Literature DB >> 29843011

From Muller to mechanism: How LNT became the default model for cancer risk assessment.

Edward J Calabrese1.   

Abstract

This paper summarizes the historical and scientific foundations of the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) cancer risk assessment model. The story of cancer risk assessment is an extraordinary one as it was based on an initial incorrect gene mutation interpretation of Muller, the application of this incorrect assumption in the derivation of the LNT single-hit model, and a series of actions by leading radiation geneticists during the 1946-1956 period, including a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation (BEAR) I Genetics Panel (Anonymous, 1956), to sustain the LNT belief via a series of deliberate obfuscations, deceptions and misrepresentations that provided the basis of modern cancer risk assessment policy and practices. The reaffirming of the LNT model by a subsequent and highly influential NAS Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) I Committee (NAS/NRC, 1972) using mouse data has now been found to be inappropriate based on the discovery of a significant documented error in the historical control group that led to incorrect estimations of risk in the low dose zone. Correction of this error by the original scientists and the application of the adjusted/corrected data back to the BEIR I (NAS/NRC, 1972) report indicates that the data would have supported a threshold rather than the LNT model. Thus, cancer risk assessment has a poorly appreciated, complex and seriously flawed history that has undermined policies and practices of regulatory agencies in the U.S. and worldwide to the present time.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer risk assessment; Dose rate; Ionizing radiation; Linear dose response; Mutation; Threshold dose response

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29843011     DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Pollut        ISSN: 0269-7491            Impact factor:   8.071


  5 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

Review 2.  Requirements for Transparency and Communicability of Regulatory Science.

Authors:  A Alan Moghissi; Richard A Calderone; Camille Estupigan; Rae Koch; Kelsey Manfredi; Vanessa Vanderdys
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 2.658

3.  Death of the ALARA Radiation Protection Principle as Used in the Medical Sector.

Authors:  Paul A Oakley; Deed E Harrison
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2020-04-29       Impact factor: 2.658

4.  Transcriptomic profiling reveals gene expression in human peripheral blood after exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation.

Authors:  Fang Fang; Xiaoling Yu; Xiaochun Wang; Xiaojun Zhu; Lantao Liu; Li Rong; Dongsheng Niu; Jue Li
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 2.724

Review 5.  Hormesis: Path and Progression to Significance.

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

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.