The Linear No-Threshold Hypothesis (LNT) was always been considered as a conservative approach to radiation safety since we have no consistent data to support what may happen to the human body below approximately 10 to 20 Rad acute exposure. It is a probabilistic assessment/assumption of risk, not a scientific predictor of harm. Many epidemiological studies have been done, including the hormesis study at the Norfolk Shipyard and the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki but they usually deal with statistical probabilities from long-term exposure to ionizing radiation. As a conservative method to help minimize and control chronic exposures to ionizing radiation, the LNT model is satisfactory. As a predictive tool, it leaves a lot to be desired. However, to treat it as a scientific fact is ludicrous since there is not any real data to support it - just extrapolated data from acute exposures and very high chronic occupational exposures (e.g., the watch dial painters).