|
|
|
|
|
|
by ars
4722 days ago
|
|
|
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis It's controversial politically, not scientifically. People have a knee jerk reaction to the idea of any radiation - except if it's natural of course, despite that making no sense. |
|
|
Besides hormesis the other popular models seem to be LNT (linear response, no threshold) and LT (linear response, above a threshold).
LNT is used by most right now, mostly because it's the most conservative-possible model that fits the very-high-exposure data that we do have from atomic bomb survivors. It is the model which gives us ALARA and 'Man-REM' planning.
LT is more what I would lean towards given available studies of very-low-exposure, but that still leaves open the question of what that would actually mean for public health advice, radiation worksite planning, etc.