Various approaches to damage assessment.

Abstract

There are two main approaches used to assess the damage to human health from exposure to low-level ionizing radiation. The first is a realistic best-estimate approach. The second is performed in support of the development of radiation standards to protect workers and the public, and tends to overestimate risk. This paper reviews these approaches to damage assessments as they have been applied to the development of radiation protection standards and current estimates of risk. Technical issues affected by these two different approaches include use of the linear hypothesis, use of relative and absolute risk projection models, dose-rate effectiveness factor, appropriateness of data sets, and the transfer of risks between populations. The prudent approach may be justified for radiation protection purposes, but scientific estimates of risk should reflect the state-of-the-science and include estimates of uncertainty.