Abstract
Radiation protection professionals benefit from using and applying a robust system of radiological protection that has evolved and matured through decades of research and experience. Nevertheless, uncertainties in potential health effects from low doses and low dose rates of radiation continue to remain. This uncertainty, coupled with complex jargon and nuances, has created an environment where the system of radiological protection can be misrepresented, even by radiation safety professionals, and by extension, misunderstood by the public. While it is universally agreed that the linear-no-threshold model cannot adequately explain or predict health effects of low dose radiation for all cancers, all individuals, or all exposure situations, the recommendation of authoritative scientific bodies to use this model for managing risks of radiation exposure is unequivocal. The role of individual radiation protection professionals in communicating radiation health and risk information is critical and consistent with the primary objective of professional organisations that represent them, mainly to promote best science and practice of radiation protection. If radiation protection professionals provide advice contrary to the recommendations and advice of regulatory and authoritative scientific bodies, it can erode public confidence in the system of radiological protection and harm the credibility of our profession.