Scientific Downplaying and euphemism:
a) Our estimates suggest that a cumulative exposure of 100 mSv would lead to a 9.7% (1.4 to 19.7%) increased mortality from all cancers excluding leukaemia and a 5.9% (−2.9 to 17.0%) increased mortality from all cancers excluding leukaemia, lung, and pleura compared with background rates: http://www.bmj.com/content/331/7508/77.full?sid=ed1379eb-6c19-40da-ba21-8c9b05d9b9da
b) http://blogs.flinders.edu.au/flinders-news/2011/07/14/radiation-response-a-meltdown-in-reason/ – This is anti human science.
In contrast: Page 2: “Table 1 Incidence of 12 classes of disease among liquidators per 100 thousand people” – shows massive increase of diseases. Page 6 “relation between effects at low-intensive dosage and dose rate” and Page 11 “the PRESENCE of linear or linear-quadratic dependency IS NOT obligatory for the cases of diseases and deaths from malignant neoplasm at low doses”: http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/kr21pdf/Burlakova.pdf
“Recently, in a concerted effort to raise the permissible levels of radiation for workers and the public, members of the Heath Physics Society have been actively promoting their theory of Hormesis, namely, that low dose exposures to radiation induce “beneficial” effects such as longevity, robustness, radio-resistance and increased growth. The use of the term “beneficial” implies a judgment, not a scientific fact. Experiments backing these hypotheses have been difficult to reproduce and definitions of “beneficial” have been controversial and appear very subjective. Claims of low dose hormesis have frequently been based on high dose observations, and the only mechanisms offered for these effects has been speculation on repair overshoot at the cellular and genome level. Cell growth as “hormetic” is the most troubling claim, since illicit growth stimulation signifies catastrophe for biological organisms.” http://www.ccnr.org/radiation_standards.html