Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » FogerRox » Read entry Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
FogerRox's Journal
Posted by FogerRox in General Discussion
Mon Jun 20th 2011, 12:40 AM
Simply put

Princeton says

The cell can repair certain levels of cell damage. At low doses, such as that received every day from background radiation, cellular damage is rapidly repaired.

http://web.princeton.edu/sites/ehs/osradtr...



university of California, UC Davis
The cell can repair certain levels of cell damage

http://www.research.ucdavis.edu/home.cfm?i...




NJ DEP
Most cells have the ability to repair some damage

http://www.state.nj.us/dep//rpp/llrw/downl...



Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility


Cells can often repair radiation damage,

These are divided into two categories:
threshold effects and non-threshold effects.
Threshold effects appear after a certain level
of radiation exposure is reached and enough
cells have been damaged to make the effect
apparent. Non-threshold effects can occur at
lower levels of radiation exposure.

http://www.jlab.org /


http://www.radiation-scott.org/EMS_2005_Po...


French Academy of Sciences,
National Academy of Medicine
Joint Report (2005)
“…this report raises doubts on the
validity of using the LNTfor evaluating
the carcinogenic risk of low doses…”
Exact opposite conclusion from BEIR VII
(Phase 2)Report.


RADIATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL BIOPHYSICS
Volume 44, Number 4, 245-251, DOI: 10.1007/s00411-006-0032-9

CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE
Recent reports on the effect of low doses of ionizing radiation and its dose–effect relationship
M. Tubiana, A. Aurengo, D. Averbeck and R. Masse

http://www.springerlink.com/content/yg4m73... /

The conclusion of the French Report is that the linear no-threshold relationship (LNT) may greatly overestimate the carcinogenic effect of low doses (<100 mSv) and even more that of very low doses (<10 mSv), such as those delivered during X-ray examinations. Conversely, the conclusion of the BEIR VII report is that LNT should be used for assessing the detrimental effects of these low and very low doses. The causes of these diverging conclusions should be carefully examined. They seem to be mostly associated with the interpretation of recent biological data. The point of view of the French Report is that these recent data are incompatible with the postulate on which LNT is implicitly based, namely the constancy of the carcinogenic effect per unit dose, irrespective of dose and dose rate.



I got your scientists.
Discuss (2 comments)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.