A study has found that cancer rates go down and life expectancy increases in areas of the US with high natural background radiation, flying in the face of decades of accepted theory that low-dose radiation is still harmful.
Natural background radiation exists from sources in the environment. This is the first large-scale study looking at terrestrial radiation (coming from radioactive elements in rocks, which vary across regions) and cosmic radiation (which increases with altitude). The Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) researchers found that life expectancy is approximately 2.5 years longer for those who live in areas of naturally high background radiation vs those who live in areas of low radiation.
The linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis has guided radiation protection policy in the US since the 1960s. This assumes that health risk from radiation is linear and incremental, meaning that there is no safe minimum dose – all ionising radiation is assumed to be harmful. However, numerous studies have contended that radiation at low doses initiates a protective hormesis effect.
Reduced levels of a number of types of cancers were found when in areas of high background radiation levels as opposed to lower. In both sexes, there was a significant decrease in lung, pancreatic, colon and rectal cancers. Among men, there were additional decreases in brain and bladder cancers. However, no decreases in cervix, breast or prostate cancers or leukaemia were observed.
“Decades of scientific theory are potentially being disproven by the remarkable researchers at BGU. These findings might even provide a sense of relief for those who reside in areas in the U.S. with higher-than-average background radiation,” said Doug Seserman, Chief Executive Officer, American Associates, BGU.
Using the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s radiation dose calculator, the researchers retrieved data background radiation on all 3,29 US counties. Cancer rate data were retrieved from the United States Cancer Statistics, while life expectancy data were retrieved from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington Medical Center.
“It is reasonable to suggest that a radiation threshold does exist, yet it is higher than the upper limit of the natural background radiation levels in the US (227 mrem/year),” the researchers wrote. “These findings provide clear indications for re-considering the linear no-threshold paradigm, at least within the natural range of low-dose radiation.”
Source: News-Medical.Net
Journal information: David, E., et al. (2021) Background radiation impacts human longevity and cancer mortality: reconsidering the linear no-threshold paradigm. Biogerontology. doi.org/10.1007/s10522-020-09909-4.
