An Open Letter to Professional Bodies§ Regarding Low Dose Radiation Cancer Risk Dear Colleagues, As described in the “Open Letter to Advisory Bodies Regarding Low Dose Radiation Cancer Risk” (on Page 5), considerable evidence has accumulated on the invalidity of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model that has been used for radiation safety purposes worldwide since the 1950s. The continuing reluctance of the advisory bodies to discard the LNT model in spite of the overwhelming evidence against it presents a dilemma to professional bodies. We believe that the leaders of the professional bodies will be aware of the latest literature and the current spate of publications (see some examples in the enclosed graphs) showing evidence against the LNT model and demonstrating the beneficial effects of low dose radiation. Such publications have not been challenged or repudiated in any peer-reviewed publications. If the professional bodies continue to use the LNT model to guide their policies and actions, they are likely knowingly contributing to harming public health, since their policies and actions perpetuate radiophobia, which can (i) result in harmful "precautionary" actions such as have occurred in Fukushima, (ii) prevent study of low dose radiation for treating diseases for which presently there are no methods of prevention or control and (iii) result in patients refusing needed diagnostic studies, studies being performed with too low a dose and thus becoming non-diagnostic, and in physicians not ordering the needed examinations. Radiophobia has also resulted in tremendous wastage of public funds. The claim of “just following recommendations” would not be an acceptable justification for harming public health when current literature overwhelmingly does not support the LNT model. Hence, it is imperative that the professional bodies discard the use of the LNT model from an evaluation of the latest evidence on their own. If the LNT model continues to be used, then it is requisite that a defensible reason for discarding present evidence be proffered to the professional community. If reliance is placed on the advisory body recommendations for continuing to use the LNT model, justification from the advisory bodies is similarly required. Urgent action is advised. We would be happy to discuss this matter with you or provide additional information for your consideration. Thank you for your kind attention to this important issue. Sincerely, Wade Allison, Oxford University, UK Allen Brodsky, Georgetown University, USA Mervyn D. Cohen, Indiana University School of Medicine, USA Jerry Cuttler, Cuttler & Associates, Canada Ludwik Dobrzynski, National Center for Nuclear Research, Poland Mohan Doss, Fox Chase Cancer Center, USA Vincent J. Esposito, University of Pittsburgh, USA Ludwig E. Feinendegen, Heinrich-Heine University, Germany Krzysztof W. Fornalski, Polish Nuclear Society, Poland Leo S. Gomez, Leo S. Gomez Consulting, USA Patricia Lewis, Free Enterprise Radon Health Mine, USA Jeffrey Mahn, Sandia National Laboratories (Retired), USA SMJ Mortazavi, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran Steven S. Payne, National Nuclear Security Administration (Retired), Col USAF (Retired), USA Charles W. Pennington, Executive Consultant, USA §
Any individual or group (private or government) that guides professionals or the public regarding health effects of low dose radiation.
SARI-OLPB-OLAB v1.02
1
March 21, 2014