RADON

How come we never noticed? EPA says 20,000 Americans Killed by radon in 2009

An email below from Michael Anderson, Program Director, Environmental Health Committee. See here

The World Health Organization has released their mortality statistics for 2009 and a startling statistic about in-home causes of death surfaced. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, Radon Gas causes over 20,000 deaths annually in the United States. To put that into perspective, Radon caused more deaths in 2009 than drunk driving, fires, and carbon monoxide.



The EPA is urging the U.S. media to assist in creating awareness of this silent killer by declaring January National Radon Awareness Month. Radon problems have been detected in almost every county in the United States. The Surgeon General and American Lung Association have also taken action to help prevent these needless deaths by recommending that all homes in the U.S. be tested regardless of geographic location or foundation type.

Please help promote this very worthy cause by writing an article or running a news story about indoor Radon Gas. Together, we can work toward saving thousands of lives in 2010! You can learn more about Radon Gas and National Radon Action Month 2010 at RadonMonth.Wordpress.com .

I don't know who is the wackiest here: The EPA or Mr Anderson. At least I have done what he asked -- though not perhaps in the way he wished. Mr Anderson does not seem to welcome debate. The email address from which the above originated was: DoNotReply@radonmitigationsystem.info. The graphic above originates from the EPA. One suspects heroic assumptions behind it

More:

The EPA goes ever further downhill scientifically

We read here a summary of the evidence by a consultant on the subject:

"There are NO valid studies that have conclusively demonstrated that typical residential exposures to radon increase the risk of cancer at all. In fact, all of the valid studies performed thus far show one of two things: 1) No risk and/or 2) a decreasing risk of cancer."

"So, just how hazardous is radon? We have to remember that there are degrees of exposure, ranging from massive doses seen in miners who also inhale other contaminants, to minimal, negligible doses seen in residential scenarios. The “hazard” (risk) is incumbent on the dose received, and the duration of the received dose, not on some absolute “harm” associated with the radioactive gas at any dose. Elevated levels of radon (and thus the SLRDs) are unquestionably a significant health hazard, but similarly, we simply do not see those kinds of elevated levels in homes, and at concentrations of radon seen in residences, there appears to be no elevated risk (and many studies show the risk of cancer is actually is lower in an house with a little radon than in an house with “no” radon.)"

When a consultant, whose job depends on being right, to the point of probably being legally culpable for bad advice, contradicts the accepted EPA "wisdom," I think it's probably a good bet we can trust him. He also gives references that allow us to check his conclusions.

For a further debunking of the EPA crap see: Hyping Health Risks – Environmental Hazards in daily Life and the Science of Epidemiology by Geoffrey C. Kabat. The author is a cancer epidemiologist and currently holds the position of senior epidemiologist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City. Chapter 6 provides chapter and verse on radon and studies about its impact on cancer, or lack of impact unless you happen to be a smoker.

Editorial reviews from Amazon:

"Hyping Health Risks provides a valuable counterpoint to the confusion and paranoia that seems to grow proportionate to the constant barrage of health risk studies. Examining four of the most persistent and controversial issues in public health, Kabat's lucid and well-written book gives the lay reader all the basic concepts and epidemiological tools she needs to understand the available evidence. His presentation allows us to better discriminate between what matters to our health and what matters to the 'hypers'-a wide array of stakeholders, some well-intentioned, some much less so. -- Ernest Drucker, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Geoffrey C. Kabat, a respected epidemiologist, provides an insider's account of how a number of ostensible health hazards have been blown out of proportion. While we face a daily barrage of health scares, Kabat cuts through the confusion and provides a lucid and rigorous rationale for rejecting much of the fear culture that permeates our society. -- Shelly Ungar, University of Toronto

With clarity and dispassion, Geoffrey C. Kabat challenges widespread beliefs that secondhand smoke, low levels of radon, and other ostensible environmental nemeses are certain killers. In making his case, Kabat draws extensively on scientific evidence while shunning rhetoric and political posturing. The result is an admirable search for scientific truth amid a sea of conflicting and often uninformed opinions. -- Leonard Cole, Rutgers University

Posted by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).