| Popis: |
There remains considerable uncertainty in obtaining risk estimates of adverse health outcomes of chronic low-dose radiation. In the absence of reliable direct data, extrapolation through the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis forms the cardinal tenet of all risk assessments for low doses (≤ 100 mGy) and for the radiation protection principle of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). However, as recent evidences demonstrate, LNT assumptions do not appropriately reflect the biology of the cell at the low-dose end of the dose-response curve. In this regard, human populations living in high-level natural radiation areas (HLNRA) of the world can provide valuable insights into the biological and cellular effects of chronic radiation to facilitate improved precision of the dose-response relationship at low doses. Here, data obtained over decades of epidemiological and radiobiological studies on HLNRA populations is summarized. These studies do not show any evidence of unfavourable health effects or adverse cellular effects that can be correlated with high-level natural radiation. Contrary to the assumptions of LNT, no excess cancer risks or untoward pregnancy outcomes have been found to be associated with cumulative radiation dose or in-utero exposures. Molecular biology-driven studies demonstrate that chronic low-dose activates several cellular defence mechanisms that help cells to sense, recover, survive, and adapt to radiation stress. These mechanisms include stress-response signaling, DNA repair, immune alterations and most importantly, the radiation-induced adaptive response. The HLNRA data is consistent with the new evolving paradigms of low-dose radiobiology and can help develop the theoretical framework of an alternate dose-response model. A rational integration of radiobiology with epidemiology data is imperative to reduce uncertainties in predicting the potential health risks of chronic low doses of radiation. |
Full Text from ScienceDirect