[ RadSafe ] Diesel exhaust and underground mining vs other factorsfor lun...
Andycgeo at aol.com
Andycgeo at aol.com
Sun Mar 4 07:44:24 CST 2012
The lung cancer incidence in the US is about 160,000. Of these lung cancers
about 140,000 are due to smoking and another 20,000 due to radon. Radon is
the second leading cause of lung cancer.
In a message dated 3/3/2012 12:12:27 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
sjd at swcp.com writes:
To answer my own uncertainty, "In the United States, smoking
is estimated to account for 87% of lung cancer cases (90% in men and
85% in women)."
Eighty seven percent of 450,000 is 391,500 lung cancer
deaths per year from smoking.
The estimate quote is from Wikipedia and is sourced (fn. 23).
At 09:53 PM 3/2/2012, you wrote:
> The dispute is not over whether or not radon causes
> cancer. The dispute is over how much cancer is caused by
> radon. The EPA estimated (in 2003) that radon causes about 21,000
> lung cancer deaths per year. This estimate was based on BEIR VI.
> The annual death toll from cigarette smoking is around
> 450,000. (How much of that is lung cancers I do not know.)
> I am eagerly awaiting the JNCI paper, which will be
> available on the afternoon of Monday, March 5.
>At 03:15 PM 3/2/2012, you wrote:
>>I think you are overselling that part of a sentence. While I haven't
>>seen the article, I suspect what they mean is that even when the other
>>factors are controlled statistically, risk of dying of lung cancer
>>increases as REC exposure increase. This does not mean that researchers
>>are saying that silica, asbestos, non-diesel exhaust-related polycyclic
>>hydrocarbons, respirable dust, and radon do not cause cancer, but rather
>>their results are not explained by those other cancer causing agents.
>>If you did a little bit of research on your source, you would find that
>>Journal of the National Cancer Institute, in which this paper will
>>appear, has over 200 papers, articles, and editorials which mention
>>radon (though most are not about radon), and a quick perusal shows
>>almost all agree that radon can cause cancer, though there is discussion
>>about the numbers. The International Agency for Research on Cancer,
>>cited as the agency that classified diesel exhaust as a probable
>>carcinogen, also classifies radon as a carcinogen.
>>I suspect that when you read this entire article, it will not in fact
>>support your position.
>>From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>>[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of patricia lewis
>>Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 11:50 AM
>>To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
>>Cc: Edward Calabrese; patricia lewis; Jerry Cuttler; Doug Boreham; TD
>>Subject: [ RadSafe ] Diesel exhaust and underground mining vs other
>>factorsfor lung cancer
>>Studies show exposure to diesel exhaust may increase lung cancer
>>(all author contact info is within the article)
>>SNIP: "The researchers found a statistically significantly increased
>>of lung cancer with increasing REC exposure among underground workers.
>>evidence of increased risk was also shown for longer-term workers above
>>ground who were exposed to elevated levels of REC (Respirable Elemental
>>Carbon - a surrogate of diesel exhaust exposure). Other workplace
>>such as silica, asbestos, non-diesel exhaust-related polycyclic aromatic
>>hydrocarbons, respirable dust, and radon, had little or no effect on the
>>findings." Repeat: ".... and radon, had little or no effect on
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
More information about the RadSafe