It seems only philosophers like to admit that they don't know something: A linear model has long been used in health physics to set maximum acceptable radiation exposures. A study by researchers that looks at Swedish children exposed to fallout from Chernobyl while they were fetuses between 8 and 25 weeks gestation concluded that the reduction in IQ at very low doses was greater than expected, given a simple LNT model for radiation damage, indicating that the LNT model may be too conservative when it comes to neurological damage.
Now don't get me wrong: They also recommended holistic approaches combining biological system-based methods with epidemiological data to develop more sophisticated dose-response models at low dose levels, considering a dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor DDREF 7.
The cancer risk for these radiation workers was still less than the average for persons in the UK due to the healthy worker effect. This is a departure from the previously used value of 2, which is still proposed by ICRP in its most recent recommendations. In its press release the Academies stated: What is the total dosage in the miners relative to background?
They simply argue that there is not enough evidence, and that the LNT model is very plausible. In a study  cancer rates among UK radiation workers were found to increase with higher recorded occupational radiation doses.
The French have a huge number of reactors and so a lot invested in this question and they had their own body do a report on this, go checkout radiation hormesis. I only read summaries about this experiment.
V again it does seem to be acceptable, with the added advantage of being available in full for download.
Major scientific bodies have endorsed LNT. Are there any standards about how to write on scientific topics? The atomic bomb survivor data have also been used to raise concerns about the radiation dose to the public from the increasing use of diagnostic imaging Brenner and Hall, ; Hall and Brenner, The doses examined varied between 0 and mSv received over their working lives.
If you want a definition of scientific consensus, the closest thing to meeting the definition would probably be a NAS study.
A study by researchers that looks at Swedish children exposed to fallout from Chernobyl while they were fetuses between 8 and 25 weeks gestation concluded that the reduction in IQ at very low doses was greater than expected, given a simple LNT model for radiation damage, indicating that the LNT model may be too conservative when it comes to neurological damage.
Fieldwork[ edit ] The LNT model and the alternatives to it each have plausible mechanisms that could bring them about, but definitive conclusions are hard to make given the difficulty of doing longitudinal studies involving large cohorts over long periods.
However, a strictly linear dose response should not be expected in all circumstances. Studies would be only useful, if you compared the statistics of a high-background-radiation area to a nearby area with low-background-radiation.
Although compelling evidence on the effect of low dosage of radiation was hard to come by, by the late s, the idea of LNT became more popular due to its mathematical simplicity.
Moreover, Fukushima nuclear power plant accidents after the East-Japan earthquake and tsunami has brought the great fear and anxiety for the exposure of radiation at low levels, even much lower levels similar to natural background.
InUnited Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR assessed the LNT model and a threshold model, but noted the difficulty in acquiring "reliable information about the correlation between small doses and their effects either in individuals or in large populations".
The cancer risk for these radiation workers was still less than the average for persons in the UK due to the healthy worker effect. The American Nuclear Society recommended further research on the Linear No Threshold Hypothesis before making adjustments to current radiation protection guidelines, concurring with the Health Physics Society's position that: The doses examined varied between 0 and mSv received over their working lives.
To be neutral, our article ought to describe all points of view i. Regarding heritable risk, its nominal risk coefficient in the whole population was estimated as 0. Sounds more like a scientific dispute to me. They are thus a reputable institution and are more akin the US National Academy of Science, who are also instituted to respond respond to government requests for expert opinion.In Linear_no-threshold_model#Fieldwork, citing a NBER paper made by students in economy in a non peer-reviewed journal about IQ impact of radiation on Swedish children looks like a poor choice (unlike the PNAS paper cited before).
I question the validity of this paper especially in regards to the topic which is the LNT model. The Linear Non-Threshold (LNT) process is used by virtually all governmental agencies to compute incidence of cancer as a consequence of exposure to a carcinogen.
Although in describing LNT process both theory and hypothesis are used, in this paper we rely upon the most recent report of the National Research Council where the word. is called the “linear no threshold” (LNT) model. In effect, it postulates that there is a theoretical, non-zero risk at low doses and low dose rates, even at and below the levels.
The strong focus of the article is a linear non-threshold theory (LNT), presented by National Research Council (). It concludes that the risk continues at lower doses without a threshold and states that even the smallest dose increases a risk for the human.
On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith Edward J.
Calabresen Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MAUSA. Such an extrapolation has generally involved the use of the linear non-threshold (LNT) theory.
Recent reports from the National Research Council (BEIR VII) and the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) have considered the appropriateness of the use of LNT for the purposes of radiation protection standard setting.Download