...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical nuclear medicine >Time to Reject the Linear-No Threshold Hypothesis and Accept Thresholds and Hormesis: A Petition to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
【24h】

Time to Reject the Linear-No Threshold Hypothesis and Accept Thresholds and Hormesis: A Petition to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission

机译:是时候拒绝线性无阈值假设并接受阈值和狂热:向美国核管理委员会提出请愿

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

On February 9, 2015, I submitted a petition to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to reject the linear-no threshold (LNT) hypothesis and ALARA as the bases for radiation safety regulation in the United States, using instead threshold and hormesis evidence. In this article, I will briefly review the history of LNT and its use by regulators, the lack of evidence supporting LNT, and the large body of evidence supporting thresholds and hormesis. Physician acceptance of cancer risk from low dose radiation based upon federal regulatory claims is unfortunate and needs to be reevaluated. This is dangerous to patients and impedes good medical care. A link to my petition is available:
机译:2015年2月9日,我向美国核监管委员会(NRC)提交了请愿书,以拒绝使用线性无阈值(LNT)假设,而将ALARA作为美国辐射安全监管的依据,而是使用阈值和兴奋剂证据。在本文中,我将简要回顾LNT的历史以及监管机构对其的使用,缺乏支持LNT的证据以及大量支持阈值和兴奋剂的证据。不幸的是,医生根据联邦法规要求接受了低剂量放射所致的癌症风险,因此需要重新评估。这对患者是危险的,并妨碍良好的医疗护理。我的请愿书的链接可用:

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号