MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Low Doses of Radiation are Protective <i>in vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i> : Evolutionary Origins

2006· article· en· W2102971773 on OpenAlexafffund
R. E. J. Mitchel

Bibliographic record

VenueDose-Response · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Radiation Exposure
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsOffspringLow Dose RadiationIonizing radiationBiologyIn vivoIn vitroDNA damageToxicologyIrradiationDose ratePhysiologyGeneticsAndrologyCancer researchCancerDNAPregnancyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research reports using cells from bacteria, yeast, alga, nematodes, fish, plants, insects, amphibians, birds and mammals, including wild deer, rodents or humans show non-linear radio-adaptive processes in response to low doses of low LET radiation. Low doses increased cellular DNA double-strand break repair capacity, reduced the risk of cell death, reduced radiation or chemically-induced chromosomal aberrations and mutations, and reduced spontaneous or radiation-induced malignant transformation in vitro. In animals, a single low, whole body dose of low LET radiation, increased cancer latency and restored a portion of the life that would have been lost due to either spontaneous or radiation-induced cancer in the absence of the low dose. In genetically normal fetal mice, a prior low dose protected against radiation-induced birth defects. In genetically normal adult-male mice, a low dose prior to a high dose protected the offspring of the mice from heritable mutations produced by the large dose. The results show that low doses of low-LET radiation induce protective effects and that these induced responses have been tightly conserved throughout evolution, suggesting that they are basic responses critical to life. The results also argue strongly that the assumption of a linear increase in risk with increasing dose in humans is unlikely to be correct, 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDose-ResponseSame topicEffects of Radiation ExposureFrench-language works237,207