The LNT Hypothesis: Ethical Travesties

Hat Tip: Carl Holder: ...reasonable people might be interested in something Margaret Maxey wrote back in 1997.
Abstract:    The LNT Hypothesis: Ethical Travesties
Presenter:   Margaret N. Maxey, Ph.D.
       Professor, Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering
       The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712

Event:         Wingspread Conference, Racine, WI, August 1997 

   "When I was a child, I spoke as a child,
   I understood as a child, I thought as a child.
   But when I became a man, I put away childish things.”
                   Paul to the Corinthians 13: 11

Slowly but inexorably, radiation scientists are recognizing that the LNT hypothesis – at one time administratively useful in regulating radiation exposures during the infancy of radiation science -- has in its maturity become scientifically illegitimate and ethically indefensible. In his book, Has Radiation Protection Become a Health Hazard? Gunnar Walinder, a Swedish radiobiologist, states unequivocally: “The linear, no-threshold hypothesis is one of the greatest scientific scandals of modern times.” Dr. Walinder’s bold statement is indicative of a significant sea-change among radiation experts in their assessment of the validity of using the LNT hypothesis as a basis for setting standards in radiation protection.

Among prominent experts, Leonard Sagan now observes that the LNT model is based on “politics and social concerns," not science. Nobel Laureate Rosalyn Yalow writes that, “the literature and media overestimate radiation damage even if the overall effect does not differ from zero.” Sohei Kondo at Osaka, Japan’s Kinki University has conducted research into atomic bomb survivors which shows slight decreases in cancer deaths among those exposed to low doses -- suggesting that radiation-induced precancerous cells undergo self-killing or apoptosis which prevents later development of a cancer. An emerging consensus concludes that current regulations for radiation exposure are not only “based on quicksand,” but have become pernicious obstacles to the ethical goal they purport to achieve: public health protection.

Radiation protection standards enacted by regulatory agencies have reflected ethical concerns based on two presuppositions:

       (1) that the linear, zero-threshold hypothesis derives from scientific data in radiobiology that are virtually conclusive; and

        (2) that it is "morally better” for health protection to assume that any radiation exposure, no matter how small, has some harmful effect which can and ought to be prevented.