title: Response to, "On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith.".
abstract: It is not true that successive groups of researchers from academia and research institutions-scientists who served on panels of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS)-were duped into supporting a linear no-threshold model (LNT) by the opinions expressed in the genetic panel section of the 1956 "BEAR I" report. Successor reports had their own views of the LNT model, relying on mouse and human data, not fruit fly data. Nor was the 1956 report biased and corrupted, as has been charged in an article by Edward J. Calabrese in this journal. With or without BEAR I, the LNT model would likely have been accepted in the US for radiation protection purposes in the 1950's.
authors.affiliation: Consulting in the Public Interest, 53 Clinton Street, Lambertville, NJ 08530, USA. Electronic address: jbeyea@cipi.com.
authors.forename: Jan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Beyea
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D004307:Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; D006801:Humans; D016014:Linear Models; D051379:Mice; D009307:National Academy of Sciences, U.S.; D009381:Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced / Q000235:genetics*; D018570:Risk Assessment