Today: 22.Aug.2018

Bruno Comby, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear: I discovered a new local radiation hot spot in France in nature (publicly accessible) near the former Areva uranium mine of Lodeve. The radiation count there goes up to 4.8 microSv per hour, that’s a 100 times more than in the middle of the Salagou lake, and 50 times more than the usual background radiation, but still 20 times less than I measured inside an inhabited house in Ramsar near the Caspian sea.

Published in Low Dose Radiation

James Conca, Ph.D. Earth and environmental sciences. Jerry Cuttler, D.Sc. Nuclear science and engineering, John Dale Dunn, MD, JD: LNT assumes, in contrast to almost all data on living organisms, that any radiation is bad and there is no threshold of radioactivity below which there is no risk, even Earth background radiation levels. Following ALARA means that we should protect everyone from all radiation, making doses as low as we possibly can, even if it costs billions.

Published in Low Dose Radiation

John Cardarelli II, Captain US Public Health Service Officer, Cincinnati, OH, USA, Brant Ulsh, M. H. Chew & Associates, Livermore, CA, USA: The USEPA uses the linear no-threshold (LNT) model to estimate cancer risks and determine cleanup levels in radiologically contaminated environments. The LNT model implies that there is no safe dose of ionizing radiation; however, adverse effects from low dose, low-dose rate (LDDR) exposures are not detectable.

Published in Low Dose Radiation

Mohn Doss, Medical Physicist in Diagnostic Imaging: The LNT Era (Linear No Threshold) has not ended yet. But, there are signs that we may be approaching its end. The problem with the LNT model for radiation-induced cancer is the absence of threshold results in the fear of the smallest amount of radiation. The LNT model was adopted by advisory bodies in the 1950 and has been endorsed by them repeatedly. Low-dose radiation boosts the immune system and so it should lead to reduction of cancers, a phenomenon known as radiation hormesis. Conclusion: The LNT mmodel is not valid and lives are being lost because of the LNT model and unjustified fear of low-dose radiation.

Published in Low Dose Radiation

Newsletter Subscription

  • Latest
  • Popular
  • Survey by John Shanahan, civil engineer, Environmentalists…
  • Axios, Zachary Basu: If China achieves the…
  • Nikkei Asian News, Tomoyo Ogawa: Russia accounts…
  • Bloomberg, Naureen Malik: Natural gas surged to…
  • Bruno Comby, President of Environmentalists for Nuclear:…