# Presentation: 723649

##               PROSPECTUS              

** **
**REVIEW OF THE**
**     ****THE DOE-OBER LOW DOSE**
**RADIATION RESEARCH PROGRAM**

## The Department of Energy’s Low Dose Radiation Research Program supports competitive peer-reviewed research aimed at informing the development of future national radiation risk policy for the public and the workplace. Since its beginning in 1999, the focus of research has been to study cellular and molecular responses to doses of x- or gamma- radiation that are at or near current workplace exposure limits; in general, for total radiation doses that are less than 0.1 Sievert (10 rem). 

**www.lowdose.energy.gov**

##         LOW-DOSE RADIATION RESEARCH PROGRAM

**                      ****BUDGETS FOR 2006 AND 2007**
**                                    ****(in thousands)**
**	****	****	****	****	**_**06**_**	****	**_**07**_
**National Laboratories**
**	****BNL****	****	****                    300               1184**
**	****LBNL                               4093               3389**
**           ****LLNL                               1245                 950**
**           ****LANL                               1000                   70**
**           ****ORNL                                 100                 429**
**           ****ORISE                                200                 200**
**           ****PNNL                                **_**1555 **_**              **_**1483**_** **
**                                                     ****8493               7705**
**Research Projects                      8422               9412**
**Conference Grants                     **_**    91**_**                **_**   82**_
_**Total**_**                                           17,006            17,199                               ****	****         ****	**

## FROM THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR SCIENCE

**the quality, and the technical innovation of the**
**Program’s research portfolio.**
**Charge 2: Assess whether the current portfolio is **
**taking best advantage of advances in biological**
**research and integrative models**

**FROM THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR SCIENCE**
**TO MICHELLE BROIDO**

## About the DOE Low Dose Radiation Research Program

**The goal of the DOE Low Dose Radiation Research Program is to support research that will help determine health risks from exposures to low levels of radiation. This information is critical to adequately and appropriately protect people while making the most effective use of our national resources.**** **

##     FROM THE UNDERSECRETARY FOR SCIENCE

**TO MICHELLE BROIDO**

**Charge 3: Evaluate whether this growing body of scientific**
**knowledge and new biological paradigms provide sufficient **
**justification for reconsideration of the risk estimate models**
**that currently set regulatory dose limits for DOE workers and**
**the public.**
**Charge 4: Identify any additional biological issues or technical**
**hurdles that the Program needs to address in order to wholly**
**inform regulatory policy**

## Slide 7

## AGE-SPECIFIC RERF DATA 1950-1997

**AGE-SPECIFIC RERF DATA 1950-1997**
**(From D. Brenner *****et al *****2003)**

## UNCERTAINTY HAS LED TO SPECULATION

**UNCERTAINTY HAS LED TO SPECULATION**
**AS TO THE ACTUAL SHAPE OF THE DOSE-**
**RISK RELATIONSHIP AT LOW DOSES**

## Enter the potential of biology to settle this issue –

**with particular emphasis on, so-called, “non-targeted**
**phenomena” including:**
**GENOMIC INSTABILITY**
**	****	****2.  BYSTANDER EFFECTS**
** ****as well as:**
** **
**	****	**** ****3.  ADAPTIVE RESPONSES **

##  BYSTANDER EFFECT vs. ADAPTIVE RESPONSE

** ****BYSTANDER EFFECT vs. ADAPTIVE**** ****RESPONSE**

**Brenner *****et al***

**Feinendegen *****et al***

##   This, in turn, has led to the battle of the national academies:

_**From BEIR VII – National Academies of the USA**_
**  **
**       ...****current scientific evidence is consistent with the**
**       ****hypothesis that there is a linear, no-threshold dose-**
**       ****response relationship between exposure to ionizing **
**       ****radiation and the development of cancer in humans**
_**From Académie des Science – Institut de France**_
**         **
**       ****While LNT may be useful for the administrative **
**       ****organization of radioprotection, its use for assessing**
**       ****carcinogenic risks, induced by low doses, such as those**
**       ****delivered by diagnostic radiology or the nuclear industry, **
**       ****is not based on valid scientific data.**

##     FROM THE UNDERSECRETARY FOR SCIENCE

**TO MICHELLE BROIDO**

**Charge 3: Evaluate whether this growing body of scientific**
**knowledge and new biological paradigms provide sufficient **
**justification for reconsideration of the risk estimate models**
**that currently set regulatory dose limits for DOE workers and**
**the public.**
**Alt: Evaluate whether this growing body of scientific knowledge**
**may lead to new biological paradigms for understanding low **
**dose radiation effects on human health.**
**Charge 4: Identify any additional biological issues or technical**
**hurdles that the Program needs to address in order to wholly**
**inform regulatory policy.**

##    BERAC LOW RADIATION DOSE 

**                ****REVIEW PANEL**

**S. James Adelstein – BERAC, Chair**
**C. Norman Coleman – National Cancer Institute**
**Shirley Fry – Formerly ORAU**
**Dudley Goodhead – UK Medical Research Council**
**John B. Little – Harvard School of Public Health**
**Jac A. Nickoloff – University of New Mexico**
**Julian Preston – Environmental Protection Agency**
**Thomas M. Roberts – Dana-Farber Cancer Institute**

## PROPOSED AGENDA

**Day 1 am: **_**Introduction to the program, program management,**_
**                  **_**program budget, proposal and post-award review**_
**                  ****David Thomassen – past Program Manager**
**                  ****Noelle Metting – current Program Manager**
**                  ****Frank Sulzman – NASA representative**
**	****     **_**Program goals, accomplishments and Prospects**_
**                  ****Antone Brooks – past Chief Scientist**
**                  ****Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff – current Chief Scientist**
**                  **_**Select program investigators’ view on whether/how**_
**                  **_**research has led to new models for understanding**_
**                  **_**low-dose effects and what technical hurdles, if any, **_
**                  **_**need to be obviated to inform risk estimates**_
**                  ****David Brenner, Randy Jirtle, William Morgan, Leslie**
**                  ****Redpath, Betsy Sutherland, Andrew Wyrobek**
**                 **
**                  **

## PROPOSED AGENDA (2)

**Day 1 pm, Day 2 am: **_**Individual project review**_
**Day 2 pm: **_**Development of statements on**_
**                  ****1. Quality, productivity, technical innovation**
**                  ****2. Taking advantage of current biologic research**
**                       ****including integrative models**
**                  ****3. Emergence of new biological paradigms and**
**                      ****implications for risk estimates**
**                  ****4. Critical biologic issues or technical hurdles**
**                      ****needing address**
**                   **