There is no safe dose means that risk is proportional to exposure. Expose yourself to a little dose and increase your risk of cancer/leukemia etc. a little in proportion. Do this long term then small increases above background are compounded daily. And it’s necessary to factor in all vectors of exposure: external sources like medical xrays, dental xrays and air travel (above background exposure) and internal sources air/water food. And you need to stay perfectly healthy during exposure - that’s why people undergoing radiation treatments avoid exposing themselves to flu etc. Also, note that the young, elderly and female are more sensitive to radiation damage then the rest of the population.
A general response to irradiation is immune suppression - so someone who would have been expected to recovery from a disease might not because their immune system was busy repairing radiation damage.
Who is indifferent to increasing their risk for early dementia, cardiac death, leukemia and “a host of other illnesses and syndromes” cited by the literature? What industry should get the green light for increasing the cancer/leukemia risk world wide and do so for the forseeable future because of their incompetence?
LNT has been utterly discredited, because it makes no sense. It was a mathematical shortcut for regulators that has no relation to reality.
Risk is not proportional to exposure to radiation, any more than risk is proportional to exposure to sunlight or water.