Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Various approaches to damage assessment

L D Hamilton1

  • 1Biomedical and Environmental Assessment Group, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973, USA.

Health Physics
|June 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary

Two methods assess low-level ionizing radiation health risks: a realistic best-estimate and a conservative approach for radiation standards. Scientific risk estimates must include uncertainty and reflect current science.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A specific stimulator of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor accelerates recovery from cyclophosphamide-induced neutropenia in the mouse.

Blood·1997
Same author

Stimulation of cytolytic activity by interleukin-10.

Journal of immunotherapy with emphasis on tumor immunology : official journal of the Society for Biological Therapy·1994
Same author

Synthetic-fuel plants: potential tumor risks to public health.

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis·1985
Same author

Response to "genetic effects of the atomic bombs: a reappraisal".

Health physics·1983
Same author

Leukemia in the Nevada 'Smoky' bomb test.

JAMA·1980
Same author

Coal conversion technologies: some health and environmental effects.

Science (New York, N.Y.)·1979

Area of Science:

  • Health Physics
  • Radiation Biology
  • Risk Assessment

Background:

  • Assessing human health damage from low-level ionizing radiation exposure involves two primary methodologies.
  • One approach aims for realistic best-estimate risk assessment, while the second, used for developing radiation protection standards, tends to overestimate risk.

Purpose of the Study:

  • This paper reviews damage assessment approaches for radiation protection standards and current risk estimations.
  • It examines technical issues influenced by these differing assessment strategies.

Main Methods:

  • Review of existing literature and methodologies for health risk assessment from low-level ionizing radiation.
  • Analysis of technical considerations including the linear hypothesis, risk projection models, dose-rate effectiveness, data set suitability, and inter-population risk transfer.

Main Results:

  • The review highlights key technical differences between realistic and conservative risk assessment approaches.
  • These include variations in the application of the linear hypothesis, relative vs. absolute risk models, and dose-rate effectiveness factors.

Conclusions:

  • While a prudent, risk-overestimating approach may be necessary for radiation protection standards, scientific risk assessments should be realistic.
  • Accurate scientific risk estimates must incorporate the current state of scientific knowledge and quantify uncertainties.

Related Experiment Videos