Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009;7(1):52-89.
doi: 10.2203/dose-response.08-024.Cuttler. Epub 2008 Nov 10.

Nuclear energy and health: and the benefits of low-dose radiation hormesis

Jerry M Cuttler  1 , Myron Pollycove
Affiliations

Nuclear energy and health: and the benefits of low-dose radiation hormesis

Jerry M Cuttler et al. Dose Response. 2009.

Abstract

Energy needs worldwide are expected to increase for the foreseeable future, but fuel supplies are limited. Nuclear reactors could supply much of the energy demand in a safe, sustainable manner were it not for fear of potential releases of radioactivity. Such releases would likely deliver a low dose or dose rate of radiation, within the range of naturally occurring radiation, to which life is already accustomed. The key areas of concern are discussed. Studies of actual health effects, especially thyroid cancers, following exposures are assessed. Radiation hormesis is explained, pointing out that beneficial effects are expected following a low dose or dose rate because protective responses against stresses are stimulated. The notions that no amount of radiation is small enough to be harmless and that a nuclear accident could kill hundreds of thousands are challenged in light of experience: more than a century with radiation and six decades with reactors. If nuclear energy is to play a significant role in meeting future needs, regulatory authorities must examine the scientific evidence and communicate the real health effects of nuclear radiation. Negative images and implications of health risks derived by unscientific extrapolations of harmful effects of high doses must be dispelled.

Keywords: radiation health effects; radiation hormesis; regulatory implications; social acceptance; sustainable nuclear energy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Per Capita World Electricity Consumption 1980–2005 (ordinate: kWh per person per year; abscissa: year). Source: US EIA, International Energy Outlook (Table 6.2)
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Number of Reactors and Percent of Electricity Mix
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Human-Made and Natural Radiation (Rockwell 2003)
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Pyro-processing to recycle nuclear fuel (Hannum 2005)
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Dose contributions to individuals in the United States (NEA 1994)
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
Telegram sent by renowned scientist Linus Pauling to President Kennedy 1 March 1962 Night Letter Durham NC Sent President John F. Kennedy, White House: Are you going to give an order that will cause you to go down in history as one of the most immoral men of all time and one of the greatest enemies of the human race? In a letter to the New York Times I state that nuclear tests duplicating the Soviet 1961 tests would seriously damage over 20 million unborn children, including those caused to have gross physical or mental defect and also the stillbirths and embryonic, neonatal and childhood deaths from the radioactive fission products and carbon 14. Are you going to be guilty of this monstrous immorality, matching that of the Soviet leaders, for the political purpose of increasing the still imposing lead of the United States over the Soviet Union in nuclear weapons technology? (sgd) Linus Pauling To Dr Jerome Wiesner, Mr. McGeorge Bundy, Dr. Glenn Seaborg I have sent the following telegram to President Kennedy (quote it) Linus Pauling
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 7
Lung cancer mortality rates compared with mean home radon levels by U.S. county and comparison with linear model by BEIR IV (Cohen 1995) m/m0 is the ratio of lung cancer mortality rate for residential radon levels to that at 0 level (theoretical), or to that of average residential level of 1.7 picocurie per liter. Note statistically highly significant increase of lung cancer mortality in counties with very low ambient concentrations of radon, i.e., in radiation deficient portion of Figure 9.
FIGURE 8
FIGURE 8
Immune system response to an acute radiation dose. Mouse splenic cells primed with antigenic sheep red blood cells (Mackinodan and James 1990)
FIGURE 9
FIGURE 9
Idealized biphasic dose-response curve (Luckey 1991). The ordinate indicates relative response compared with the controls. The abscissa is mammalian whole-body chronic dose rate in mGy per year. The numbered areas are: (1) deficient, (2) ambient, (3) hormetic, (4) optimum, (5) zero equivalent point, and (6) harmful.
FIGURE 10
FIGURE 10
The anti-mutagenic DNA damage-control biosystem (Pollycove and Feinendegen 2001)
FIGURE 11
FIGURE 11
Effect of increased background radiation on the DNA damage-control biosystem
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Académie des Sciences. Problems Associated with the Effects of Low Doses of Ionising Radiation. 1997 Académie des Sciences Report No. 38. February 1997.
    1. ANS (American Nuclear Society) Position Statement. Health Effects of Low-Level Radiation. 2001. Available at http://www.ans.org/pi/ps/docs/ps41.pdf.
    1. ANS. Chernobyl Forum Reports 20-year Findings, Offers Recommendations. Nuclear News. 2005 Oct;:46–52.
    1. ANS. World List of Nuclear Power Plants, Operable, Under Construction or on Order as of December 31, 2007. Nuclear News. 2008 March ;:39–63.
    1. Baker RJ, Chesser RK. The Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster and Subsequent Creation of a Wildlife Preserve. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 2000;19(5):1231–1232.

LinkOut - more resources