This debate panel addresses one of the most scientifically and politically contested topics in radiation science: whether the current radiation safety paradigm based on the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model is scientifically valid, or whether it should be replaced with a model that accounts for hormesis — the hypothesis that low doses of radiation may actually be beneficial or at least far less harmful than the LNT model predicts. The current ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle is built on LNT assumptions. If hormesis is real, ALARA may be unnecessarily costly and may actually be harming public health by inducing unnecessary fear of radiation.

Panelists

Gamal Akabani

Baylor Scott & White

Mohan Doss

Fox Chase Cancer Center

Kyle Jones

MD Anderson Cancer Center

Michael Martin

Texas A&M Environmental Health & Safety

Leslie Braby

Texas A&M University

Discussion

To join the conversation, you must be logged in and registered for the meeting.

Join the Waitlist NowLog In