LNT and cancer risk assessment: Its flawed foundations part 2: How unsound LNT science became accepted

This paper argues that Edward B. Lewis served as a type of independent academic radiation LNT-cancer risk assessment-stalking horse for the BEAR Genetics Panel, task which he had no expertise or experience (e.g. radiation, leukemia, epidemiology and statistical modelling). His efforts produced an insufficiently documented, strongly biased, high-profile in Science (May 17, 1957), whose principal conclusions not been proven, asserted privately, writing. inconclusive perspective was well camouflaged published by means sophisticated wordsmithing. At time his department head George Beadle came to chair Panel summer 1956, Beadle-inspired-Lewis LNT activity acquired urgency when study 70,000 offspring from survivors A-bombs failed show genetic damage after decade careful study, undercutting recommendations. With Beadle's guidance, effort redirected Panel's focus atomic bomb acrimoniously disrupted relationships priorities, more immediate disciplinary/professional opportunities with concerns about fallout, leukemia risks new cancer causation role mutation. The serious limitations affected neither its publication nor receiving editorial endorsement, possibly due influence powerful members, such Bentley Glass, one only six senior editors Science. restored, even though improperly, scientific moral initiatives led directly multiple high level recommendations assessment based on Precautionary Principle, asserted, remains place today essentially all countries. present explores how long-shot quasi-stalking horse, who unsupported members during withering criticism prompted article, nevertheless endured pursuit goal, becoming strikingly successful achieving global revolution place.