TO THE EDITOR: The lead article, by Siegel et al.(1), in the January 2017 issue of The
Journal of Nuclear Medicine is brilliant, timely, and scientifically superb. Unfortunately, the …

TO THE EDITOR: In their Invited Perspective (1), Duncan et al.''respectfully disagree''with our
commentary challenging the Biologic Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII report …

TO THE NEWSLINE EDITOR: I am delighted with the commentary by Siegel, Sacks, and
Greenspan in the November issue of JNM Newsline (2021; 62 [11]: 17N–18N, 22N) …

TO THE EDITOR: I read with interest the Invited Perspective by Duncan et al.(1), which was
in response to the article by Siegel et al.(2) criticizing the Biologic Effects of Ionizing …

TO THE EDITOR: Sometimes we need to challenge the views of colleagues and friends,
especially when their thinking has the effect of muddying the waters rather than providing …

Editor: I read with interest the recent article by Zondervan and colleagues in the May 2013
issue of Radiology (1) regarding the increased cancer risk from computed tomography (CT) …

TO THE EDITOR: I read with interest the Invited Perspective by Duncan et al.(1), which was
in response to the article by Siegel et al.(2) criticizing the Biologic Effects of Ionizing …

In a recent Point/Counterpoint, Graham et al [1] and Guiberteau and Oates [2] seemingly
agree on a solitary issue: the decline of nuclear medicine (NM) in the United States. We …

Bernard Cohen had not intended to foment revolution. To be sure, he had hoped that the
linear, no-threshold (LNT) model of ionizing radiations effects on humans would prove to be …

The linear no-threshold (LNT) model for radiation-induced cancer was adopted by national
and international advisory bodies in the 1950s and has guided radiation protection policies …