WITH RADON GAS SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN TO BE THE SECOND LEADING CAUSE OF LUNG CANCER (The FIRST is smoking) AND NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF LUNG CANCER FOR NON SMOKERS, I HAVE TO ASK;
Why is it taking so long for that message to be understood by the masses?
Have you noticed anyone down-playing the importance of radon testing?
Why would some one do that? Is there some loose talk of it being a scam??
A question for AGENTS alone: do you look at a radon test as an annoyance?
I see the importance of Radon Testing, but many of my clients do not see it as an issue. Why is that? I think it mostly has to do with the $ it costs for the extra test.
Sure, Im sure that having an extra cost will be a deterent. You can't force people to have a test. But the test doesnt even have to be at the transaction time, and there are tests costing only 25 dollars. Every home owner should have one. Maybe every house to be sold should require a mandatory test. I mean why try to hide it?
As for the majority of people thinking it is not an issue- well i have to wonder who is advising them in that direction? I talk to so many people who still do not know about the real dangers of radon decay products.
I dont think it is wise to dismiss a test for a cancer causing agent in a home though.
Gotta think- How much do chemotherapy treatements cost?
With children and elderly being affected the most, how important is saving some money compared to lives?
In the future when more people know just how dangerous high levels of radon gas and its decay products can be,will the question be: Why didnt you alert me about this??
What is really sad is that it is pretty easy to fix once it is found.
Howdy and evenen Joseph
Here in my area, a good many of the Real Estate Agents tell their clients. That Radon Gas is not a big deal to worry about. I have actually had Agents talk a client out of having the test, after the client has setup having a Radon test. And when I have ask an Agent about it, I usually get told, it just takes up to much of their time.
I think there is still a lack of hard scientific evidence that supports that it is really an issue. I know it is big business but most of the so called science behind how dangerous radon is, is actually seriously flawed.
You must be joking.
http://www.epa.gov/radon/pubs/physic.html#HealthRisk
this is just a snippet from the EPA web site that cites just some of the available references to scientific studies.
""More is known about the health risk of radon exposure to humans than about most other human carcinogens. This knowledge is based on extensive epidemiological studies of thousands of underground miners, carried out over more than fifty (50) years world-wide, including miners in the United States and Canada. In addition to the miner data, experimental exposures of animals confirm that radon and its decay products can cause lung cancer.""
The NAS report, published in 1991 (National Academy of Sciences, 1991, Comparative Dosimetry of Radon in Mines and Homes. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.), concluded that it is reasonable to extrapolate from the miner data to a residential situation, but that the effective doses per unit of exposure for people in their homes is approximately thirty percent (30%) less than for the miners. In its analysis, NAS considered variables such as the amount and type of dust to which the radon decay particles would attach, the breathing rate of working miners compared to that of people at home, and the presence of women and children in the homes. EPA has adjusted its residential risk estimates accordingly. The result is still considerable -- EPA now estimates that approximately 14,000 lung cancer deaths in the United States per year are due to residential radon exposures, with an uncertainty range of 7,000 to 30,000. As more data are gathered about residential radon exposures, the risk estimates may be adjusted further. Enough data exists now, however, to be able to say with certainty that thousands of preventable lung cancer deaths annually in the United States are attributable to indoor residential exposure to radon.
I'll give you this...
Caoimhín P. Connell does a good job of disputing the existing STUDIES that have evidence of radon causing cancer. Obviously, He is not satisfied with the current studies and almost goes as far as saying that exposure to radioactive ALPHA PARTICLES is GOOD FOR YOU?
Caoimhin IS a very clever man. His skills of reasoning are sublime. I'm sure he could dispute any subject with his methods of dismantling scientific studies. With reasoning such as his you could say that a black hole does not exist. Or anything out there without exact 100 % scientific representstion.
With reasoning such as his if he decided the earth was FLAT IM SURE HE COULD MAKE AN EXCELLENT CASE.
MAYBE HE BELONGS TO THIS GROUP? http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm
I DONT SEE WHY HE IS SO ADAMANT ABOUT DISPROVING THE HARD SOUGHT KNOWLEDGE WE HAVE SO FAR ON RADON? IF HE IS SO BRILLIANT THEN MAYBE HE SHOULD CONDUCT HIS OWN STUDY. OR MAYBE OFFER TO LIVE IN A HOME WITH EXTREMELY ELEVATED LEVELS OF RADON GAS AND PUT HIS MONEY WHERE HIS MOUTH IS.
Of course he thinks it is big business. Ever thought that he is tring to play the hush hush game on the other SIDE to preserve the EXISTING BIG BUSINESS.
Hi Joe----well I see you have found Caoimhin's work----if after reading what he has to say about it you still want to rely on the faulty EPA studies----there is nothing I can add. Honestly I am not siding with either side and trying to leave room for the possibility of the truth filtering out. I just think it odd that if it is such a big deal why isn't it being shouted from every bill board and every other TV add and on the radio? There is the distinct possibility that it is because it is a bunch of hooey. The loudest voices by far are the ones in the business of selling the hooey-----and they all use the same flawed documentation. If there is danger---get the science right and then have at it.
To someone saying there is no way that radon causes cancer- I have to disagree. Just because there isnt 100% conclusive PROOF out there YET, does not mean it isnt true. I dont need tons of proof to understand that a radioactive alpha particle releasing its energy in the soft tissues of the lung lining is going to be bad and HELLO.... will probably lead to lung cancer.
Why isnt it being shouted from the billboards?? What Is?? Who does that for ANYTHING???
I think it is very hard for lawyers to sue someone over radon. That's why we don't see a lot about it.
BEFORE THE TEXAS MOLD HOUSE, who cared about mold?- but now its a buzz word... more than 10,000 varieties --but soo much fear mongering of toxic strains.Thats a huge industry now.
I'm talking about one thing here- RADON-
Radon gas will decay into alpha particles, People HAVE gotten cancer from it. What-- honestly ---is the main cause to scoff at the dangers of it?
I mean why? because you really want to keep people from making money on it, until when? When they do conclusively prove all minutiae? How many people will be frantically back-pedaling then?
With people dying from the lung cancer caused by radon, how can we callously dismiss it as bullcrap?
here is a link to the CANCER SURVIVORS AGAINST RADON:
here is a WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION link to more informastion on cancer and radon:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs291/en/index.html
Here is a link to the latest study out of the University of Iowa;
If you are at all intrigued by what Caoimhin's has to say about Radon----you might be interested in what he has to say about mold. Mold and Radon have many of the same issues in terms of public awareness and false science.
But what im saying is that science itself is subject to be falsified and Caoimhin knows exactly how to discredit something. What he excells at is debate.
Again , i say, with his methods - he could reason that the world is flat.
Joesph, I am largely playing devil's advocate here----I have no way of knowing what the "truth" is. I do know that believing in things I don't understand will not make it become the truth. I am open to either side or somewhere in between being the truth---I certainly am not convinced by the radon side at this point. I don't see anything the radon side is putting forth that is anywhere near as documented as what Caoimhin argues. Even the Ohio studies are not very new at the rate information changes. Part of it attributes eating meat to being a component. I think we don't understand all we know about it yet, and I am doing my best to keep an open mind so that there is room for the truth to sneak in:)
I understand- there is a lot more to discover on the subject- but it cannot discount what we do know presently.
I have often found elevated radon levals in homes, and in some of these Homes, I have had the oppertunity to discover that the previous occupant or a family member had succumbed to lung cancer. The common thread is that they were known to be Non Smokers.
Now maybe the problem is discerning the dynamic conditions in which radon gas decay products will cause the most lung cancer as opposed to the least.
We will slowly be hearing more and more about Radon in the news.
They are thinking about reducing the US radon levels from 4 pCiL to 2.7 pCiL which is consistent with the european action level.
Something to REALLY consider is this: Seeing that Radon gas exposure has lead to lung cancer with many people. Knowing that LUNG CANCER has a 1 in 5 rate of survival. Knowing that homes that are being built tighter and more energy efficient are also increasing the amount of gass that is circulating in the home.
How much harder do you suppose it is to gather evidence and complete the full scientific research when people are dying off from it every day?
Would THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY industry be worried about Radon ? yes becuse tighter homes hold more radon in
Would some big interests with property investments be worried about Radon? of course, they dont want to have to deal with extra cost of any needed mititgation.
Has anyone in their past ever tried to spin the truth in order to protect their money? You betcha! IT HAPPENS ALL AROUND US ALL THE TIME.
Are contractors pissed that there are regulations and licensing required to install mitigation systems? oh yes, Installation is relatively easy work, but it needs to be done right and you need knowledge of radon science.
How can Radon be invented as a money machine when you can buy a test for your self at ace hardware, or get one from the state for free?
BTW ...Is it clear enough to the masses that a LICENSED Radon measurement tech CAN NOT install a radon mitigation system as there is a different license required to be a mitigation installer?
So to be clear -- what im saying is THERE IS NO BENEFIT TO THE TECHNICIAN IF THEY DISCOVER HIGH LEVELS OF RADON, ESPECIALLY SINCE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ENTITY MUST PERFORM THE MITIGATION. How could you fake high levels anyway? Carring some uranium in your pockets?
Comments(14)