Proceedings of the Joint American Nuclear Society and Health Physics Society Conference: Applicability of Radiation-Response Models to Low-Dose Protection Standards 1–3 October 2018, Pasco, Washington Introduction—Years in the Making

Brooks, Anne; Glines, Wayne M.; Waltar, A.E.

doi:10.1097/hp.0000000000001213

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reliance on the LNT policy affects other facets of society as well. It foments fear by suggesting there is no safe level of radiation exposure, causing some people to refuse life-saving medical treatments that use radiation for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes (Brooks et al 2023). It results in unnecessary and tremendous costs to build or decommission nuclear power plants; a safe, reliable, and low-carbon emission form of energy 52 .…”

Section: Impact On Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Overt Scientific Bias and Clandestine Acts by Trusted Scientists: The Flawed Application of the Linear No-threshold Model

Cardarelli

2024

Health Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Health Physics Society (HPS) released a video documentary on the history of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model in April 2022. It exposed many scientific and ethical failings of many leaders, influential scientists, and organizations that have resulted in the current system of radiological protection. Since then, the society received many comments; most were supportive, while a few criticized the video documentary as delivering an anti-LNT message. Shortly thereafter, many emails discovered via an independent Freedom of Information Act request revealed multiple layers of coordination between prominent people in the field of radiation protection to coopt the leadership within the HPS and suppress information they perceived or assumed to be contrary to a pro-LNT message. Many of these emails were published by JunkScience.com, an independent organization that exposes faulty scientific data and analyses used to advance special interests and hidden agendas. This Forum article is intended to document in the peer-reviewed literature the JunkScience.com findings of clandestine acts by trusted scientists within the radiation protection community. The emails exposed strong personal biases, actions taken by leaders within the National Commission on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) to “save the Society” from its “downward spiral,” and actions taken by NCRP and HPS members serving on a National Academies of Sciences committee to suppress scientific information relevant to the debate about health effects in low-dose environments. These anti-science actions harm our entire profession and the trust that Congress bestows on our scientific organizations expecting to receive objective recommendations based on sound science. It is important that these events are recorded in the scientific literature from a historical perspective. The radiation protection community will be judged not by what is revealed in this article but by what actions are taken from here.

show abstract

Section: Impact On Societymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These statements stand true today, and this "worship of the straight line" has ultimately caused unwarranted crippling fear of low-level radiation exposures (Brooks et al 2023).…”

Section: The International Commission On Radiological Protectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overt Scientific Bias and Clandestine Acts by Trusted Scientists: The Flawed Application of the Linear No-threshold Model

Cardarelli

2024

Health Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, biological research over the past few decades has increased the understanding of how radiation interacts with the non-linear complexities of living tissue. Accordingly, it is important to delve a bit deeper into the biological aspects of radiation exposure at low levels, since the development of a scientifically-based premise to review and eventually revise the LNT premise can only be accomplished and accepted by the broad radiation health professional community when the detailed biological processes are understood (Brooks et al 2023).…”

Section: Radiobiologistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Low-level Radiation Exposure Should Not Be Feared

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to address the public fear that is usually associated with low-level radiation exposure situations. Its ultimate objective is to provide persuasive assurances to informed but skeptical members of the public that exposure situations involving low-level radiation are not to be feared. Unfortunately, just acquiescing to an unsupportive public fear of low-level radiation is not without consequences. It is causing severe disruptions to the benefits that harnessed radiation can produce for the well-being of all humanity. In this pursuit, the paper provides the scientific and epistemological basis needed for regulatory reform by reviewing the history in quantifying, understanding, modeling, and controlling radiation exposure, including some of the evolving contributions of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, the International Commission on Radiological Protection, and the myriad of international and intergovernmental organizations establishing radiation safety standards. It also explores the various interpretations of the linear no-threshold model and the insights gained from radiation pathologists, radiation epidemiologists, radiation biologists, and radiation protectionists. Given that the linear no-threshold model is so deeply imbedded in current radiation exposure guidance, despite the lack of a solid scientific base on the actually proven radiation effects at low-doses, the paper suggests near-term ways to improve regulatory implementation and better serve the public by excluding and/or exempting trivial low-dose situations from the regulatory scope. Several examples are given where the unsubstantiated public fear of low-level radiation has resulted in crippling the beneficial effects that controlled radiation offers to a modern society.

show abstract

“…I have no issues with the content of the Arno et al 2023 paper titled “Update and Extension of Release Criteria for Canine 117m Sn Treatments.” The paper models the dose to patient owners following treatment of dogs with osteoarthritic joints by radiosynoviorthesis and provides guidance related to stay-time limits with an objective of maintaining compliance with the 1 mSv y −1 dose limit established by US NRC and Agreement States for members of the public. I find it ironic that the same May 2023 Journal issue includes the forum article “How the Science of Radiation Biology Can Help Reduce the Crippling Fear of Low-level Radiation” (Brooks et al 2023), a paper that includes many examples of the negative impact of radiation phobia, to which I will offer one more.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comments on Pet Care and Dose Limits

Fellman

2023

Health Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proceedings of the Joint American Nuclear Society and Health Physics Society Conference: Applicability of Radiation-Response Models to Low-Dose Protection Standards 1–3 October 2018, Pasco, Washington Introduction—Years in the Making

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

Overt Scientific Bias and Clandestine Acts by Trusted Scientists: The Flawed Application of the Linear No-threshold Model

Overt Scientific Bias and Clandestine Acts by Trusted Scientists: The Flawed Application of the Linear No-threshold Model

Why Low-level Radiation Exposure Should Not Be Feared

Comments on Pet Care and Dose Limits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About