L A Baldwin
Journal:  Trends Pharmacol Sci       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 14.819

2.  Interaction of radiation and smoking in lung cancer induction among workers at the Mayak nuclear enterprise.

Authors:  Z B Tokarskaya; B R Scott; G V Zhuntova; N D Okladnikova; Z D Belyaeva; V F Khokhryakov; H Schöllnberger; E K Vasilenko
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 1.316

3.  Further study of prolongation of life span associated with immunological modification by chronic low-dose-rate irradiation in MRL-lpr/lpr mice: effects of whole-life irradiation.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Ina; Kazuo Sakai
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.841

4.  Stochastic thresholds: a novel explanation of nonlinear dose-response relationships for stochastic radiobiological effects.

Authors:  Bobby R Scott
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2006-05-22       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  Evidence for a lack of DNA double-strand break repair in human cells exposed to very low x-ray doses.

Authors:  Kai Rothkamm; Markus Löbrich
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-04-04       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Adaptive response of human lymphocytes to low concentrations of radioactive thymidine.

Authors:  G Olivieri; J Bodycote; S Wolff
Journal:  Science       Date:  1984-02-10       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Lung cancer mortality between 1950 and 1987 after exposure to fractionated moderate-dose-rate ionizing radiation in the Canadian fluoroscopy cohort study and a comparison with lung cancer mortality in the Atomic Bomb survivors study.

Authors:  G R Howe
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 2.841

8.  Human lymphocytes exposed to low doses of ionizing radiations become refractory to high doses of radiation as well as to chemical mutagens that induce double-strand breaks in DNA.

Authors:  S Wolff; V Afzal; J K Wiencke; G Olivieri; A Michaeli
Journal:  Int J Radiat Biol Relat Stud Phys Chem Med       Date:  1988-01

9.  Radiation risk prediction and genetics: the influence of the TP53 gene in vivo.

Authors:  R E J Mitchel
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2006-05-22       Impact factor: 2.658

10.  The influence of radiation and nonradiation factors on the lung cancer incidence among the workers of the nuclear enterprise Mayak.

Authors:  Z B Tokarskaya; N D Okladnikova; Z D Belyaeva; E G Drozhko
Journal:  Health Phys       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 1.316

View more
  18 in total

1.  Improving the scientific foundations for estimating health risks from the Fukushima incident.

Authors:  Edward Calabrese
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Commentary on Using LNT for Radiation Protection and Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 2.658

3.  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

Review 4.  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

5.  The dose window for radiation-induced protective adaptive responses.

Authors:  Ronald E J Mitchel
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2009-11-23       Impact factor: 2.658

6.  Radiation hormesis: historical perspective and implications for low-dose cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  Alexander M Vaiserman
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 2.658

7.  Hormesis: a conversation with a critic.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 9.031

8.  Novel acyclic nucleotide analogues GS-343074 and GS-424044 demonstrate antiproliferative and pro-apoptotic activity in canine neoplastic cell lines.

Authors:  J A Lawrence; M K Huelsmeyer; D H Thamm; D B Tumas; G Birkus; I Kurzman; D M Vail
Journal:  Vet Comp Oncol       Date:  2013-05-15       Impact factor: 2.613

9.  Low-dose-radiation stimulated natural chemical and biological protection against lung cancer.

Authors:  B R Scott
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2008-03-20       Impact factor: 2.658

10.  Remedy for radiation fear - discard the politicized science.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 2.658

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.