• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

穆勒的诺贝尔演讲:电离辐射的剂量反应——是意识形态还是科学?

Muller's Nobel lecture on dose-response for ionizing radiation: ideology or science?

机构信息

Environmental Health Sciences, Department of Public Health, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA.

出版信息

Arch Toxicol. 2011 Dec;85(12):1495-8. doi: 10.1007/s00204-011-0728-8. Epub 2011 Jun 30.

DOI:10.1007/s00204-011-0728-8
PMID:21717110
Abstract

In his Nobel Prize Lecture of December 12, 1946, Hermann J. Muller argued that the dose-response for radiation-induced germ cell mutations was linear and that there was "no escape from the conclusion that there is no threshold". However, assessment of correspondence between Muller and Curt Stern 1 month prior to his Nobel Prize Lecture reveals that Muller knew the results and implications of a recently completed study at the University of Rochester under the direction of Stern, which directly contradicted his Nobel Prize Lecture. This finding is of historical importance since Muller's Nobel Lecture gained considerable international attention and is a turning point in the acceptance of the linearity model in risk assessment for germ cell mutations and carcinogens.

摘要

在 1946 年 12 月 12 日的诺贝尔奖演讲中,赫尔曼·J·穆勒(Hermann J. Muller)认为,辐射诱导的生殖细胞突变的剂量反应呈线性,并且“无法得出没有阈值的结论”。然而,对穆勒在获得诺贝尔奖演讲前一个月与 Curt Stern 的评估结果进行评估后发现,穆勒知道斯特恩(Stern)在罗切斯特大学(University of Rochester)完成的一项最新研究的结果和意义,该研究直接与他的诺贝尔奖演讲相矛盾。这一发现具有历史意义,因为穆勒的诺贝尔奖演讲引起了国际社会的广泛关注,并且是接受生殖细胞突变和致癌物风险评估中线性模型的转折点。

相似文献

1
Muller's Nobel lecture on dose-response for ionizing radiation: ideology or science?穆勒的诺贝尔演讲:电离辐射的剂量反应——是意识形态还是科学?
Arch Toxicol. 2011 Dec;85(12):1495-8. doi: 10.1007/s00204-011-0728-8. Epub 2011 Jun 30.
2
Muller's Nobel Prize Lecture: when ideology prevailed over science.穆勒的诺贝尔奖演讲:当意识形态凌驾于科学之上。
Toxicol Sci. 2012 Mar;126(1):1-4. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfr338. Epub 2011 Dec 13.
3
Confirmation that Hermann Muller was dishonest in his Nobel Prize Lecture.确认赫尔曼·穆勒在诺贝尔奖演讲中不诚实。
Arch Toxicol. 2023 Nov;97(11):2999-3003. doi: 10.1007/s00204-023-03566-5. Epub 2023 Sep 4.
4
How the US National Academy of Sciences misled the world community on cancer risk assessment: new findings challenge historical foundations of the linear dose response.美国国家科学院如何误导世界社会对癌症风险评估:新发现挑战线性剂量反应的历史基础。
Arch Toxicol. 2013 Dec;87(12):2063-81. doi: 10.1007/s00204-013-1105-6. Epub 2013 Aug 4.
5
Thresholds for radiation induced mutation? The Muller-Evans debate: A turning point for cancer risk assessment.辐射诱导突变的阈值?穆勒-埃文斯的辩论:癌症风险评估的转折点。
Chem Biol Interact. 2023 Sep 1;382:110614. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2023.110614. Epub 2023 Jun 23.
6
Was Muller's 1946 Nobel Prize research for radiation-induced gene mutations peer-reviewed?穆勒1946年关于辐射诱发基因突变的诺贝尔奖研究经过同行评审了吗?
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2018 Jun 6;13(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s13010-018-0060-5.
7
Muller's Nobel Prize data: Getting the dose wrong and its significance.米勒诺贝尔奖数据:剂量错误及其意义。
Environ Res. 2019 Sep;176:108528. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2019.108528. Epub 2019 Jun 8.
8
Key historical study findings questioned in debate over threshold versus linear non-threshold for cancer risk assessment.关键历史研究结果在阈值与线性非阈值癌症风险评估的辩论中受到质疑。
Chem Biol Interact. 2022 May 25;359:109917. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2022.109917. Epub 2022 Apr 1.
9
How did Hermann Muller publish a paper absent any data in the journal Science? Ethical questions and implications of Muller's Nobel Prize.赫尔曼·穆勒是如何在《科学》杂志上发表一篇没有任何数据的论文的?穆勒诺贝尔奖的伦理问题和影响。
Chem Biol Interact. 2022 Dec 1;368:110204. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2022.110204. Epub 2022 Oct 7.
10
Newly discovered letter: why Muller failed to cite the negative mouse mutation findings of Snell, preserving his chances to receive the Nobel Prize.新发现的信件:为何 Muller 未能引用 Snell 的阴性小鼠突变发现,从而保留了自己获得诺贝尔奖的机会。
Arch Toxicol. 2024 Aug;98(8):2739-2741. doi: 10.1007/s00204-024-03807-1. Epub 2024 Jun 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of Natural Ionizing Radiation on Health Indicators in Region with Monazite Sand in Brazil.天然电离辐射对巴西独居石砂地区健康指标的影响。
World J Nucl Med. 2024 Oct 25;24(1):31-35. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1791695. eCollection 2025 Mar.
2
False and Misleading Claims of Scientific Misconduct in Early Research into Radiation Dose-response: Part 1. Overlooking Key Historical Text.辐射剂量反应早期研究中关于科学不端行为的虚假和误导性指控:第1部分。忽视关键历史文本。
Health Phys. 2025 Jun 1;128(6):507-523. doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000001932. Epub 2024 Dec 10.
3
Confirmation that Hermann Muller was dishonest in his Nobel Prize Lecture.
确认赫尔曼·穆勒在诺贝尔奖演讲中不诚实。
Arch Toxicol. 2023 Nov;97(11):2999-3003. doi: 10.1007/s00204-023-03566-5. Epub 2023 Sep 4.
4
Application of Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation in Medical Therapies.低剂量电离辐射在医学治疗中的应用。
Dose Response. 2020 Jan 6;18(1):1559325819895739. doi: 10.1177/1559325819895739. eCollection 2020 Jan-Mar.
5
Muller's nobel prize research and peer review.穆勒的诺贝尔奖研究及同行评审。
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2018 Oct 19;13(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s13010-018-0066-z.
6
The EPA Cancer Risk Assessment Default Model Proposal: Moving Away From the LNT.美国环境保护局癌症风险评估默认模型提案:摒弃线性无阈模型
Dose Response. 2018 Aug 9;16(3):1559325818789840. doi: 10.1177/1559325818789840. eCollection 2018 Jul-Sep.
7
Computed tomography and patient risk: Facts, perceptions and uncertainties.计算机断层扫描与患者风险:事实、认知与不确定性。
World J Radiol. 2016 Dec 28;8(12):902-915. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v8.i12.902.
8
Key messages of recent publications in the field of toxicology.毒理学领域近期出版物的关键信息。
EXCLI J. 2012 Nov 9;11:715-42. eCollection 2012.
9
Current developments in toxicology.毒理学的当前进展。
EXCLI J. 2012 Oct 31;11:692-702. eCollection 2012.
10
Breast cancer causes and treatment: where are we going wrong?乳腺癌的病因与治疗:我们的治疗方向错了吗?
Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2013 Dec 3;5:111-9. doi: 10.2147/BCTT.S44399. eCollection 2013.