ArticleDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society
Ethics of Adoption and Use of the Linear No-Threshold Model.
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 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Percutaneous Zero-fluoroscopy Atrial Septal Defect ClosureCurrent cardiology reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Deep learning for incidence rate prediction and radiation risk assessment of solid tumors.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Thyroid radiation dose reduction with the use of thyroid shields during CT brain studies.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
- The Thoracic Absorption Dose and Secondary Tumor Risk Caused by Different Imaging Methods in Image-Guided Particle Radiotherapy.Thoracic cancer · 2025Article
- An Overview of Appropriate Medical Practice and Preparedness in Radiation Emergency Response.Cureus · 2024Review
- Until There Is a Resolution of the Pro-LNT/Anti-LNT Debate, We Should Head Toward a More Sensible Graded Approach for Protection From Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
- Interests, Bias, and Consensus in Science and Regulation.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The linear no-threshold (LNT) model of ionizing radiation-induced cancer assumes that every increment of radiation dose, no matter how small, constitutes an increased cancer risk for humans. Linear no-threshold is presently the most widely applied model for radiation risk assessment. As such, it imposes very heavy burden on the society in both economic and human terms. This model, which was adopted in late 1950s in the wake of massive government investments in science, is controversial and raises important ethical issues. This article identifies 2 issues often missed: scientists usurping the role of policy makers and seeking funding and power. These issues should be considered together with the scientific controversy raging over the validity of the LNT model and the multiple other ethical issues regarding its ongoing use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.