[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Radon and Never Smokers



Tom, Jim, Radsafers,

Why not have a critical look at the www.precura.de website; under

Publications you can download the Schneeberg study "High residential

radon health effects in Saxony".  There are long-term exposure

categories from <50 to >1500 Bq/m^3.  In Germany the medical records as

well as the occupational records are relatively reliable.  This report

does not seem to indicate an increased lung cancer risk up to

residential radon levels of 1000 Bq/m^3, and suggests a reduced relative

risk between the lowest category and 1000 Bq/m^3. Any comment? I include

a summary:



""Analysis of the likelihood of female inhabitants of Schneeberg and

Schlema (Saxony) contracting lung cancer as a result of radon exposure

in dwellings arising from mining and geologically-induced factors, and

studies concerning the reconstruction of exposure". 

J. Conrady, K. Martin, A. Poffijn, M. Tirmarche, J. Lembcke, D.M. Thai,

H. Martin

Executive Summary 

The available data from indoor radon studies were considered by BEIR VI

to be not yet sufficient to develop a general risk-assessment model or

to estimate precisely the magnitude of risk posed by radon in houses. In

its conclusions, BEIR VI recommends that the power of an indoor radon

study to detect an excess risk could be enhanced by targeting special

populations, such a population with high exposures, a broad range of

exposures, and low residential mobility. The preferential use of

non-smokers was not recommended. Otherwise the Schneeberg study

completely complies with BEIR VI recommendations regarding its

conditions. 

An increased and significant OR could be established with the Schneeberg

study by two forms of analysis in the higher exposure-categories only.

Below a radon-concentration of 48 * 106 (Bqh/m³) accordingly 1000 Bq/m³

and a residential duration of 20 years the OR is not elevated.

Significantly elevated OR after both forms of the analysis are

detectable at the exposition level of > 1500 Bq/m³ . 

The risk estimation of the Schneeberg study for lung cancer from indoor

radon is not in accordance with the results from miners and population

studies, which state an excess risk for 10%/100 Bq/m³ radon exposure. If

such risk estimates are true, in the highly exposed population of

Schneeberg such lung cancer risks must have been easily established.

That is not the case. From the risk estimate of the Schneeberg study

even a safe threshold value was found and a significantly elevated risk

appeared at >1.500 Bq/m³ only. Great efforts were taken to explain such

discrepancies in comparison to the results from other studies. One

reason could be the favourable study conditions of the Schneeberg study

(highly exposed population, mainly non-smoking women, exposed fraction

very high and a relatively high power etc.). The other reasons are

related to characteristics of the other studies especially with the low

exposure to indoor radon and a high exposure to tobacco smoke and a low

power. The results from the Schneeberg study are on the other hand

enough founded to make further research in that key population a top

priority and hesitate to introduce prematurely legal limits for indoor

radon."

 

Chris Hofmeyr

chofmeyr@nnr.co.za



-----Original Message-----

From: Tom Mohaupt [mailto:tom.mohaupt@WRIGHT.EDU]

Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:27 PM

To: Jim Nelson; RadSafe

Subject: Re: Radon and Never Smokers





Indeed an interesting study. Thanks Jim for bringing it to our

attention.

Some comments:



1) The relative risks presented in Table 5 adjusted with missing data

imputed. They state the relative risk as 1.55 for radon concentrations

greater than 140 Bq/m^3. From Table 4, concentrations greater than 200

Bq/m^3 (with imputed data) give a RR of 1.067 [Cases: 13/258; Controls:

23/487]. Big difference. New math?



2) Looking over Table 4, there really isn't a discernible difference

between the cases and controls. Any differences in percentages can

easily

be swayed by one or two cases (or controls) improperly grouped.



3) It doesn't look like Sweden has a genuine radon problem. The control

distribution of radon concentration should represent the country at

large.

In such case, less than 5% of the population is exposed to radon

concentration more than 200 Bq/m^3 (the European action level for new

construction) and 0.6% of the population is exposed to radon

concentrations

more than 400 Bq/m^3 ( the action level for existing structures).



4) I would have liked to see the authors include higher categories of

radon

concentrations, such as 800 and 1200 Bq/m^3, since these levels do exist

and are biologically more important. Using administrative values as data

cutoff point is OK as long as higher cutoff values are presented for

comparison (i.e., 400 Bq/m^3 to infinity represents an enormous spectrum

of

concentrations).



Tom







Jim Nelson wrote:

> 

> Interesting article recently published.

> http://www.epidem.com/article.asp?ISSN=1044-3983&VOL=12&ISS=4&PAGE=396

> 

> Residential Radon and Lung Cancer among Never-Smokers in Sweden

> 

> Frédéric Lagarde1; Gösta Axelsson2; Lena Damber3; Hans Mellander4;

Fredrik

> Nyberg1; Göran Pershagen1,5

> 

> >From the 1Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet,

> Stockholm;

> 2Department of Environmental Medicine, Göteborg University,

Gothenburg;

> 3Department of Oncology, University Hospital, Ume;

> 4Swedish Radiation Protection Institute, Stockholm; and

> 5Department of Environmental Health, Stockholm County Council,

Stockholm,

> Sweden.

> 

> EPIDEMIOLOGY 2001;12:396-404

> 

>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------

> 

> In this study, we attempted to reduce existing uncertainty about the

> relative risk of lung cancer from residential radon exposure among

> never-smokers. Comprehensive measurements of domestic radon were

performed

> for 258 never-smoking lung cancer cases and 487 never-smoking controls

from

> five Swedish case-control studies. With additional never-smokers from

a

> previous case-control study of lung cancer and residential radon

exposure in

> Sweden, a total of 436 never-smoking lung cancer cases diagnosed in

Sweden

> between 1980 and 1995 and 1,649 never-smoking controls were included.

The

> relative risks (with 95% confidence intervals in parentheses) of lung

cancer

> in relation to categories of time-weighted average domestic radon

> concentration during three decades, delimited by cutpoints at 50, 80,

and

> 140 Bq m-3, were 1.08 (0.8-1.5), 1.18 (0.9-1.6), and 1.44 (1.0-2.1),

> respectively, with average radon concentrations below 50 Bq m-3 used

as

> reference category and with adjustment for other risk factors. The

data

> suggested that among never-smokers residential radon exposure may be

more

> harmful for those exposed to environmental tobacco smoke. Overall, an

excess

> relative risk of 10% per 100 Bq m-3 average radon concentration was

> estimated, which is similar to the summary effect estimate for all

subjects

> in the main residential radon studies to date.

> 

> Keywords: case-control study; lung neoplasms; risk assessment; radon;

> never-smokers; cocarcinogenesis; tobacco smoke pollution;

environmental

> exposures

> 

> _________________________________________________________________

> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

> 

>

************************************************************************

> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe,

> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text

"unsubscribe

> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject

line.



-- 

Thomas Mohaupt, M.S., CHP

University Radiation Safety Officer



104 Health Sciences Bldg

Wright State University

Dayton, Ohio 45435

tom.mohaupt@wright.edu

(937) 775-2169

(937) 775-3761 (fax)



"An investment in knowledge gains the best interest." Ben Franklin

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text

"unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject

line.



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.