Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

From Muller to mechanism: How LNT became the default model for cancer risk assessment.

Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) - 1 Oct 2018

Calabrese Edward J

Abstract excerpt

This paper summarizes the historical and scientific foundations of the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) cancer risk assessment model. The story of cancer risk assessment is an extraordinary one as it was based on an initial incorrect gene mutation interpretation of Muller, the application of this incorrect assumption in the derivation of the LNT single-hit model, and a series of actions by leading radiation geneticists...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation
Share to Linear Models
Share to Mice

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy Delete account & data About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Neoplasms

Share to Neoplasms, Radiation-Induced

Share to Radiation, Ionizing

Share to Risk Assessment

Share to United States

Source

Identifiers

PMID: 29843011
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.051

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 7 Sept 2026. Manifest publication-graph-cohort-2026-09-08.1.

Source receipt: pubmed, retrieved 7 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence. Graph snapshot: 2026-09-29.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

From Muller to mechanism: How LNT became the default model for cancer risk assessment.PMID 29843011Read ↗

Flaws in the LNT single-hit model for cancer risk: An historical assessment.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The threshold vs LNT showdown: Dose rate findings exposed flaws in the LNT model part 1. The Russell-Muller debate.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Dose response and risk assessment: Evolutionary foundations.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Key historical study findings questioned in debate over threshold versus linear non-threshold for cancer risk assessment.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The threshold vs LNT showdown: Dose rate findings exposed flaws in the LNT model part 2. How a mistake led BEIR I to adopt LNT.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Thresholds for radiation induced mutation? The Muller-Evans debate: A turning point for cancer risk assessment.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Physics Essentials Enable Deeper Understanding in Signaling and Crosstalk of the Carcinogenesis Paradigm "Epistemology of the Origin of Cancer".Semantic proximity Read ↗

The LNT model for cancer induction is not supported by radiobiological dataSemantic proximity Read ↗

LNT and cancer risk assessment: Its flawed foundations part 2: How unsound LNT science became accepted.Semantic proximity Read ↗

The road to linearity: why linearity at low doses became the basis for carcinogen risk assessment.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Are We Approaching the End of the Linear No-Threshold Era?Semantic proximity Read ↗

Lessons to be learned from a contentious challenge to mainstream radiobiological science (the linear no-threshold theory of genetic mutations).Semantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.