Literature DB >> 28109526

The threshold vs LNT showdown: Dose rate findings exposed flaws in the LNT model part 1. The Russell-Muller debate.

Edward J Calabrese1.   

Abstract

This paper assesses the discovery of the dose-rate effect in radiation genetics and how it challenged fundamental tenets of the linear non-threshold (LNT) dose response model, including the assumptions that all mutational damage is cumulative and irreversible and that the dose-response is linear at low doses. Newly uncovered historical information also describes how a key 1964 report by the International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP) addressed the effects of dose rate in the assessment of genetic risk. This unique story involves assessments by two leading radiation geneticists, Hermann J. Muller and William L. Russell, who independently argued that the report's Genetic Summary Section on dose rate was incorrect while simultaneously offering vastly different views as to what the report's summary should have contained. This paper reveals occurrences of scientific disagreements, how conflicts were resolved, which view(s) prevailed and why. During this process the Nobel Laureate, Muller, provided incorrect information to the ICRP in what appears to have been an attempt to manipulate the decision-making process and to prevent the dose-rate concept from being adopted into risk assessment practices.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Dose-rate; Hormesis; LNT; Linear dose response; Specific locus test

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28109526     DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2016.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Res        ISSN: 0013-9351            Impact factor:   6.498


  12 in total

Review 1.  Was Muller's 1946 Nobel Prize research for radiation-induced gene mutations peer-reviewed?

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Philos Ethics Humanit Med       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 2.464

2.  The IRI-DICE hypothesis: ionizing radiation-induced DSBs may have a functional role for non-deterministic responses at low doses.

Authors:  Britta Langen; Khalil Helou; Eva Forssell-Aronsson
Journal:  Radiat Environ Biophys       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 1.925

3.  The EPA Cancer Risk Assessment Default Model Proposal: Moving Away From the LNT.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese; Jaap C Hanekamp; Dima Yazji Shamoun
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 4.  Muller's nobel prize research and peer review.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Philos Ethics Humanit Med       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 2.464

Review 5.  Hormetic and Mitochondria-Related Mechanisms of Antioxidant Action of Phytochemicals.

Authors:  Rafael Franco; Gemma Navarro; Eva Martínez-Pinilla
Journal:  Antioxidants (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-04

6.  The Mistaken Birth and Adoption of LNT: An Abridged Version.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 2.658

7.  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

8.  Radiophobia: 7 Reasons Why Radiography Used in Spine and Posture Rehabilitation Should Not Be Feared or Avoided.

Authors:  Paul A Oakley; Deed E Harrison
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 2.658

Review 9.  Hormesis: Path and Progression to Significance.

Authors:  Edward J Calabrese
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 5.923

10.  The Impact of Dose Rate on DNA Double-Strand Break Formation and Repair in Human Lymphocytes Exposed to Fast Neutron Irradiation.

Authors:  Shankari Nair; Monique Engelbrecht; Xanthene Miles; Roya Ndimba; Randall Fisher; Peter du Plessis; Julie Bolcaen; Jaime Nieto-Camero; Evan de Kock; Charlot Vandevoorde
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 5.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.