Even Low-Level Radioactivity Is Damaging, Scientists Conclude (cross-post from LBN)

[caraher]

17. I have no prior familiarity with their work

I do understand that LNT is used as a conservative model, in order to have *something* to calculate. I also admit that I don't know enough of the details of the sort of meta-analysis this latest (and their work) paper represents to assess how thorough and bias-free it is.

But it is very pertinent to note, as you do, that they find no warrant for the idea that we're vastly understating the risks. I think it's of mainly academic interest whether the correct model is LNT, a threshold model or even one with a hormesis effect, in that none of those choices being ultimately correct would mean that current regulatory practices expose the public or workers to excessive risk through ignorance of the real dangers. But it is very significant in practical terms if even researchers considered to have a bias in favor of inflating radiation hazards find no evidence for risks beyond those calculated by widely-used LNT models.