All procedures involving ionizing radiation, whether diagnostic or therapeutic, are subject to strict regulation, and public concerns have been raised about even the low levels of radiation exposures involved in diagnostic imaging. During the last 2 decades, there are signs of more balanced attitude to ionizing radiation hazards, as opposed to the historical "radiophobia." The linear no-threshold hypothesis, based on the assumption that every radiation dose increment constitutes increased cancer risk for humans, is increasingly debated. In particular, the recent memorandum of the International Commission on Radiological Protection admits that the linear no-threshold hypothesis predictions at low doses (that International Commission on Radiological Protection itself has used and continues to use) are "speculative, unproven, undetectable, and 'phantom'." Moreover, numerous experimental, ecological, and epidemiological studies suggest that low doses of ionizing radiation may actually be beneficial to human health. Although these advances in scientific understanding have not yet yielded significant changes in radiation regulation and policy, we are hopeful such changes may happen in the relatively near future. This article reviews the present status of the low-dose radiation hazard debate and outlines potential opportunities in the field of low-dose radiation therapy.
Keywords: LNT; linear no-threshold hypothesis; low-dose; radiation carcinogenesis.
© The Author(s) 2015.