BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

British Journal of Radiology (2006) 79, 285-294
© 2006 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/55733882

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wall, B F
Right arrow Articles by Meara, J R
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wall, B F
Right arrow Articles by Meara, J R

Review article

What are the risks from medical X-rays and other low dose radiation?

B F Wall, BSc, G M Kendall, PhD, A A Edwards, MSc, S Bouffler, PhD, C R Muirhead, PhD and J R Meara, FFPH

Health Protection Agency, Radiation Protection Division, Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon. OX11 0RQ, UK

The magnitude of the risks from low doses of radiation is one of the central questions in radiological protection. It is particularly relevant when discussing the justification and optimization of diagnostic medical exposures. Medical X-rays can undoubtedly confer substantial benefits in the healthcare of patients, but not without exposing them to effective doses ranging from a few microsieverts to a few tens of millisieverts. Do we have any evidence that these levels of exposure result in significant health risks to patients? The current consensus held by national and international radiological protection organizations is that, for these comparatively low doses, the most appropriate risk model is one in which the risk of radiation-induced cancer and hereditary disease is assumed to increase linearly with increasing radiation dose, with no threshold (the so-called linear no threshold (LNT) model). However, the LNT hypothesis has been challenged both by those who believe that low doses of radiation are more damaging than the hypothesis predicts and by those who believe that they are less harmful, and possibly even beneficial (often referred to as hormesis). This article reviews the evidence for and against both the LNT hypothesis and hormesis, and explains why the general scientific consensus is currently in favour of the LNT model as the most appropriate dose–response relationship for radiation protection purposes at low doses. Finally, the impact of the LNT model on the assessment of the risks from medical X-rays and how this affects the justification and optimization of such exposures is discussed.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
BJR review of the year - 2006
Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2007; 80(951): 147 - 151.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2006 by the British Institute of Radiology.