title: The threshold vs LNT showdown: Dose rate findings exposed flaws in the LNT model part 2. How a mistake led BEIR I to adopt LNT.
abstract: This paper reveals that nearly 25 years after the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) I Committee (1972) used Russell's dose-rate data to support the adoption of the linear-no-threshold (LNT) dose response model for genetic and cancer risk assessment, Russell acknowledged a significant under-reporting of the mutation rate of the historical control group. This error, which was unknown to BEIR I, had profound implications, leading it to incorrectly adopt the LNT model, which was a decision that profoundly changed the course of risk assessment for radiation and chemicals to the present.
authors.affiliation: Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, Morrill I, N344, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA. Electronic address: edwardc@schoolph.umass.edu.
authors.forename: Edward J
authors.initials: EJ
authors.lastname: Calabrese
mesh_terms: D004307:Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation; D049673:History, 20th Century; D049674:History, 21st Century; D059165:Hormesis / Q000528:radiation effects*; D006801:Humans; D009154:Mutation / Q000528:radiation effects*; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D009381:Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced / Q000235:genetics* / Q000266:history*; D017711:Nonlinear Dynamics; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011835:Radiation Protection; D011839:Radiation, Ionizing; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012307:Risk Factors
keywords: Dose-rate; Hormesis; LNT; Linear dose response; Specific locus test