Ionizing Radiation Exposure--More Good Than Harm? the Preponderance of Evidence Does Not Support Abandoning Current Standards and Regulations (Commentary‪)‬

The following discussion is in response to a recent commentary by Oakley PA, Harrison DD, Harrison DE, Hass JW: On "phantom risks" associated with diagnostic ionizing radiation: evidence in support of revising radiography standards and regulations in chiropractic (JCCA 2005; 49(4):264-9). (1) The basic premise of the Oakley et al. commentary is that the linear-no-threshold risk model and current radiation exposure guidelines are based on faulty or inadequate science; that low levels of radiation actually offer beneficial health effects (radiation hormesis) rather than posing health risks; and that current guidelines aimed at limiting radiation exposure to levels as low as reasonably achievable should be abandoned.