Biological Consequences and Health Risks of Low-Level Exposure to Ionizing Radiation: Commentary on the Workshop

Feinendegen, L. E.; Brooks, Antone L.; Morgan, William F.

doi:10.1097/hp.0b013e31820a83ae

Cited by 43 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The LNT model currently is the basis of radiation protection regulations. However, this model now is made unlikely by the observations of low-dose-specific biological responses, which unambiguously demonstrate the failure of extrapolation of radiation effects per unit dose from high to low doses (Feinendegen et al 2004(Feinendegen et al , 2011. Such low-dosespecific responses introduce non-linear reactions, which also impress as bystander effects and genomic instability with aggravation of initial damage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Quantification of Adaptive Protection Following Low-dose Irradiation

Feinendegen

2016

Health Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question whether low doses and low dose-rates of ionizing radiation pose a health risk to people is of public, scientific and regulatory concern. It is a subject of intense debate and causes much fear. The controversy is to what extent low-dose effects, if any, cause or protect against damage such as cancer. Even if immediate molecular damage in exposed biological systems rises linearly with the number of energy deposition events (i.e., with absorbed dose), the response of the whole biological system to that damage is not linear. To understand how initial molecular damage affects a complex living system is the current challenge.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Quantification of Adaptive Protection Following Low-dose Irradiation

Feinendegen

2016

Health Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This same pattern has been demonstrated for many cellular and molecular responses to radiation (Yin et al 2003) these low dose and dose rate exposures. Two useful reviews of these data are by Dauer et al (2010) and Feinendegen et al (2011).…”

Section: Washington State and Doe Low Dose Radiation Research Programmentioning

confidence: 97%

Thirty-sixth Lauriston S. Taylor Lecture on Radiation Protection and Measurements—From the Field to the Laboratory and Back

Brooks¹

2013

Health Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

My scientific journey started at the University of Utah chasing fallout. It was on everything, in everything, and was distributed throughout the ecosystem. This resulted in radiation doses to humans and caused me great concern. From this concern I asked the question, "Are there health effects from these radiation doses and levels of radioactive contamination?" I have invested my scientific career trying to address this basic question. While conducting research, I got acquainted with many of the What ifs of radiation biology. The major What if in my research was, "What if we have underestimated the radiation risk for internally-deposited radioactive material?" While conducting research to address this important question, many other What ifs came up related to dose, dose rate, and dose distribution. I also encountered a large number of Wows. One of the first was when I went from conducting environmental fallout studies to research in a controlled laboratory. The activity in fallout was expressed as pCi L⁻¹, whereas it was necessary to inject laboratory animals with μCi g⁻¹ body weight to induce measurable biological changes, chromosome aberrations, and cancer. Wow! That is seven to nine orders of magnitude above the activity levels found in the environment. Other Wows have made it necessary for the field of radiation biology to make important paradigm shifts. For example, one shift involved changing from "hit theory" to total tissue responses as the result of bystander effects. Finally, Who cares? While working at U.S. Department of Energy headquarters and serving on many scientific committees, I found that science does not drive regulatory and funding decisions. Public perception and politics seem to be major driving forces. If scientific data suggested that risk had been underestimated, everyone cared. When science suggested that risk had been overestimated, no one cared. This result-dependent Who cares? was demonstrated as we tried to generate interactions by holding meetings with individuals involved in basic low-dose research, regulators, and the news media. As the scientists presented their "exciting data" that suggested that risk was overestimated, many of the regulators simply said, "We cannot use such data." The newspaper people said, "It is not possible to get such information by my editors." In spite of these difficulties, research results from basic science must be made available and considered by members of the public as well as by those that make regulatory recommendations. Public outreach of the data is critical and must continue to be a future focus to address properly the question of, "Who cares?" My journey in science, like many of yours, has been a mixture of chasing money, beatings, and the joys of unique and interesting research results. Perhaps through our experiences, we can improve research environments, funding, and use of the valuable information that is generated. Scientists that study at all levels of biological organization, from the environment to the laboratory and human epidemiology,...

show abstract

“…However, there is considerable evidence for the LDR upregulation of adaptive protections (Feinendegen et al, 2011;Feinendegen et al, 2013), antioxidants (Wang et al, 2008), DNA repair enzymes (Bodnarchuk, 2003), and the immune system (Liu, 2007). As a consequence of such enhanced defenses, it is reasonable to conclude (analogous to the abovedescribed examples of thinking and exercise) that LDR may reduce the accumulation of DNA damage in the long term, and result in better Low Dose Radiation to Control Neurodegenerative Diseases health (Pollycove, 2007).…”

Section: Increased Dna Damage From Low Dose Ionizing Radiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low Dose Radiation Adaptive Protection to Control Neurodegenerative Diseases

Doss¹

2013

Dose-Response

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ᮀ Concerns have been expressed recently regarding the observed increased DNA damage from activities such as thinking and exercise. Such concerns have arisen from an incomplete accounting of the full effects of the increased oxidative damage. When the effects of the induced adaptive protective responses such as increased antioxidants and DNA repair enzymes are taken into consideration, there would be less endogenous DNA damage during the subsequent period of enhanced defenses, resulting in improved health from the thinking and exercise activities. Low dose radiation (LDR), which causes oxidative stress and increased DNA damage, upregulates adaptive protection systems that may decrease diseases in an analogous manner. Though there are ongoing debates regarding LDR's carcinogenicity, with two recent advisory committee reports coming to opposite conclusions, data published since the time of the reports have overwhelmingly ruled out its carcinogenicity, paving the way for consideration of its potential use for disease reduction. LDR adaptive protection is a promising approach to control neurodegenerative diseases, for which there are no methods of prevention or cure. Preparation of a compelling ethics case would pave the way for LDR clinical studies and progress in dealing with neurodegenerative diseases.

show abstract

Biological Consequences and Health Risks of Low-Level Exposure to Ionizing Radiation: Commentary on the Workshop

Cited by 43 publications

References 72 publications

Quantification of Adaptive Protection Following Low-dose Irradiation

Quantification of Adaptive Protection Following Low-dose Irradiation

Thirty-sixth Lauriston S. Taylor Lecture on Radiation Protection and Measurements—From the Field to the Laboratory and Back

Low Dose Radiation Adaptive Protection to Control Neurodegenerative Diseases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About