This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Billen D (1990) Commentary: spontaneous DNA damage and its significance for the “negligible dose” controversy in radiation protection. Radiat Res 124:242–245
Calabrese EJ (2013a) Origin of the linear no threshold (LNT) dose-response concept. Arch Toxicol 87:1621–1633. doi:10.1007/s00204-013-1104-7
Calabrese EJ (2013b) How the US National Academy of Sciences misled the world community on cancer risk assessment: new findings challenge historical foundations of the linear dose response. Arch Toxicol 87:2063–2081. doi:10.1007/s00204-013-1105-6
Cuttler JM (2013) Commentary on Fukushima and Beneficial Effects of Low Radiation. Dose-Response 11:432–443. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3834738/. doi:10.2003/dose-response.13-008.Cuttler
Cuttler JM (2014) Remedy for radiation fear—discard the politicized science. Dose-Response (in press)
Feinendegen LE, Pollycove M, Neumann RD (2013) Hormesis by low dose radiation effects: low-dose cancer risk modeling must recognize up-regulation of protection. In: Baum RP (ed) Therapeutic nuclear medicine. Springer, Heidelberg. ISBN 973-3-540-36718-5
UNSCEAR (1958) Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. United Nations. General Assembly. Official Records. Thirteenth Session. Supplement No. 17 (A/3838). New York
About this article
Cite this article
Cuttler, J.M. Leukemia incidence of 96,000 Hiroshima atomic bomb survivors is compelling evidence that the LNT model is wrong. Arch Toxicol 88, 847–848 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-014-1207-9
- Protection System
- Cancer Risk Assessment
- Positive Health Effect
- Radiation Produce
- Psychological Suffering