Cancer risks, risk-cost-benefit analyses, and the scientific method

Two main changes in risk analysis are increasingly beginning to influence the manner in which, in the perception of scientists, low-dose modeling of radiation carcinogenesis is supposed to be done. In the past, efforts to model radiation risks have been carried out under the banner of scientific endeavors. On closer inspection, however, it has become obvious that these efforts were not guided by the scientific method and that a change in approach is needed. We realize increasingly that risk analysis is not done in a vacuum and that any action taken due to the result of the analysis not only has a benefit in the form of a risk reduction but leads inevitably to an increase in cost and an increase in the risks of persons effecting the benefit. Thus, a risk-cost-benefit analysis should be done and show a clear-cut net benefit before a remedial action is taken