220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36057228)
1. Ionizing radiation protection and the linear No-threshold controversy: Extent of support or counter to the prevailing paradigm.
Okonkwo UC; Ohagwu CC; Aronu ME; Okafor CE; Idumah CI; Okokpujie IP; Chukwu NN; Chukwunyelu CE
J Environ Radioact; 2022 Nov; 253-254():106984. PubMed ID: 36057228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The scientific basis for the use of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model at low doses and dose rates in radiological protection.
Laurier D; Billarand Y; Klokov D; Leuraud K
J Radiol Prot; 2023 Jun; 43(2):. PubMed ID: 37339605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Linear-no-threshold is a radiation-protection standard rather than a mechanistic effect model.
Breckow J
Radiat Environ Biophys; 2006 Mar; 44(4):257-60. PubMed ID: 16468065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. The linear nonthreshold (LNT) model as used in radiation protection: an NCRP update.
Boice JD
Int J Radiat Biol; 2017 Oct; 93(10):1079-1092. PubMed ID: 28532210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. LNT--an apparent rather than a real controversy?
Charles MW
J Radiol Prot; 2006 Sep; 26(3):325-9. PubMed ID: 16926475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Are We Approaching the End of the Linear No-Threshold Era?
Doss M
J Nucl Med; 2018 Dec; 59(12):1786-1793. PubMed ID: 30262515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Molecular biology, epidemiology, and the demise of the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis.
Pollycove M; Feinendegen LE
C R Acad Sci III; 1999; 322(2-3):197-204. PubMed ID: 10196673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Does scientific evidence support a change from the LNT model for low-dose radiation risk extrapolation?
Averbeck D
Health Phys; 2009 Nov; 97(5):493-504. PubMed ID: 19820459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Biological Effects From Low Doses and Dose Rates of Ionizing Radiation: Science in the Service of Protecting Humans, a Synopsis.
Feinendegen LE; Cuttler JM
Health Phys; 2018 Jun; 114(6):623-626. PubMed ID: 29521814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. The LNT model for cancer induction is not supported by radiobiological data.
Scott BR; Tharmalingam S
Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Mar; 301():34-53. PubMed ID: 30763552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Economic and policy considerations drive the LNT debate.
Mossman KL
Radiat Res; 2008 Feb; 169(2):245; author reply 246-7. PubMed ID: 18220464
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Re-evaluation of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model using new paradigms and modern molecular studies.
Tharmalingam S; Sreetharan S; Brooks AL; Boreham DR
Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Mar; 301():54-67. PubMed ID: 30763548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Resolving an Open Science-policy question: Should the LNT still be an omnibus regulatory assumption?
Ricci PF; Calabrese EJ
Sci Total Environ; 2022 Jun; 825():153917. PubMed ID: 35189226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
