Here is the straight truth about Radon. The first in a series of what home owners and home buyers need to know, but don't.

No doubt if you have went to buy or sell a home, at some point the question of whether or not to have a Radon test done has come up. Below are some very interesting facts concerning Radon that the general public has probably never heard before. All information obtained came directly from EPA publications.

The EPA's 4 picocuries/cubic liter threshold is arbitrary. There have never been tests of the effects of varying amounts of radon in a residential home setting. The only tests to date have come from mine shafts in Pennsylvania where miners developed cancers, and where radon was among 25 or so radioactive elements present. The results of these findings were somehow extrapolated to homes. In other words, there has never been a single verifiable case where Radon in a residential home was linked to Cancer. Even the EPA has admitted it.

From a 1994 EPA report: "Facts Concerning Environmental Radon"

"To date the EPA has had little success in stimulating home owners to measure levels in their homes which would be the first step in the process of deciding on a course of action if a high radon level is found. This is partly because it is difficult to get people concerned that their home, a place that one looks to for security, is a potential source of hidden danger. Also, it has not yet been possible to generate convincing data on increased risk at or below 4-8 pCi/liter"

In the EPA's own words there has been no evidence of increased risk in the 4-8 range. Yet the EPA recommends remediation on any reading above 4pCi. In short, Radon mitagators charge homeowners $800 to $2000 setting up vent systems in their home for this number that appears to have been pulled out of thin air.

Finally, two most widespread claims about radon all come from one source, the EPA:

1) Radon is the second-leading cause of lung cancer in the United States.
2) 21,000 people die of lung cancer each year due to radon.

The concern here is that these two statements, long considered gospel, fail to separate smokers' vs. non smokers. Furthermore, the numbers used are on the high end of the actual findings which said 3,000 to 32,000. Therefore in my opinion it is impossible to make either claim above. There is absolutely no way to tell whether Radon or smoking caused cancer in the above claims.

Below is the sole source for these two claims which have been repeated thousands of times, so much, in fact, that they are considered gospel in the Real Estate industry. It is directly taken from the public summary of the EPA report, "Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation".

Note: "ever smokers" is defined as anyone who is smoking or has ever smoked.

"The BEIR VI committee's preferred central estimates are that about 1 in 10 of all lung cancer deaths amounting to 15,400 to 21,800 per year in the United States can be attributed to radon among ever-smokers and never-smokers together. The number of radon related lung cancer deaths resulting from (our analysis) could be as low as 3000 or as high as 32,000. Most of the radon-related lung cancers occur among ever-smokers, and because of the synergism between smoking and radon, many of the cancers in ever-smokers could be prevented by either tobacco control or reduction of radon exposure."

So...."15,400 to 21,800 per year in the United States can be attributed to Radon among ever-smokers and never-smokers together". So how could they possibly conclude that "21,000 people die in America from Radon each year?

Furthermore, if Radon truly was the second leading cause of Cancer in the United States, why then are there no public service announcements on television, radio, billboards, local news etc. like there is for smoking cigarettes? The ONLY time you ever hear about Radon is during the home buying process. There is nothing outside the realm of Real Estate that alerts the public to this "so called" danger.

Is Radon real? Absolutely. Does it pose a potential hazard to you or your family? You decide.

 

15 Comments on The TRUTH about Radon

APR
23
376,526 Points 23 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Mike, I wish more people understood some of the myths, misinformation, and downright incomprehensibility of some of the stuff out there regarding radon.  Thanks for taking this subject on.  Radon mitgation and testing is BIG BUSINESS more than anthing----kind of a "primer" for mold----and how to make that big business as well:)

6:51pm • #1
OCT
19

Recently trying to sell a 30 year old home, the buyer is using the radon test results to leverage the other minor repairs they want done that we originally had said we wouldn't pay for.  They are not at liberty to show us the exact test result, but they say its well above the wellness standard. I am stuck between a rock and a hard place, because if I refuse to do the minor repairs then thw EPA will make me do the remediation when they rat me out. RADON SCHMADON!

Ditto Dalcher
3:15pm • #2
OCT
25

So Mike, do you have your license to test for radon?  I'm guessing not otherwise you would have been through the radon licensing class and have a better insight on radon and it's effects.

5:57pm • #4
OCT
26

Lynda,

Nope, I sure don't. Again I will reitterate, If Radon really is that big of a public health threat, why then is there no education for the general public. When you are talking about a Radon licensing class, it is for people that want to get into the business of Radon, so of course it is going to appear as though it is a big deal. If you really want to get my attention or prove your point, show me ANYTHING (other than a real estate transaction) that is geared towards educating the general public about Radon and it's effects.

I'll be here waiting

6:10am • #5
376,526 Points 23 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Mike, as you know from my first comment----I agree with you and I think there is so much more to the Radon issue than has anything to do with its supposed dangers.  When an supposed issue gets "legislated" it becomes doubly problematic for an inspector.

