dose-threshold analysis indicated no threshold - zero dose the best estimate of threshold

[kristopher]

2. Typo?

Last edited Sat May 12, 2012, 12:23 PM - Edit history (1)

ETA: OK, I guess it isn't. I saw the conflict with the mainstream nuclear industry focus on DNA repair and the associated attempt to undermine LNT as most relevant - that goes to demonstrate our differing perspectives, eh?

"The estimated lowest dose range with a significant ERR for all solid cancer was 0 to 0.20 Gy, and a formal dose-threshold analysis indicated no threshold; i.e., zero dose was the best estimate of the threshold."


When I see "zero dose was the best estimate of the threshold" I can't help but think it is an unusually clear statement that was included in the paper for a specific reason, don't you think?