The analyses in this paper show that a number of biologically based models describe cancer incidence among the A-bomb survivors equally well. However, these different models can predict very different temporal patterns of risk after irradiation. No evidence was found to support the previous claim of Pierce and Mendelsohn that excess cancer risks for the solid tumors depend only upon attained age and not on age at exposure or time since exposure. Although the A-bomb survivor cohort is the largest epidemiological data set for the study of radiation and cancer, it is not large enough to discriminate among various possible carcinogenic mechanisms. Unfortunately for hypothesis generation, the data appear to be consistent with a number of different mechanistic interpretations of the role of radiation in carcinogenesis.