[ RadSafe ] Mohan Doss's response to my comments on his hormesis petition

Doss, Mohan Mohan.Doss at fccc.edu
Fri Oct 9 18:12:48 CDT 2015

Dear Peter,
    It is interesting that you did not respond to the considerable amount of new evidence since 2005 for radiation hormesis (that I referred to). However, you picked the least important among the cancers (~0.3% of all cancer deaths in USA) - thyroid cancer  - whose incidence is highly prone to overdiagnosis and overtreatment - and pointed out some apparent discrepancies between my statements and Carol Marcus's statements. Chernobyl situation is somewhat complex, and I will respond to this issue after studying it further. Your objections to the petitions have no merit based on the vast evidence for radiation hormesis which you did not refute. 
   With best regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Crane
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2015 5:19 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Mohan Doss's response to my comments on his hormesis petition

In his reply to my comments on the hormesis petitions filed with the NRC by Carol Marcus, Mark Miller, and himself, Mohan Doss writes: 

"Regarding increased thyroid cancers detected in Chernobyl among children: High doses would indeed cause thyroid cancers, but the dose limit Carol Marcus has suggested is low. Therefore, referring to Chernobyl data where the children had high doses to thyroid, and had increased cancers, has no relevance to the issue at hand.  In the above argument, the effects of increased thyroid screening do not come into the picture at all."

Mohan, your petition to the NRC says that it "supports and supplements" Carol's petition. But her position on the crucially important Chernobyl data is quite different from yours, if I understand your position correctly. She writes:

"The increase in thyroid cancers was found in children under 15 years of age in 1987, the year after the accident. However, the radiation doses were too low to have caused this, and there was no dose-response relationship. In addition, the timing was off --- the mean latent period for radiation induced thyroid cancer is about 28 years. However, the increase was highly likely due to a mass screening effect. Occult thyroid cancer is actually extremely common...."

In sum, her view is that the radiation doses to the thyroid from Chernobyl were too low to be relevant to the LNT debate, whereas your view is that they were too high to be relevant. 

Your example shows that it is not only LNT supporters who believe that the post-Chernobyl thyroid cancers were caused by radiation. Maybe you should explain, for the benefit of Carol and everyone else on this listserv, why this is the prevalent view.

Peter Crane, NRC Counsel for Special Projects (retired) _______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email communication may contain private, confidential, or legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated and/or duly authorized recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient or have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by email and permanently delete all copies of this email including all attachments without reading them. If you are the intended recipient, secure the contents in a manner that conforms to all applicable state and/or federal requirements related to privacy and confidentiality of such information.

More information about the RadSafe mailing list