Environmental Health Sciences Division, Department of Public Health, School of Public Health, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003, USA.
Toxicol Sci. 2012 Mar;126(1):1-4. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfr338. Epub 2011 Dec 13.
This paper extends and confirms the report of Calabrese (Calabrese, E. J. (2011b). Muller's Nobel Lecture on dose-response for ionizing radiation: Ideology or science? Arch. Toxicol. 85, 1495-1498) that Hermann J. Muller knowingly made deceptive comments in his 1946 Nobel Prize Lecture (Muller, H. J. (1946). Nobel Prize Lecture. Stockholm, Sweden. Available at http://www.nobelprize.org/. Accessed December 12) concerning the dose-response. Supporting a linearity perspective, Muller stated there is "no escape from the conclusion that there is no threshold" while knowing the results of a recent study by Ernst Caspari and Curt Stern contradicted these comments. Recently uncovered private correspondence between Muller and Stern reveals Muller's scientific assessment of the Caspari and Stern manuscript in a letter from Muller to Stern 5 weeks (14 January 1947) after his Nobel Prize Lecture of 12 December 1946. Muller indicated that the manuscript was of acceptable scientific quality; he indicated the manuscript should be published, but the findings needed replication because it significantly challenged the linearity hypothesis. These findings complement the previous letter (12 November 1946 letter from Muller to Stern), which revealed that Muller received the Caspari and Stern manuscript, recognized it as significant, and recommended its replication 5 weeks before his Nobel Prize Lecture. Muller therefore supported this position immediately before and after his Nobel Prize Lecture. Muller's opinions on the Caspari and Stern manuscript therefore had not changed during the time leading up to his Lecture, supporting the premise that his Lecture comments were deceptive. These findings are of historical and practical significance because Muller's comments were a notable contributory factor, changing how risks would be assessed for carcinogens (i.e., changing from a threshold to a linear model) throughout the 20th century to the present.
这篇论文扩展并证实了 Calabrese 的报告（Calabrese，E. J.（2011b）。 Muller 的诺贝尔演讲剂量反应的离子辐射：意识形态还是科学？Arch. Toxicol. 85，1495-1498），即 Hermann J. Muller 在他 1946 年的诺贝尔演讲中故意发表了欺骗性言论，涉及剂量反应。支持线性观点，Muller 表示“没有办法不得出这样的结论：没有阈值”，而他知道 Ernst Caspari 和 Curt Stern 的一项最近研究结果与这些言论相矛盾。最近发现的 Muller 和 Stern 之间的私人通信揭示了 Muller 在 1946 年 12 月 12 日诺贝尔演讲后的第 5 周（1947 年 1 月 14 日）给 Stern 的一封信中对 Caspari 和 Stern 手稿的科学评估。Muller 表示该手稿具有可接受的科学质量；他表示该手稿应该发表，但发现需要复制，因为它严重挑战了线性假设。这些发现补充了之前的一封信（1946 年 11 月 12 日 Muller 给 Stern 的信），其中揭示了 Muller 收到了 Caspari 和 Stern 的手稿，认为它很重要，并建议在他的诺贝尔演讲前 5 周复制它。因此，Muller 在诺贝尔演讲前后都支持这一立场。因此，在他的演讲之前和之后，Muller 对 Caspari 和 Stern 手稿的看法都没有改变，这支持了他的演讲言论是欺骗性的前提。这些发现具有历史和实践意义，因为 Muller 的言论是一个重要的促成因素，它改变了 20 世纪至今致癌物质风险评估的方式（即从阈值模型转变为线性模型）。
