This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Feinendegen, L E Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Feinendegen, L E

Evidence for beneficial low level radiation effects and radiation hormesis

Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Germany and Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, USA

Abstract

Low doses in the mGy range cause a dual effect on cellular DNA. One is a relatively low probability of DNA damage per energy deposition event and increases in proportion to the dose. At background exposures this damage to DNA is orders of magnitude lower than that from endogenous sources, such as reactive oxygen species. The other effect at comparable doses is adaptive protection against DNA damage from many, mainly endogenous, sources, depending on cell type, species and metabolism. Adaptive protection causes DNA damage prevention and repair and immune stimulation. It develops with a delay of hours, may last for days to months, decreases steadily at doses above about 100 mGy to 200 mGy and is not observed any more after acute exposures of more than about 500 mGy. Radiation-induced apoptosis and terminal cell differentiation also occur at higher doses and add to protection by reducing genomic instability and the number of mutated cells in tissues. At low doses reduction of damage from endogenous sources by adaptive protection maybe equal to or outweigh radiogenic damage induction. Thus, the linear-no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis for cancer risk is scientifically unfounded and appears to be invalid in favour of a threshold or hormesis. This is consistent with data both from animal studies and human epidemiological observations on low-dose induced cancer. The LNT hypothesis should be abandoned and be replaced by a hypothesis that is scientifically justified and causes less unreasonable fear and unnecessary expenditure.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E J HALL and D J BRENNER Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology Br. J. Radiol., May 1, 2008; 81(965): 362 - 378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Li, R. Engelmann, K. Doi, and H. MacMahon Improved Detection of Small Lung Cancers with Dual-Energy Subtraction Chest Radiography Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): 886 - 891. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Kakeda, Y. Korogi, H. Arimura, T. Hirai, S. Katsuragawa, T. Aoki, and K. Doi Diagnostic Accuracy and Reading Time to Detect Intracranial Aneurysms on MR Angiography Using a Computer-Aided Diagnosis System Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 459 - 465. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. J. Rustin, G. M. Mead, S. P. Stenning, P. A. Vasey, N. Aass, R. A. Huddart, M. P. Sokal, J. K. Joffe, S. J. Harland, and S. J. Kirk Randomized Trial of Two or Five Computed Tomography Scans in the Surveillance of Patients With Stage I Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumors of the Testis: Medical Research Council Trial TE08, ISRCTN56475197--The National Cancer Research Institute Testis Cancer Clinical Studies Group J. Clin. Oncol., April 10, 2007; 25(11): 1310 - 1315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. T. Goodhead Energy deposition stochastics and track structure: what about the target? Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2006; 122(1-4): 3 - 15. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Redpath Health risks of low photon energy imaging Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2006; 122(1-4): 528 - 533. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Allen, T. Demetriades, and D. J. Brenner Radiation risk overestimated. Radiology, August 1, 2006; 240(2): 613 - 614. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B F Wall, G M Kendall, A A Edwards, S Bouffler, C R Muirhead, and J R Meara What are the risks from medical X-rays and other low dose radiation? Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2006; 79(940): 285 - 294. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				BJR Review of the Year - 2005. Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2006; 79(939): 183 - 187. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L E Feinendegen and R D Neumann The issue of risk in complex adaptive systems: the case of low-dose radiation induced cancer Human and Experimental Toxicology, January 1, 2006; 25(1): 11 - 17. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. E. Feinendegen and R. D. Neumann Physics must join with biology in better assessing risk from low-dose irradiation Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(4): 346 - 356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M Tubiana Linear no-threshold dogma Br. J. Radiol., November 1, 2005; 78(935): 1060 - 1060. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L E Feinendegen Author reply Br. J. Radiol., August 1, 2005; 78(932): 773 - 773. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Edwards and S Bouffler Abandoning linear no threshold Br. J. Radiol., August 1, 2005; 78(932): 770 - 771. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P Dendy Low dose radiation risk: UKRC 2004 debate Br. J. Radiol., January 1, 2005; 78(925): 1 - 2. [Full Text] [PDF]