The Genetics Panel of the NAS BEAR I Committee (1956): epistolary evidence suggests self-interest may have prompted an exaggeration of radiation risks that led to the adoption of the LNT cancer risk assessment model
- PMID: 24993953
- DOI: 10.1007/s00204-014-1306-7
The Genetics Panel of the NAS BEAR I Committee (1956): epistolary evidence suggests self-interest may have prompted an exaggeration of radiation risks that led to the adoption of the LNT cancer risk assessment model
Abstract
This paper extends a series of historical papers which demonstrated that the linear-no-threshold (LNT) model for cancer risk assessment was founded on ideological-based scientific deceptions by key radiation genetics leaders. Based on an assessment of recently uncovered personal correspondence, it is shown that some members of the United States (US) National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation I (BEAR I) Genetics Panel were motivated by self-interest to exaggerate risks to promote their science and personal/professional agenda. Such activities have profound implications for public policy and may have had a significant impact on the adoption of the LNT model for cancer risk assessment.
Similar articles
-
Cancer risk assessment foundation unraveling: new historical evidence reveals that the US National Academy of Sciences (US NAS), Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation (BEAR) Committee Genetics Panel falsified the research record to promote acceptance of the LNT.Arch Toxicol. 2015 Apr;89(4):649-50. doi: 10.1007/s00204-015-1455-3. Epub 2015 Jan 20. Arch Toxicol. 2015. PMID: 25600588
-
An abuse of risk assessment: how regulatory agencies improperly adopted LNT for cancer risk assessment.Arch Toxicol. 2015 Apr;89(4):647-8. doi: 10.1007/s00204-015-1454-4. Epub 2015 Jan 18. Arch Toxicol. 2015. PMID: 25596944
-
From Muller to mechanism: How LNT became the default model for cancer risk assessment.Environ Pollut. 2018 Oct;241:289-302. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.051. Epub 2018 May 22. Environ Pollut. 2018. PMID: 29843011 Review.
-
On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith.Environ Res. 2015 Oct;142:432-42. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2015.07.011. Epub 2015 Aug 4. Environ Res. 2015. PMID: 26248082 Review.
-
LNTgate: How scientific misconduct by the U.S. NAS led to governments adopting LNT for cancer risk assessment.Environ Res. 2016 Jul;148:535-546. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2016.03.040. Epub 2016 Apr 28. Environ Res. 2016. PMID: 27131569
Cited by
-
False and Misleading Claims of Scientific Misconduct in Early Research into Radiation Dose-response: Part 1. Overlooking Key Historical Text.Health Phys. 2025 Jun 1;128(6):507-523. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001932. Epub 2024 Dec 10. Health Phys. 2025. PMID: 39656129 Free PMC article.
-
Model Uncertainty via the Integration of Hormesis and LNT as the Default in Cancer Risk Assessment.Dose Response. 2015 Dec 10;13(4):1559325815621764. doi: 10.1177/1559325815621764. eCollection 2015 Oct-Dec. Dose Response. 2015. PMID: 26740815 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources