[ RadSafe ] BEIR VII Discussion Continued

[Scott, Bobby]

TD Luckey in his article "Radiation Hormesis Overview", published in RSO
8(4):23-29, 2003, states the following (a through j) which appear to
apply directly to BEIR VII (Phase 2):

 

Most epidemiologist and government agencies err by one or more of the
following:

 

a)      assume all radiation is harmful;

b)      include data from low-dose participants in their control cohort;

c)      have no low dose group in the protocol;

d)      do not use available low-dose data

e)      use a one dimensional formula or statistic which do not allow
expression of beneficial effects;

f)        ignore data that does not fit the LNT dose-response curve;

g)      interpolate between high doses and background levels to obtain
fancied results to produce an support unreasonable regulations;

h)      assume cell functions are not subject to whole body activities;

i)        ignore increased immune competence found in exposed organisms;

j)        ignore increased health and average lifespan while emphasizing
risks and death.

 

Form the above list, please choose your favorites and comment on them in
the Radsafe Digest with respect to BEIR VII (Phase 2). 

 

Please note that use of DDREF as was done in BEIR VII restricts
dose-response functions to have positive slopes.  Hormetic dose-response
is not possible with use of DDREF approach. 

 

Please note also that application of DDREF forces nonlinearity in the
dose-response curve.  This is interesting given the emphasis of BEIR VII
on data being consistent with LNT. BEIR VII then uses DDREF to impose
nonlinearity!

 

It is my understanding that the control group used by BEIR VII was
redefined to include higher dosed individuals.  If so, could this have
included persons in a hormetic dose zone?  That would not be a good
thing to do.

 

Dose rate is quite important related to evaluating radiation risks.
Dose rates for A-bomb survivors were likely more than 10 orders of
magnitude greater than for high background regions of the globe.  If so,
can on justifiably extrapolate form A-bomb survivor data to exposure to
background radiation.  BEIR VII concluded that even background radiation
was harmful.  I respectively disagree. Our research points to elevated
background radiation suppression cancer risk. Of course such suppression
cannot be simulated via use of DDREF.

 

I don't have time today for additional comments as I am preparing to
catch a plane shortly to attend the PSA '05 meeting tomorrow in San
Francisco to present a talk entitled "The LNT hypothesis may have
outlived its usefulness for low-LET radiation."  The presentation will
be given in the LNT plenary session chaired by Dr. Chauncey Starr. The
presentation will be made available in pdf format via my website
http://www.radiation-scott.org <http://www.radiation-scott.org/>  within
a few days.  It will be placed in the section on Low Dose Research.

 

Best wishes.

Bobby R. Scott

LRRI, Albuquerque, NM USA