This piece assumes some familiarity with two radiation harm models, Linear No Threshold (LNT), and Sigmoid No Threshold (SNT). At a minimum, you will need to be familiar with LNT is Nonsense and A Sigmoid No Threshold Primer. The Policy Implications of SNT
Following the link for SNT, I find "page not found".
I'm curious because in biology, most dose-response curves are sigmoids if you use a semi-log plot, which corresponds to a hyperbola if you use a linear rather than a logarithmic x-axis (i.e. it's a supra-linear model).
I think the link is fixed in the version on the substack site. Mea culpa.
Agree there is nothing original about using a sigmoid dose response curve. It was the ubiquitous standard until LNT came along for radiation , altho EPA has now metastasized LNT to other potentially toxic materials. If there is anything original about SNT, it is the idea of chopping the dose rate profile into repair periods, and treating each repair period as an independent event.
I should have highlighted the Tamura City numbers in Table 1. At Tamura City, the PEAK dose rates were less than the AVERAGE dose rates in high natural background areas such as portions of the Kerala coast.\cite{nair-2009} Nair et all found no increase in cancer in the high dose rate districts. SNT is consistent with this non-effect. The SNT total compensation for the 40,000 citizens of Tamura is $105. But for LNT, the collective dose results in a total compensation of 29 million dollars.
Following the link for SNT, I find "page not found".
I'm curious because in biology, most dose-response curves are sigmoids if you use a semi-log plot, which corresponds to a hyperbola if you use a linear rather than a logarithmic x-axis (i.e. it's a supra-linear model).
I think the link is fixed in the version on the substack site. Mea culpa.
Agree there is nothing original about using a sigmoid dose response curve. It was the ubiquitous standard until LNT came along for radiation , altho EPA has now metastasized LNT to other potentially toxic materials. If there is anything original about SNT, it is the idea of chopping the dose rate profile into repair periods, and treating each repair period as an independent event.
The LNT model has nothing to do with science. It was used by the Atomic Energy Commision to bury Gofman's embarrassing findings on medical radiation.
I should have highlighted the Tamura City numbers in Table 1. At Tamura City, the PEAK dose rates were less than the AVERAGE dose rates in high natural background areas such as portions of the Kerala coast.\cite{nair-2009} Nair et all found no increase in cancer in the high dose rate districts. SNT is consistent with this non-effect. The SNT total compensation for the 40,000 citizens of Tamura is $105. But for LNT, the collective dose results in a total compensation of 29 million dollars.