Literature DB >> 23912675

How the US National Academy of Sciences misled the world community on cancer risk assessment: new findings challenge historical foundations of the linear dose response.

Edward J Calabrese1.   

Abstract

This paper extends several recent publications indicating that Hermann J. Muller: (1) Made deceptive statements during his Noble Prize Lecture on December 12, 1946, that were intended to promote the acceptance of the linear dose-response model for risk assessment for ionizing radiation and (2) that such actions of Muller were masked by a series of decisions by Muller's long-time colleague and esteemed radiation geneticist Curt Stern, affecting key publications in the mutation literature. Such actions further enhanced acceptance of the linearity dose-response model while preventing Muller's deceptions from being discovered. This paper provides documentation that Muller reinforced such practices within the scientific literature in the early 1950s, by supporting scientifically questionable actions of Stern. Detailed documentation is provided that demonstrates how these actions affected national and international risk assessment policy for ionizing radiation and chemical carcinogens via the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation committee in 1956, to adopt the linear dose-response model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23912675     DOI: 10.1007/s00204-013-1105-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Toxicol        ISSN: 0340-5761            Impact factor:   5.153


  12 in total

1.  Low-dose ionizing radiation and cancer risk: not so easy to tell.

Authors:  Suraj Dahal; Matthew J Budoff
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2019-12

Review 2.  Radiobiology in Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Pat Zanzonico; Lawrence Dauer; H William Strauss
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2016-12

3.  Linear Non-Threshold (LNT) historical discovery milestones.

Authors:  Edward Calabrese
Journal:  Med Lav       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 2.244

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

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

5.  A message to Fukushima: nothing to fear but fear itself.

Authors:  Shizuyo Sutou
Journal:  Genes Environ       Date:  2016-06-01

6.  Evidence That Lifelong Low Dose Rates of Ionizing Radiation Increase Lifespan in Long- and Short-Lived Dogs.

Authors:  Jerry M Cuttler; Ludwig E Feinendegen; Yehoshua Socol
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 7.  Health Impacts of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation: Current Scientific Debates and Regulatory Issues.

Authors:  Alexander Vaiserman; Alexander Koliada; Oksana Zabuga; Yehoshua Socol
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 2.658

8.  Cellular and Molecular Detection of Multi-doses of Ionizing Radiation-Induced Immunomodulatory Response.

Authors:  Soha M Hussien
Journal:  Cell Biochem Biophys       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 2.194

9.  Model Uncertainty via the Integration of Hormesis and LNT as the Default in Cancer Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 2.658

10.  It Is Time to Move Beyond the Linear No-Threshold Theory for Low-Dose Radiation Protection.

Authors:  John J Cardarelli; Brant A Ulsh
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 2.658

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.