Evidence for beneficial low level radiation effects and radiation hormesis

Accession number;05A0364474
Title;Evidence for beneficial low level radiation effects and radiation hormesis
Author;FEINENDEGEN L E(Heinrich-heine-univ. Duesseldorf, Deu)   
Journal Title;Nippon Genshiryoku Kenkyujo JAERI,Conf
Journal Code:L2150A
ISSN:
VOL.;NO.;PAGE.159-174(2005)
Figure&Table&Reference;FIG.3, REF.79
Pub. Country;Japan
Language;English
Abstract;Low doses in the mGy range cause a dual effect on cellular DNA. One effect concerns a relatively low probability of DNA damage per energy deposition event and it increases proportional with dose, with possible bystander effects operating. This damage at background radiation exposure is orders of magnitudes lower than that from endogenous sources, such as ROS. The other effect at comparable doses brings an easily observable adaptive protection against DNA damage from any, mainly endogenous sources, depending on cell type, species, and metabolism. Protective responses express adaptive responses to metabolic perturbations and also mimic oxygen stress responses. Adaptive protection operates in terms of DNA damage prevention and repair, and of immune stimulation. It develops with a delay of hours, may last for days to months, and increasingly disappears at doses beyond about 100 to 200 mGy. Radiation-induced apoptosis and terminal cell differentiation occurs also at higher doses and adds to protection by reducing genomic instability and the number of mutated cells in tissues. At low doses, damage reduction by adaptive protection against damage from endogenous sources predictably outweighs radiogenic damage induction. The analysis of the consequences of the particular low-dose scenario shows that the linear-no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis for cancer risk is scientifically unfounded and appears to be invalid in favor of a threshold or hormesis. This is consistent with data both from animal studies and human epidemiological observations on low-dose induced cancer. The LNT hypothesis should be abandoned and be replaced by a hypothesis that is scientifically justified. The appropriate model should include terms for both linear and non-linear response probabilities. Maintaining the LNT-hypothesis as basis for radiation protection causes unreasonable fear and expenses. (author abst.)