HEALTH AND RADIATION

For almost 40 years, since Linus Pauling parlayed the linear no-threshold hypothesis of radiation damage into a Nobel Peace Prize during his campaign against American nuclear defense, this model has been the central weapon of the anti-nuclear power politicos. It is probable that no other single myth has done more technological damage than this hypothesis (dishonestly presented, of course, as fact rather than hypothesis by Pauling and his successors). As an indirect killer of human beings through economic and technological loss, it may stand second only to the banning of DDT.

The final death knells of this damaging myth are now being sounded as threshold experiments and hormesis experiments (showing the beneficial health effects of low level radiation) are finding their way from specialized journals to general science publications. "Cancer Risk of Low-Level Exposure'' by Marvin Goldman in Science 271, pp 1821-1822, 29 March 1996, is an example.

When this information spreads to the public media, it is likely to stimulate a technological revolution. In the best interests of not getting too far ahead of this and becoming a negative influence, we refrain for now from answering an obvious question - will the lives saved by radiation hormesis from Chernobyl exceed the lives lost from the initial accident? Hint: The likely answer is definitely not politically correct.