Low Doses of Radiation Reduce Risk <i>in Vivo</i>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The "Linear No Threshold" hypothesis, used in all radiation protection practices, assumes that all doses, no matter how low, increase the risk of cancer, birth defects and heritable mutations. In vitro cell based experiments show adaptive processes in response to low doses and dose rates of low LET radiation, and do not support the hypothesis. This talk will present cellular data and data from animal experiments that test the hypothesis in vivo for cancer risk. The data show that a single, low, whole body dose (less than about 100 mGy) of low LET radiation, given at low dose rate, increased cancer latency and consequently reduced both spontaneous and radiation-induced cancer risk in both genetically normal and cancer-prone mice. This adaptive response lasted for the entire lifespan of all the animals that developed these tumors, and effectively restored a portion of the life that would have been lost due to the cancer in the absence of the low dose. Overall, the results demonstrate that the assumption of a linear increase in risk with increasing dose in vivo is not warranted, and that low doses actually reduce risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it