309 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29843011)
1. From Muller to mechanism: How LNT became the default model for cancer risk assessment.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Pollut; 2018 Oct; 241():289-302. PubMed ID: 29843011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Res; 2015 Oct; 142():432-42. PubMed ID: 26248082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cancer risk assessment foundation unraveling: new historical evidence reveals that the US National Academy of Sciences (US NAS), Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation (BEAR) Committee Genetics Panel falsified the research record to promote acceptance of the LNT.
Calabrese EJ
Arch Toxicol; 2015 Apr; 89(4):649-50. PubMed ID: 25600588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The threshold vs LNT showdown: Dose rate findings exposed flaws in the LNT model part 2. How a mistake led BEIR I to adopt LNT.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Res; 2017 Apr; 154():452-458. PubMed ID: 27974149
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. EPA adopts LNT: New historical perspectives.
Calabrese EJ
Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Aug; 308():110-112. PubMed ID: 31108044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. LNT and cancer risk assessment: Its flawed foundations part 1: Radiation and leukemia: Where LNT began.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Res; 2021 Jun; 197():111025. PubMed ID: 33744270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An abuse of risk assessment: how regulatory agencies improperly adopted LNT for cancer risk assessment.
Calabrese EJ
Arch Toxicol; 2015 Apr; 89(4):647-8. PubMed ID: 25596944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Genetics Panel of the NAS BEAR I Committee (1956): epistolary evidence suggests self-interest may have prompted an exaggeration of radiation risks that led to the adoption of the LNT cancer risk assessment model.
Calabrese EJ
Arch Toxicol; 2014 Sep; 88(9):1631-4. PubMed ID: 24993953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Origin of the linearity no threshold (LNT) dose-response concept.
Calabrese EJ
Arch Toxicol; 2013 Sep; 87(9):1621-33. PubMed ID: 23887208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Ethical failings: The problematic history of cancer risk assessment.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Res; 2021 Feb; 193():110582. PubMed ID: 33290793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Muller-Neel dispute and the fate of cancer risk assessment.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Res; 2020 Nov; 190():109961. PubMed ID: 32810676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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.
Calabrese EJ
Arch Toxicol; 2013 Dec; 87(12):2063-81. PubMed ID: 23912675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The linear No-Threshold (LNT) dose response model: A comprehensive assessment of its historical and scientific foundations.
Calabrese EJ
Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Mar; 301():6-25. PubMed ID: 30763547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. LNTgate: How scientific misconduct by the U.S. NAS led to governments adopting LNT for cancer risk assessment.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Res; 2016 Jul; 148():535-546. PubMed ID: 27131569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. EPA transparency proposal: testimony of Edward J. Calabrese, Ph.D, October 3, 2018.
Calabrese EJ
J Cell Commun Signal; 2019 Mar; 13(1):145-147. PubMed ID: 30560424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The threshold vs LNT showdown: Dose rate findings exposed flaws in the LNT model part 1. The Russell-Muller debate.
Calabrese EJ
Environ Res; 2017 Apr; 154():435-451. PubMed ID: 28109526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. How self-interest and deception led to the adoption of the linear non-threshold dose response (LNT) model for cancer risk assessment.
Selby PB; Calabrese EJ
Sci Total Environ; 2023 Nov; 898():165402. PubMed ID: 37454843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The Mistaken Birth and Adoption of LNT: An Abridged Version.
Calabrese EJ
Dose Response; 2017; 15(4):1559325817735478. PubMed ID: 29051718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Muller mistakes: The linear no-threshold (LNT) dose response and US EPA's cancer risk assessment policies and practices.
Calabrese EJ; Selby PB
Chem Biol Interact; 2023 Sep; 383():110653. PubMed ID: 37572872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Linear Non-Threshold (LNT) historical discovery milestones.
Calabrese E
Med Lav; 2022 Aug; 113(4):e2022033. PubMed ID: 36006093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
