dose-threshold analysis indicated no threshold - zero dose the best estimate of threshold

[kristopher]

10. Wrong way "Pam" with more misdirection (and evidence of his style of "science")

There is no conflict between the articles on the point you are claiming "Pam".

The NAS paper: “Our data show that at lower doses of ionizing radiation, DNA repair mechanisms work much better than at higher doses ... This non-linear DNA damage response casts doubt on the general assumption that any amount of ionizing radiation is harmful and additive.”


The Radiation Research paper: 4) The linear dose-response relationship provided the best fit for the ERR data across the entire dose range, but a concave curve was the best fit for data restricted to dose < 2 Gy. This resulted because risk estimates for exposure to around 0.5 Gy were lower than those in the linear model.


The NAS paper takes the implications of their findings too far. It might be what explains the concave curve, however it does not establish a lower threshold.

Your unending litany of misinformation and false claims are pathetic, "Pam".