9:20am • #6

Yeah I hear ya Charles!! Hope all is well with you by the way :-)

9:43am • #7
NOV
16
376,526 Points 23 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Hey Mike----I hope you are not holding your breath:)

2:21pm • #12
376,526 Points 23 Featured Posts Outside Blog

     Scott unfortunately this is a little bit like the guy that decides a horse is the best animal to haul a heavy load over the mountain only to find after he gets started that a burrow would have served him better.  Now he is too far along the trail to turn back----so he keeps whacking the horese on the backsides hoping that the poor animal will be able to carry the load.  All the investors in the transportation company are not about to go back and check to see how it all happened---they still have to keep flogging the poor horse as well.  Now the horse is far into the mountains and carrying everyone it has picked up along the way.  Sooner or later the horses back has to break---or perhaps he will make it after all.  I hope you are correct in a way, but I am still not holding my breath.

     Of the total cancer deaths, 3 to 14 % of the total cancer cases (not deaths by the way) are attributed to radon.  In the US that would be (to take a high round number) 10% of 174,000 new cases in the US.  So we have 17,400 cases of lung cancer attributed to Radon of which the "majority" of cases are cigarette related according to the EPA and WHO.  Now lets say it is 3%---the end total is even smaller.  Now, on the other side of the equation lets place the industry that has grown up around that small number of people "supposedly" affected by Radon.

     Like I said, I hope you are correct.

3:50pm • #15
NOV
17

I would be one of many that disagrees simply because there is absolutely no solid evidence that Radon causes cancer. Those pamphlets and reports from the EPA and WHO contain no DIRECT link to Radon as the single cause of cancer in their studies. The EPA has even admitted that they cannot prove it. So are we to just believe something that our own government admits they cannot prove?

Come on now.

....and of course anyone who offers Radon testing as part of their services is going to disagree with me and the thousands of others who believe it is a total sham. Just look up "Radon scam" or "Radon hoax" in any search engine, you will see exactly what I'm talking about. If it were "such a real danger" why then is there so much controversy surrounding it? I believe one of the many reasons is the fact that there is NO public awareness. No radio ads, no TV commercials, no evidence from health professionals, no hospital records, no "Radon as the cause of death" on death certificates, nothing about Radon being taught in public schools etc. Talk to anyone outside of the Real Estate realm about Radon and they don't even know what you are talking about.

3:55pm • #17
NOV
19

Well, I guess the same could be said about mold testing.  Why test when you know that mold is present in a home? You can see it, smell so you need to get rid of it.

I just have a difficult time believing that the EPA, the WHO, the American Cancer Society and about 15 States that regulate radon testing are wrong. 

9:03am • #18

Oh Scott,

Mold is a whole different ballgame. Mold is a very real danger and health threat. I agree that you really don't need to test for Mold if you can actually see it. See it, smell it, remove it. (but first remember that you need to take care of whatever caused it in the first place).

HOWEVER, you must keep in mind that 50% of all mold found in homes is hidden. (behind drywall, underneath carpet pad etc.) Millions of people have allergies to Mold spores. Some people are allergic to all of them while others are allergic to only certain spores. If someone is purchasing a home and say they or their kids have allergies to mold, then it is a smart idea to test for mold in the home via air samples. I have said this a thousand times and will continue to say it. Just because you cant see it or smell it, does not mean it isn't there. That is a proven fact. Whereas Radon is a colorless, odorless gas that has NOT been proven to cause any health threat in a residential setting.

9:38am • #19
376,526 Points 23 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Mike you know I am with you on the Radon but I am afraid I think that "mold" is subject to much the same sort of bad science and misinformation/disinformation that radon is and that documented health issues related to mold are equally scarce and can be attributed to any number of other contaminates in the same environment that the mold spores are in.

10:05am • #20

Hey Charles, that's cool,

I know there are many different opinions on both of these subjects. I can only go by what I have seen and personally experienced. I personally am allergic to mold spores and that came after being subjected to a number of lab tests from my own personal care physician. Also when watching the weather in many states they will advise people on the air quality such as pollen count, ragweed and mold spores in the air. That is because there are so many people with those particular allergies.

Now of course if they added the Radon count to those numbers, I am sure I would be thinking differently :-)

Take care

10:42am • #21

Comments have been disabled by the author

 
Logo_larger Rainmaker_large

MC2 Home Inspections Indianapolis Avon Plainfield Brownsburg Indiana

Indianapolis, IN

More about me…

MC2 Home Inspections

Address: Indianapolis, IN, 46268

Office Phone: (317) 605-3432

Email Me



Links

Archives

RSS 2.0 Feed for this blog

Find IN real estate agents and Indianapolis real estate on ActiveRain.