top of page

Reasons to eliminate the LNT model 


LNT model is wrong. It should not be used.

LNT model says:

If radiation dose increases slightly, cancers would increase (red line in the graph)



When radiation dose increased slightly, cancers decreased (green data points)

Conclusion: LNT model is wrong. 


You should cross-out LNT from your vocabulary.

Figure legend:

LNT model Prediction - Using BEIR VII Report (NRC, 2006)

Taiwan - Residents of radio-contaminated apartments in Taiwan (Hwang, 2006)

NSWS - Radiation workers in Nuclear Shipyard Worker Study (Sponsler, 2005) 

British Radiologists - British Radiologists who entered service during the period 1955-1979 (Berrington, 2001)

Mayak - Evacuated residents of villages near Mayak Nulcear Weapons Facility (Kostyuchenko, 1994)


Note: Click here for an explanation of the plotted data points

LNT model is wrong.

It should not be used.

LNT model is responsible for millions of preventable cancer deaths. It should not be used.


LNT model led to the policy: Keep radiation doses As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA)

  • Led to fear of low levels of radiation

  • Prevented study of radiation hormesis when it was proposed by Prof. Luckey in 1980. Evidence for radiation hormesis is becoming stronger, and evidence for LNT model is being discredited

    Conclusion: Radiation hormesis is real.

    ~20% of cancer deaths could have been prevented, if radiation hormesis had been studied in 1980s.

    Millions of cancer deaths could have been prevented over the past four decades. 


LNT model caused millions of preventable cancer deaths. 

It should not be used.



Please join us and/or help us in our campaign to discontinue its use.

bottom of page