A long and detailed YouTube video by Kyle Hill about how an outdated principle of “there is no safe level of ionizing radiation” still pervades nuclear and radiation policy in spite of continuously mounting scientific evidence to the contrary, contributing to unnecessarily great caution with things like medical imaging, and to negative public perception and panic regarding nuclear power.
The TL;DW is that there is a mountain of evidence that small doses of radiation are harmless due to the body’s natural defenses and self-repair mechanisms, and in fact according to many studies small doses may in fact reduce the risk of cancer compared to baseline rather than increase it (a phenomenon known as hormesis).
The scientific community is not a unified body, so having scientists questioning any scientific model does not seem like a “wow” moment. But, when the discourse starts including strong vocabulary, admittedly I start questioning/researching claims. And I appreciate it when studies conclude by saying things like: cautious of interpretation is needed, or further studies are warranted, etc.
Apart from that, sure, maybe the LNT model needs some re-evaluation, maybe not - I dunno, time will tell. Still, to my understanding, one problem with ionising radiation is that the dosage received by people is not always as tightly controlled as needed for it to be safe, despite all efforts. Not even in work environments.
For example: