Remedy for radiation fear - Discard the politicized science

Dose-Response

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 170-184

  Cuttler, Jerry M ^a  

^a Cuttler and Associates Inc   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATOMIC BOMB; ATOMIC WARFARE; CANCER INCIDENCE; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; FEAR; GAMMA RADIATION; HORMESIS; HUMAN; LEUKEMIA; LINEAR NO THRESTHOLD DOSE RESPONSE MODEL; LOW ENERGY RADIATION; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NONHUMAN; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION HAZARD; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIATION RESPONSE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84894517832     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15593258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2203/dose-response.13-055.Cuttler     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Calabrese EJ. 2013a. Origin of the linear no threshold (LNT) dose-response concept. Arch Toxicol DOI 10.1007/s00204-013-1104-7. Available at: http://link.springer.com/ article/ 10.1007%2Fs 00204-013-1104-7
2. Calabrese EJ. 2013b. How the US National Academy of Sciences misled the world community on cancer risk assessment: new findings challenge historical foundations of the linear dose response. Arch Toxicol DOI 10.1007/s00204-013-1105-6. Available at: http://link.springer.com/article/ 10.1007/s00204-013-1105-6
3. Calabrese EJ. 2013c. How radiotherapy was historically used to treat pneumonia: Could it be useful today? Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 86: 555-570
4. Caspari E and Stern C. 1948. The influence of chronic irradiation with gamma rays at low doses on the mutation rate in Drosophila Melanogaster. Genetics 33: 75-95. Available at: http://www. genetics.org/content/33/1/75.full.pdf+html?sid=cb861a39-fb63-48c4-bcbe-2433bb5c8d6a
5. Cuttler JM. 2013. Commentary on Fukushima and Beneficial Effects of Low Radiation. Dose-Response 11(4): 432-443. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC383 4738/
6. Doss M. 2013. Linear No-Threshold Model vs. Radiation Hormesis. Dose Response 11(4): 480-497. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3834742/
7. Feinendegen LE, Pollycove M and Neumann RD. 2013. Hormesis by low dose radiation effects: lowdose cancer risk modeling must recognize up-regulation of protection. In Baum RP (ed.). Therapeutic Nuclear Medicine. Springer. ISBN 973-3-540-36718-5. Available at: http://db.tt/ UyrhlBpW
8. Fliedner TM, Graessle DH, Meineke V and Feinendegen LE. 2012. Hemopoietic response to low dose-rates of ionizing radiation shows stem cell tolerance and adaptation. Dose-Response 10: 644-663. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526333/
9. Henriksen T and the Biophysics and Medical Physics Group at UiO. 2013. Radiation and Health. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 0-415-27162-2 (2003 updated to 2013). University of Oslo. Available at: http://www.mn.uio.no/fysikk/tjenester/kunnskap/straling/radiation-and-health-2013.pdf
10. Japan National Police Agency. 2013. Damage situation and police countermeasures associated with 2011 Tohoku district-off the Pacific Ocean earthquake, November 8, 2013. Available at: http://www.npa.go.jp/archive/keibi/biki/higaijokyo_e.pdf
11. Jaworowski Z. 1999. Radiation risk and ethics. Physics Today 59(9): 24-29. Available at: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/71478013/Jaworowski-1999_Radiation-Risk-Ethics_PhysToday_copyright. pdf
12. Jaworowski Z. 2010. Radiation hormesis-A remedy for fear. Human Exper Toxicol 29(4): 263-270. Available at: http://www.belleonline.com/newsletters/volume15/vol15-2.pdf
13. Luckey TD. 1991. Radiation Hormesis. CRC Press
14. Mainichi. 2013. Stress-induced deaths in Fukushima top those from 2011 natural disasters. The Mainichi. September 9, 2013. Available at: http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/fukushimaevacuation-has-killed-more-than-earthquake-and-tsunami-survey-says
15. Mitchel REJ. 2007a. Low Doses of Radiation Reduce Risk in Vivo. Dose-Response 5: 1-10. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2477704/
16. Mitchel REJ. 2007b. Cancer and Low Dose Responses in Vivo: Implications for Radiation Protection. Dose-Response 5(4): 284-291. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC2477713/
17. Muckerheide J. 2000. Apply radiation health effects data to contradict and overturn radiation protection policies and rules. Proc ICONE 8, April 2-6, Baltimore. Available at: http://www.ddponline. org/muckerheide.doc
18. Muller HJ. 1927. Artificial transmutation of the gene. Science 66(1699): 84-87
19. Ozasa K, Shimizu Y, Suyama A, Kasagi F, Soda M, Grant EJ, Sakata R, Sugiyama H and Kodama K. 2012. Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors, report 14, 1950-2003: an overview of cancer and noncancer diseases. Radiat Res 177(3): 229-243
20. Pollycove M and Feinendegen LE. 2003. Radiation-induced versus endogenous DNA damage: possible effect of inducible protective responses in mitigating endogenous damage. Human Exper Toxicol 22: 290-306. Available at: http://www.belleonline.com/newsletters/volume11/vol11-2.pdf
21. Sakamoto K. 2004. Radiobiological Basis for Cancer Therapy by Total or Half-body Irradiation. Nonlinearity in Biology, Toxicology, and Medicine 2:293-316. Available at: http://www.ncbi. nlm. nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2657505/
22. Sanders CL. 2010. Radiation Hormesis and the Linear-No-Threshold Assumption. Springer
23. Sasaki MS, Tachibana A and Takeda S. 2014. Cancer risk at low doses of ionizing radiation: artificial neural networks inference from atomic bomb survivors. J Radiat Res (in press)
24. Scott BR. 2008. It's time for a new low-dose-radiation risk assessment paradigm-one that acknowledges hormesis. Dose-Response 6: 333-351. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/ articles/PMC2592992/
25. Scott BR, Sanders CL, Mitchel REJ and Boreham DR. 2008. CT Scans May Reduce Rather than Increase the Risk of Cancer. J Am Phys Surg 13(1): 8-11. Available at: http://www.jpands.org/ vol13no1/scott.pdf
26. Seiler FA and Alvarez JL. 1994. The Scientific Method in Risk Assessment. Technology: Journal of the Franklin Institute 331A: 53-58. Available at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/25952 7706_The_Scientific_Method_in_Risk_Assessment
27. Seiler FA and Alvarez JL. 1998. The Scientific Method and Risk Management. Proc Waste Management Symposium. March 3. Available at: http://www.wmsym.org/archives/1998/ html/ sess07/07-01/07-01.htm
28. UNSCEAR. 1958. Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. United Nations. General Assembly. Official Records. Thirteenth Session. Supplement No. 17 (A/3838). New York. Available at: http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/ publications/1958.html
29. UNSCEAR. 1994. Adaptive Responses to Radiation in Cells and Organisms. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation. Report to the United Nations General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes. Annex B. Available at: http://www.unscear.org/unscear/publications/1994.html
30. UNSCEAR. 2012. Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Fifty-ninth session (21-25 May 2012). Available at: http://www.unscear.org/
31. WHO. 2013. Health risk assessment from the nuclear accident after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, based on a preliminary dose estimation. World Health Organization. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78218/1/9789241505130_eng.pdf