Response to, "On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith."
- PMID: 26948286
- DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2016.01.039
Response to, "On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith."
Abstract
It is not true that successive groups of researchers from academia and research institutions-scientists who served on panels of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS)-were duped into supporting a linear no-threshold model (LNT) by the opinions expressed in the genetic panel section of the 1956 "BEAR I" report. Successor reports had their own views of the LNT model, relying on mouse and human data, not fruit fly data. Nor was the 1956 report biased and corrupted, as has been charged in an article by Edward J. Calabrese in this journal. With or without BEAR I, the LNT model would likely have been accepted in the US for radiation protection purposes in the 1950's.
Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
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
-
Jan Beyea mischaracterizes the work by Siegel et al. (2016).Environ Res. 2016 Oct;150:663. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2016.05.032. Epub 2016 Jun 16. Environ Res. 2016. PMID: 27321710 No abstract available.
Comment on
-
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.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources