| inbluevt | Date: Thursday, 2013/08/15, 7:49 PM | Message # 1 | DMCA |
|
|
Private
Group: Blocked
Messages: 1024
|
In the 1950s regulators came to adopt the linear no threshold (LNT) dose-response approach to ionizing radiation exposure, which was later generalized to chemical carcinogen risk assessment. A UMass Amherst
toxicologist now offers further evidence to support his earlier assertions that two geneticists deliberately suppressed evidence to prevent the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) from considering an alternative, threshold model, for which there was experimental support.
"This isn’t an academic debate; it’s practical, because all of our rules about chemical and low-level radiation are
based on unvalidated assumptions and scientific panel decisions made without sound evidence,” the toxicologist says.
In two recent peer-reviewed articles, toxicologist Edward Calabrese of the University of Massachusetts Amherst describes how regulators came to adopt the linear no threshold (LNT) dose-response approach to ionizing radiation exposure in the 1950s, which was later generalized to chemical carcinogen risk assessment.He also offers further evidence to support his earlier assertions that two geneticists deliberately suppressed evidence to prevent the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) from considering an alternative, threshold model, for which there was experimental support.
More
Message edited by inbluevt - Thursday, 2013/08/15, 7:50 PM |
|
|
| |
Main 
