Several factors constrain application of these potential public benefits:

• Radiation protection policy that presumes that radiation causes detrimental health effects linearly proportional to radiation dose, all the way to zero dose—the Linear No-Threshold premise (LNT) is even accepted in medical applications, where extensive medical use of much higher doses in hundreds of millions of patients and health workers show no significant adverse health effects below high doses and under limited conditions.
• The biological evidence that flatly contradicts the LNT premise has never been refuted by radiation protection policy-makers—just ignored. Funding of NCI, NIH and other health research reflects this policy bias.
• A handful of anti-nuclear activists (e.g. Sternglass, Wing, Stewart, Mancuso, Gofman) have produced flawed reports that claim harmful effects from radiation levels far below the variations in natural background radiation. These are discredited by serious scientists but still cited by policy-makers and used to justify fear of all radiation.
• A few reports from respectable institutions also depend on improper selection and manipulation of data to support their claim that low-dose radiation is hazardous.
• This situation continues only because it is quietly supported by scientists and institutions whose incomes and reputations are nourished by the status quo. Research that contradicts the LNT is dropped and/or not reported. Even when reported, it is not applied or considered by radiation protection policy review bodies. Money is not available for such work. Review and policy-setting committees are selected and staffed accordingly.

But considerable progress is being made. Radiation, Science & Health, Inc. (RSH), an international non-profit organization of independent radiation and public policy experts, without such conflicts of interest, was organized to advocate for resolution of this situation. Actions taken include:

• Presentations of the data are being made at numerous scientific conferences, including special sessions at every national ANS meeting, starting in 1994.
• A compendium of excerpts and analyses of the relevant scientific literature is being compiled (the "RSH DataDoc") and is available as a resource document to science and public policy groups. This is being continuously updated.
• An RSH Newsletter has been started, to disseminate information in this field to a wide audience of scientific, medical, policy-making and lay persons. Distribution of more technical scientific data, the development of a review journal, or a series of monographs, are also being considered.
• Documented formal presentations of the data are made to policy-making and advisory groups, including NCRP, NRC, NAS BEIR committees, GAO, EPA representatives, and congressional personnel.

In addition to RSH activities, many more scientists, reviewers, and policy-makers are becoming involved:

• In Japan, a substantial program of biological and epidemiological research is being carried out, with significant data confirming the biological benefits (and even the essential nature) of low-dose radiation, including success in reducing and curing cancer with LDR stimulating immune functions, and enzymatic repair, and hormonal and physiological responses.
• A research program, including the review of hundreds of historical animal studies on the effects of low-dose radiation has been established in Canada.
• Clinical testing of the use of low-dose irradiation as an immunotherapeutic treatment for cancer is under way in Japan, France and the U.S.
• People who, a few years ago, had not heard of "hormesis," now find it widely presented in the scientific literature, and in technical articles and policy papers.

To encourage further progress, the following more aggressive actions are planned or under way; and more are to be proposed:

• The EPA’s use of the LNT as a basis for rules and regulations has been directly challenged by RSH in formal, documented comments presenting the substantial contradictory scientific literature on EPA’s proposed rule on radioactivity in drinking water. If the new rule is still based on the unfounded EPA application of the LNT, RSH anticipates taking the matter to court. EPA has a substantial track record of losing cases in court when they consistently fail to base their rules on credible science.
• Letters have been sent to agency heads, and Inspectors General, and most recently to the Fraud Unit of the GAO, documenting agency failures to consider the scientific literature, both internally and in funding reviews by NCRP and BEIR Committees, and requesting appropriate corrective action be taken.
• RSH is also considering filing formal charges of scientific misconduct against some of the most egregious cases of data that have been mishandled and misinterpreted to support the LNT.
• RSH is encouraging the expansion of medical applications of low-dose radiation for immunostimulation to treat and prevent some cancers, and other beneficial effects, including uses to fight infection (especially to fight the loss of effectiveness of antibiotics because of extensive overuse), inflammations (especially arthritic and rheumatic conditions), We are considering approaching cancer patient support groups along with other medical and policy groups. This work can also include diabetes, AIDS, wound healing, and other conditions. We welcome all inquiries, recommendations, and/or support in this effort.