Yes, the theory about tha beneficial effects of low-level radiation (called radiation hormesis) is an attractive one, however there was recently another meta-analysis of the long-term health of radiation workers which didn't seem to support it. So for now, the official IAEA model is still the linear no-threshold (LNT) one, which assumes that for later effects like cancer, the risk is directly proportional to the dose received and zero risk only occurs at zero dose.
Current protection regulations are based on a pretty large mass of scientifically produced evidence so, apart from some uncertainty still about what happens at chronic low level doses (as in areas of high background radiation) the risks and effects are already very well known with existing knowledge and 'technology'. The risk to you as a pilot from radiation exposure is just one small risk jostling aong with the many others we all live with day- to-day. Wiggy puts it very well - it's a personal cost versus benefit thing!
However, should you be unfortunate enough to develop cancer for whatever reason, you will at least have the benefit of much development of new (and expensive) technology being used in its treatment around the world today. Far from what hunterboy says, health authorities around the world are devoting large sums of money towards sophisticated radiotherapy equipment and expensive chemotherapy drugs. These developments have greatly improved survival rates and 'quality of life' for modern day patients compared with say, 50 years ago, and the technology is still improving. Of course, they never pay the professional staff enough
, but thats another story.......
Cheers
mphysflier
