Literature DB >> 23304105

Shifting the paradigm in radiation safety.

Mohan Doss1.   

Abstract

The current radiation safety paradigm using the linear no-threshold (LNT) model is based on the premise that even the smallest amount of radiation may cause mutations increasing the risk of cancer. Autopsy studies have shown that the presence of cancer cells is not a decisive factor in the occurrence of clinical cancer. On the other hand, suppression of immune system more than doubles the cancer risk in organ transplant patients, indicating its key role in keeping occult cancers in check. Low dose radiation (LDR) elevates immune response, and so it may reduce rather than increase the risk of cancer. LNT model pays exclusive attention to DNA damage, which is not a decisive factor, and completely ignores immune system response, which is an important factor, and so is not scientifically justifiable. By not recognizing the importance of the immune system in cancer, and not exploring exercise intervention, the current paradigm may have missed an opportunity to reduce cancer deaths among atomic bomb survivors. Increased antioxidants from LDR may reduce aging-related non-cancer diseases since oxidative damage is implicated in these. A paradigm shift is warranted to reduce further casualties, reduce fear of LDR, and enable investigation of potential beneficial applications of LDR.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aging-related diseases; Antioxidant stimulation; Immune system; LNT model; Low dose radiation; Radiation safety

Year:  2012        PMID: 23304105      PMCID: PMC3526328          DOI: 10.2203/dose-response.11-056.Doss

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


  123 in total

1.  Atomic bomb health benefits.

Authors:  T D Luckey
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2008-08-11       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 2.  The road to linearity: why linearity at low doses became the basis for carcinogen risk assessment.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 5.153

3.  Nuclear energy and health: and the benefits of low-dose radiation hormesis.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler; Myron Pollycove
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2008-11-10       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 4.  How cigarette smoke skews immune responses to promote infection, lung disease and cancer.

Authors:  Martin R Stämpfli; Gary P Anderson
Journal:  Nat Rev Immunol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 53.106

5.  Risks associated with low doses and low dose rates of ionizing radiation: why linearity may be (almost) the best we can do.

Authors:  Mark P Little; Richard Wakeford; E Janet Tawn; Simon D Bouffler; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  The linear no-threshold relationship is inconsistent with radiation biologic and experimental data.

Authors:  Maurice Tubiana; Ludwig E Feinendegen; Chichuan Yang; Joseph M Kaminski
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 11.105

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

Authors:  Bobby R Scott
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2007-09-30       Impact factor: 2.658

8.  Reduction in mutation frequency by very low-dose gamma irradiation of Drosophila melanogaster germ cells.

Authors:  Keiji Ogura; Junji Magae; Yasushi Kawakami; Takao Koana
Journal:  Radiat Res       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.841

9.  Radiobiological basis for cancer therapy by total or half-body irradiation.

Authors:  Kiyohiko Sakamoto
Journal:  Nonlinearity Biol Toxicol Med       Date:  2004-10

10.  Nonlinear dose-response relationship in the immune system following exposure to ionizing radiation: mechanisms and implications.

Authors:  Shu-Zheng Liu
Journal:  Nonlinearity Biol Toxicol Med       Date:  2003-01
View more
  7 in total

1.  Special issue introduction.

Authors:  Bobby R Scott; Ludwik Dobrzyński
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 2.658

2.  Point/Counterpoint: low-dose radiation is beneficial, not harmful.

Authors:  Mohan Doss; Mark P Little; Colin G Orton
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Linear No-Threshold Model VS. Radiation Hormesis.

Authors:  Mohan Doss
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 2.658

4.  Correcting systemic deficiencies in our scientific infrastructure.

Authors:  Mohan Doss
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  Evidence supporting radiation hormesis in atomic bomb survivor cancer mortality data.

Authors:  Mohan Doss
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 6.  Computed tomography and patient risk: Facts, perceptions and uncertainties.

Authors:  Stephen P Power; Fiachra Moloney; Maria Twomey; Karl James; Owen J O'Connor; Michael M Maher
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2016-12-28

Review 7.  Low-dose ionizing radiation as a hormetin: experimental observations and therapeutic perspective for age-related disorders.

Authors:  Alexander Vaiserman; Jerry M Cuttler; Yehoshua Socol
Journal:  Biogerontology       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 4.284

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.