RE: Radon

[Sonter Mark <sonterm@EPA.NSW.GOV.AU>]

I thought that it was fairly well accepted that the Po210 on tobacco leaves

(and other leafy plants) comes from the radon and hence radon daughters in

the air......



Mark Sonter



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

	From:	Jim Nelson [SMTP:nelsonjima@HOTMAIL.COM]

	Sent:	Thursday, 28 June 2001 2:39

	To:	paulwilliam_s@YAHOO.COM; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

	Subject:	Radon 





	Paul,



	The tobacoo products would also contain similar concentrations of 

	polonium-210 whether in the U.S. or Sweden and likely be

proportional to 

	radium concentrations in the soils.  Do you think U.S. soils would

have a 

	higher concentration of radium then Sweden.  Do you know of any

analytical 

	results examining the thorium content?



	I have seen analyses by the tobacco companies on the polonium

content.

	Your points are well taken and of great interest.



	Jim Nelson



	>From: Paul William Shafer <paulwilliam_s@yahoo.com>

	>To: Jim Nelson <nelsonjima@HOTMAIL.COM>,

radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

	>Subject: Re: Radon and Never Smokers

	>Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 06:28:47 -0700 (PDT)

	>

	>Jim et al.

	>

	>I do not find this study at all surprising. It is very

	>interesting. Radon's daughter products inhaled in a

	>chronic exposure condition would have a greater lung

	>retention and greater effect than the thorium and

	>organics found in tobacco smoke. Certain tobaccos

	>grown in higher thorium soil (red clays for example in

	>Ky, Ga, Tn) would be worse than those grown in more

	>humic soils (Va, NC). Many Europeans smoke cigarettes

	>grown in low thorium soils with higher natural

	>nicotine (less chemically induced nicotine

	>enhancement).  These cigarettes are usually more

	>expensive.  This may partially explain longevity in

	>European cultures who have a larger smoking population

	>than the US.

	>

	>Paul Shafer

	>--- Jim Nelson <nelsonjima@HOTMAIL.COM> 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.

	> >

	>



	_________________________________________________________________

	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.

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

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.