UPDATE (3 hours later): Thanks to DBB's input below, I've replaced the problematic Conca article with a letter by Kirby and Mackenzie on the same topic. The Conca article was entitled "Can low doses of radiation raise COVID-19 survival rates?"
[An article describes] How Big Oil, working through the Rockefeller Foundation, helped foist LNT on the scientific community and on the public.
The linked article would be excellent reading for anyone wanting to learn more about the safe threshold for ionising radiation. Pretty well any toxin has a threshold dose below which it presents no threat to the organism. The article spells out the events where good science identifying the threshold was replaced with a populist fear that the threat was intrinsically evil.
That the public was so willing to believe is apparent from the extraordinary popularity of the 1959 movie, "On the Beach". Good Science Fiction, it makes a single tweak to reality, in this case by proposing that nuclear fallout would be totally lethal even if it was diluted throughout the entire atmosphere. Although fiction, it was swallowed as gospel. Even though most of the audience had had an x-ray at some time during their lives without dying from it, the public at large was willing to believe that there is no threshold below which ionising radiation is harmless. Since then, fallout from nuclear tests in the 1960s has spread around the world without a coincident increase in radiation induced cancers. Yet even today, many people believe that nuclear fallout would be worse than climate change.
In the 1950s DNA had been shown to be a palette for genetic code, but described as if it were a single molecule surviving throughout the life of the cell. In the popular understanding, the only thing that could break such an important molecule would be unnatural radiation due to artificial radioactivity. Considering the incredible length ascribed to the DNA, it would have to be an impossibly robust molecule to survive all the other biochemical assaults across that lifetime without breaking and being promptly repaired. Scientists searched for the "double-strand break repair mechanism", eventually earning the 2015 Nobel prize for Chemistry.
In the light of that research, it seems that the enormously long structure of DNA has thousands of discontinuities and repair functions underway at any one time. Calling DNA a molecule at all is arguable, but we have yet to hear of a different description of it suitable for school textbooks. Ionising radiation is just one of many double-strand breaking stressors that it can recover from – up to some threshold.
It's good someone is actually trying this therapy. (For more background, see my comment of Apr. 14 above.)
Interesting idea. Makes sense, on first blush: the virus' single-strand DNA (RNA) would be much more sensitive to ionizing radiation - effectively all breaks are the equivalent of double strand breaks (which also serves as example of why a virus can mutate quicker than eukaryotes). In addition, a virus lacks several of the repair/defence mechanisms of eukaryotes. Especially multi cellular organisms which also have cell mitosis as final defence mechanism - not an option for a virus, clearly!
Based on UV treatment units' effectiveness in removing viral threats, the idea seems promising.
It would probably require a number of treatments in series to be most effective for viral agents inside an organism, though.
The study profiled here, even using a "linear no threshold" assessment of risk, concludes that 5 to 10 times too many people were evacuated after Chernobyl. And after Fukushima, as a response to radiation, no one should have been evacuated.
The article concludes: "Rediscovering nuclear as a safe energy source, as well as a green and affordable one, would be revolutionary."
(Hat tip to Rod Adams for his tweet on Atomic Insights.)
A Call to Action: "Low-Dose Radiation May Help Cure COVID-19..." [Taps Mic] "..Is This Thing On?" Mohammad K. Kahn, MD, PhD, Clayton B. Hess, MD, MPH Published 19 November 2020 JNCI Cancer Spectrum, Volume 5, February 2021 academic.oup.com/jncics/article/5/1/pkaa105/5991442.
Another example of how inordinate fear of radiation may, literally, be scaring us to death.