220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36057228)
21. Scientific foundation of regulating ionizing radiation: application of metrics for evaluation of regulatory science information.
Moghissi AA; Gerraa VK; McBride DK; Swetnam M
Health Phys; 2014 Nov; 107(5):388-94. PubMed ID: 25271928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The debate on the use of linear no threshold for assessing the effects of low doses.
Tubiana M; Aurengo A; Averbeck D; Masse R
J Radiol Prot; 2006 Sep; 26(3):317-24. PubMed ID: 16926474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Changing Attitude Toward Radiation Carcinogenesis and Prospects for Novel Low-Dose Radiation Treatments.
Socol Y; Welsh JS
Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2016 Dec; 15(6):732-736. PubMed ID: 26391015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Estimating radiation-induced cancer risks at very low doses: rationale for using a linear no-threshold approach.
Brenner DJ; Sachs RK
Radiat Environ Biophys; 2006 Mar; 44(4):253-6. PubMed ID: 16470411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Recent reports on the effect of low doses of ionizing radiation and its dose-effect relationship.
Tubiana M; Aurengo A; Averbeck D; Masse R
Radiat Environ Biophys; 2006 Mar; 44(4):245-51. PubMed ID: 16468064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Ionizing radiations epidemiology does not support the LNT model.
Ricci PF; Tharmalingam S
Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Mar; 301():128-140. PubMed ID: 30763555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The Integration of LNT and Hormesis for Cancer Risk Assessment Optimizes Public Health Protection.
Calabrese EJ; Shamoun DY; Hanekamp JC
Health Phys; 2016 Mar; 110(3):256-9. PubMed ID: 26808876
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. [Tremendous Human, Social, and Economic Losses Caused by Obstinate Application of the Failed Linear No-threshold Model].
Sutou S
Yakugaku Zasshi; 2015; 135(11):1197-211. PubMed ID: 26521869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Low-dose radiation risk extrapolation fallacy associated with the linear-no-threshold model.
Scott BR
Hum Exp Toxicol; 2008 Feb; 27(2):163-8. PubMed ID: 18480143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Biological and cellular responses of humans to high-level natural radiation: A clarion call for a fresh perspective on the linear no-threshold paradigm.
Ghosh A
Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen; 2022 Jun; 878():503478. PubMed ID: 35649671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Perspective on the use of LNT for radiation protection and risk assessment by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Puskin JS
Dose Response; 2009 Aug; 7(4):284-91. PubMed ID: 20011649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The History of the Linear No-Threshold Model and Recommendations for a Path Forward.
Cardarelli J; Hamrick B; Sowers D; Burk B
Health Phys; 2023 Feb; 124(2):131-135. PubMed ID: 36625838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Future of Radiation Protection Regulations.
Doss M
Health Phys; 2016 Mar; 110(3):274-5. PubMed ID: 26808881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. 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]
35. A critical evaluation of the NCRP COMMENTARY 27 endorsement of the linear no-threshold model of radiation effects.
Ulsh BA
Environ Res; 2018 Nov; 167():472-487. PubMed ID: 30138826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Linear non-threshold (LNT) fails numerous toxicological stress tests: Implications for continued policy use.
Calabrese EJ
Chem Biol Interact; 2022 Sep; 365():110064. PubMed ID: 35940280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Common sense about the linear no-threshold controversy-give the general public a break.
Leonard BE
Radiat Res; 2008 Feb; 169(2):245-6; author reply 246-7. PubMed ID: 18220465
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. EPA adopts LNT: New historical perspectives.
Calabrese EJ
Chem Biol Interact; 2019 Aug; 308():110-112. PubMed ID: 31108044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. [Cancer incidence and mortality after low-dose radiation exposure: epidemiological aspects].
Vaĭserman A; Mekhova LV; Koshel' NM; Voĭtenko VP
Radiats Biol Radioecol; 2010; 50(6):691-702. PubMed ID: 21434396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
