Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27867322›Full record

ArticleDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society

A Certified Health Physicist's Reflections on a 40-Year Career in Radiation Protection.

Mark L Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Multiple Organ Lesions in a Case of Contamination With Multiple Radionuclides After 38 Years.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Mark L MillerSandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is a reflection from a certified health physicist regarding his becoming aware, during his 40-year career, that the linear no-threshold (LNT) model and the associated As Low As Reasonably Achievable concept have no scientific basis and make no positive contribution to radiation safety. They should be replaced by an alternative, scientifically based model that includes a threshold, below which there is no harm, and recognition of hormesis and the adaptive response, which reflect the benefits of low-dose and low-dose-rate radiation exposure. Continued use of the unscientific LNT model is not conservative, as most regulators complacently claim but actually harmful. Examples of these harmful impacts in the areas of nuclear power, nuclear medicine, and environmental management are included.

Indexed as

adaptive responseLNT modellow-dose radiationradiation hormesis

Identifiers

PMID27867322
PMCPMC5102072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.