Preprints.org logo
Preprint
Hypothesis

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Protective Approaches for Radiation Exposure

Submitted:

20 July 2026

Posted:

23 July 2026

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
Radiation exposure from all various medical treatment remains a major health risk, with both immediate and long-term consequences ranging from acute radiation sickness to chronic diseases such as cancer. In my paper, I discussed new perspectives on how to protect human cells from radiation. I highlight from cellular level, the focus should be on the improvement of overall functions in genome repair and resistance to radiation damages, which could be artificially conducted on the genes at our choice. For the protection from radiation burning I suggest the employment of temperature cooling system rather than mere physical shielding as in the conventional approach. In a most plain view upon further examination of the core reactivities, what is often overlooked subtle yet highly efficient disabling aspect during radiation activities resides just within the equipment shell. When the shell materials become cracked, reactive activities may quickly disrupted leading to dismissed energy when bursting into ‘holiday fireworks’. My perspectives provide more insight in the protection mechanisms warranting future studies.
Keywords: 
radiation
;  
nuclear power
;  
evolution
;  
thermal damage
;  
disassembling nuclear activities
Subject: 
Physical Sciences  -   Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Main Text

Radiation exposure is notorious by causing extensive damage to human cells. Acute high-intensity radiation at a close distance, the most critical danger is skin burns, damage to the gastrointestinal tract, neurological impairments, and loss of bone marrow function. In extreme cases, exposure can result in rapid burns, tissue necrosis, and multi-organ failure, subsequent death. In chronic exposure, even with normal repair mechanisms, persistent or high-dose exposure often overwhelm these systems, leading to long-term chronic outcomes including different types of cancers and accelerate aging processes. Recent research is quickly emerging, but effective therapies are under development.
Several organisms are well known for their beneficial capacities that can endure radiation exposure more effectively. For example, Ramazzottius varieornatus possesses their unique DNA repair enzymes and specialized protective genes such as such as Dsup to shield the genome from radiation damages (1, 2). Similarly, Hypsibius henanensis sp. nov. demonstrates their remarkable tolerance, further highlighting the resilience of tardigrades in extreme environments (3, 4, 5). I suggest, to protect human cells, comparable strategies should be investigated. Given the complexity of human genome, it could be extremely difficult to identify the critical genes that offer protection. However, the most decisive aspect is the succeeded activities in the cellular repair functions and genome protection in these organisms that ensure the survival rather than the individual gene codes suggesting, when these activities do not necessarily rely on the genes they identified per the most recent theory of evolution, any genes involved in this function could take the control role on these activities through artificial modulation. Although this idea is similar to the commonly known fact of diverse critical protective genes among individuals, what I emphasized is the active cellular selecting and designing of its own critical genes in response to stress [6], which could be mimicked in our experimental system. The outlook potentially enables human cells to endure similar harsh conditions, warranting further investigations.
Radiation poses a significant risk to cells by damaging molecules and DNA, leading to structural breakdown and functional disruptions (6). This damage fundamentally relies on active reactions, where radiation energy triggers biochemical processes that exacerbate cellular harm. Meanwhile, these reactions generate thermal energy that further accelerates cellular deterioration. In this damaging process, an often overlooked aspect is thermal energy, one of the most prominent energy forms, which is often accused of the associated thermal damage once reaching certain magnitude, while in fact as the most vulnerable energy resource regarding to disrupt ongoing reactions.
Specifically when the thermal risk is able to be managed through precise temperature control thus neutralizing incoming heat to prevent excessive energy buildup, the most immediate retrieval is just the radiation-induced thermal damage ceases, halting further penetration into cellular structures. What is more important is that once neutron-driven chain reactions are in forced insulation, nuclear reactions should cease accordingly due to the forced suppression of energy release when domino effects should quickly override the crucial nuclear chain reactions, leading to natural dissipation. Any more prominent radiation activities may gradually halt as the reactions cease, effectively limiting further damage. In this framework, the powerful process, once named as unstoppable, when handled conversely seems to become more manageable under the switch control of the most obvious per observable power in this process - thermal power kept in a switch-off.
In this regard, precise temperature adjustments within a controlled small space can effectively neutralize incoming extreme heat, even at temperatures of 400°C or higher, by counterbalancing the thermal energy with an exact cooling mechanism. I emphasize that precautions should still be maintained, subtle vulnerabilities in this complex system may potentially lead to disproportionately increased risk. The detailed discussion of these aspects, however, is beyond the scope of this paper.
Radiation therapy often for cancer patients should be carefully planned to protect healthy tissues and minimize side effects. Physical shield is usually believed to the way to shield from radiation [8,9]. However in the case when nuclear reactions may proceed potentially without limits, physical shield ultimately will fail. Further, the materials in the physical shield may further exaggerate the energy buildup, as any confined environment tends to trap accumulated heat and sustain ongoing nuclear reactions. If such conditions result in a burst, it poses an even greater risk, causing more severe damage - similar to compressing the reactions tightly and deliberately bringing them closer before they violently release. In this context, effective insulation against radiation damage shouldn’t be only physical shielding but rather on temperature regulation as in the above discussion.
The core of nuclear energy as well-known is released through the splitting of atomic nuclei (fission) or the combining of atomic nuclei (fusion), governed by the strong nuclear force. The energy release quickly initiate chain reactions, where each reaction triggers subsequent ones gathering more energy in self propagation. In this complex system, the cruciality as most well-known lies just in the confinement of accumulated energy. While most current attention is typically directed toward the core activities of these reactions, a subtly overlooked important yet the seemly most vulnerable aspect lies in the must-in-place of spatial confinement. If the reaction space is not properly confined, the energy will disperse uncontrollably, preventing sustained reactions and leading to the most rapid energy dissipation.
Some emerging views already attention on the confinement but usually positing it as necessary barrier to prevent the release of radioactive materials in case of accidents. The barrier is the condition for the energy buildup, most current research focuses on the consolidating the shield to ensure the activated energy must be confined and accumulated to support reactions before releasing at its exaggeration produced from the reactions. What is subtly overlooked in a converse understanding is that it’s just this loss of containment that may quickly disrupt the accumulation and utilization of energy, making the reaction inefficient or unstable leading to failure or unintended consequences. This occurs regardless of how imperative the chain reactions are presumed to be, even when they are considered unstoppable and present significant challenges, however, all these must still be conditioned by the confined space to aggregate the energy. Specifically, when the confined shell is dismantled - especially when small parts of it become disassembled - the reactivities are effectively disrupted due to rapid and uncontrollable release of energy into open space, leading to the swift cessation of further reactivity. Even any residual chain reactions may continue, without the energy being confined in the previous containment, any potential energy accumulation would dissipate swiftly, resembling the transient bursts observed in ‘holiday fireworks’.
Nevertheless, I do not exclude the possibility that disassembling the shell during ongoing active reactions may contribute to its condensation when the activities rapidly proceed across different layers. Subtle structure vulnerabilities may still persist within this complex system during attempted disassembly. The detailed mechanisms however are beyond the scope of this paper. My paper aims to offer further insight into protective strategies for medical personnel in radiation facilities. The proposed framework may warrant further investigation.

