The linear no-threshold (LNT) model, which asserts that any level of ionizing radiation increases cancer risk, has been the basis of global radiation protection policies since the 1950s. Despite ongoing endorsements, a growing body of evidence challenges the LNT model, suggesting instead that low-level radiation exposure might reduce cancer risk, a concept known as radiation hormesis. This editorial examines the persistence of the LNT model despite evidence favoring radiation hormesis and proposes a solution: a public, online debate between proponents of the LNT model and advocates of radiation hormesis. This debate, organized by a government agency like Medicare, would be transparent and thorough, potentially leading to a shift in radiation protection policies. Acceptance of radiation hormesis could significantly reduce cancer mortality rates and streamline radiation safety regulations, fostering medical innovation and economic growth.