☆ 4.7 Editorial Material

Confirmation that Hermann Muller was dishonest in his Nobel Prize Lecture

ARCHIVES OF TOXICOLOGY (2023)

Related references

Note: Only part of the references are listed.

Review Biochemistry & Molecular Biology

Thresholds for radiation induced mutation? The Muller-Evans debate: A turning point for cancer risk assessment

Edward J. Calabrese

Summary: In 1949, Robley Evans published a paper supporting a threshold dose response for ionizing radiation-induced mutation, contradicting Hermann Muller's comments. Muller engaged in a dispute with Evans, dismissing his comments and reversing his previous views. Muller's actions were rewarded, with his newly expressed views becoming accepted, and the marginalizing of Caspari's findings impacted recommendations to support LNT.

CHEMICO-BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS (2023)

Add to Collection

Article Environmental Sciences

Manhattan Project genetic studies: Flawed research discredits LNT recommendations

Edward J. Calabrese et al.

Summary: This paper reexamines the technical report of Uphoff and Stern (1949) in Science that supported a linearity dose response for radiation risk assessment. It demonstrates the research's limitations in accurately estimating radiation risks due to the inclusion of two variables and the use of a low dose rate that precluded adequate testing. The failure to subject the study's experimental details to peer-review and publication impacted the adoption of the linear dose response model.

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION (2023)

Add to Collection

Review Environmental Sciences

How self-interest and deception led to the adoption of the linear non-threshold dose response (LNT) model for cancer risk assessment

Paul B. Selby et al.

Summary: This paper uncovers the scientific contributions and deceptive/self-serving decisions of William L. Russell and Liane Russell, which led to the adoption of the linear non-threshold (LNT) model for cancer risk assessment by the US EPA. By deliberately concealing a significant cluster of mutations in the control group of their first experiment, the Russells falsely claimed that male mice were 15 times more susceptible to ionizing radiation-induced gene mutations compared to fruit flies. This self-serving error not only elevated the importance of their research program, but also promoted the LNT-based doubling dose concept and the switch from a threshold to an LNT model by regulatory agencies.

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT (2023)

Add to Collection

Review Environmental Sciences

Cover up and cancer risk assessment: Prominent US scientists suppressed evidence to promote adoption of LNT

Edward J. Calabrese et al.

Summary: This paper reveals the misconduct of William Russell and Arthur Upton in conducting and publishing data on the effects of radiation on offspring, as well as their bias actions to enhance the adoption of LNT.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (2022)

Add to Collection

Article Biochemistry & Molecular Biology

Key historical study findings questioned in debate over threshold versus linear non-threshold for cancer risk assessment

Edward J. Calabrese

Summary: This paper demonstrates that the dissertation research of Ray-Chaudhuri that was used by Hermann Muller to support his radiation induced gene mutation hypothesis and LNT dose response model is uninterpretable due to the lack of essential research design information. These findings are historically significant as they challenge Muller's gene mutation research and promotion of the LNT model in radiation risk assessment.

CHEMICO-BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS (2022)

Add to Collection

Review Biochemistry & Molecular Biology

Linear non-threshold (LNT) fails numerous toxicological stress tests: Implications for continued policy use

Edward J. Calabrese

Summary: This study conducted a series of stress tests on the linear non-threshold (LNT) dose-response model and found significant limitations in its use for low-dose cancer risk assessment. The model's ability to predict low-dose cancer risks was found to be seriously flawed, rendering it unreliable.

CHEMICO-BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS (2022)

Add to Collection

Review Biochemistry & Molecular Biology

The linear No-Threshold (LNT) dose response model: A comprehensive assessment of its historical and scientific foundations

Edward J. Calabrese

CHEMICO-BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS (2019)

Add to Collection

Review Environmental Sciences

Flaws in the LNT single-hit model for cancer risk: An historical assessment

Edward J. Calabrese

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (2017)

Add to Collection

Review Environmental Sciences

On the origins of the linear no-threshold (LNT) dogma by means of untruths, artful dodges and blind faith

Edward J. Calabrese

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH (2015)

Add to Collection

Article Environmental Sciences

PROTECTION OF THE GAMETES EMBRYO/FETUS FROM PRENATAL RADIATION EXPOSURE

Robert L. Brent

HEALTH PHYSICS (2015)

Add to Collection

Review Toxicology

Origin of the linearity no threshold (LNT) dose-response concept

Edward J. Calabrese

ARCHIVES OF TOXICOLOGY (2013)

Add to Collection

Review Toxicology

How the US National Academy of Sciences misled the world community on cancer risk assessment: new findings challenge historical foundations of the linear dose response

Edward J. Calabrese

ARCHIVES OF TOXICOLOGY (2013)

Add to Collection

Review Toxicology

Muller's Nobel Prize Lecture: When Ideology Prevailed Over Science

Edward J. Calabrese

TOXICOLOGICAL SCIENCES (2012)

Add to Collection

Review Toxicology

Muller's Nobel lecture on dose-response for ionizing radiation: ideology or science?

Edward J. Calabrese

ARCHIVES OF TOXICOLOGY (2011)

Add to Collection

Editorial Material Environmental Sciences

Key Studies Used to Support Cancer Risk Assessment Questioned

Edward J. Calabrese

ENVIRONMENTAL AND MOLECULAR MUTAGENESIS (2011)

Add to Collection

© Peeref 2019-2024. All rights reserved.