Summary

In this paper, I present several novel insights into nuclear reactions and explore how these fundamental mechanisms can be harnessed to improve both treatment and protection strategies in radiation therapy facilities. Nuclear reactions are fundamentally energy driven. I propose that employing a rapid cooling system to dissipate the energy burst may swiftly suppress ongoing reactions and prevent further damage. More critically, disassembling the containment shell of the reaction may facilitate the immediate release of energy into open space, thereby terminating reactivity. At cellular level, I highlight, rather than the current focus on search specific genes, the focus should be on the specific cellular activities such as genome repair mechanisms as evidenced in other species through current cellular engineering methods. My work aims to offer new perspectives on cellular protection from radiation, warranting further investigation to improve safety in radiation-based medical environments.

Footnote

English editing was assisted by ChatGPT.

References

  1. Hashimoto, T.; et al. Extremotolerant tardigrade genome and improved radiotolerance of human cultured cells by tardigrade-unique protein. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 12808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Chavez, C.; Cruz-Becerra, G.; Fei, J.; Kassavetis, G. A.; Kadonaga, J. T. The tardigrade damage suppressor protein binds to nucleosomes and protects DNA from hydroxyl radicals. Elife 2019, 8, e47682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Li, L.; et al. Multi-omics landscape and molecular basis of radiation tolerance in a tardigrade. Science 2024, 386, eadl0799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Beltrán-Pardo, E.; Jönsson, K. I.; Harms-Ringdahl, M.; Haghdoost, S.; Wojcik, A. Tolerance to Gamma Radiation in the Tardigrade Hypsibius dujardini from Embryo to Adult Correlate Inversely with Cellular Proliferation. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0133658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Clark-Hachtel, C. M.; et al. The tardigrade Hypsibius exemplaris dramatically upregulates DNA repair pathway genes in response to ionizing radiation. Curr. Biol. 2024, 34, 1819–1830.e6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Tumor Evolution Is Directed by Cellular Responses to Survival Challenges. Y Zhang preprints.org (2024).
  7. Safari, A.; Rafie, P.; Taeb, S.; Najafi, M.; Mortazavi, S. M. J. Development of Lead-Free Materials for Radiation Shielding in Medical Settings: A Review. J. BioMed Phys. Eng. 2024, 14, 229–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Kim, S.-C.; Byun, H. Development of ultra-thin radiation-shielding paper through nanofiber modeling of morpho butterfly wing structure. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 22532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.