[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Radon Field Day
Philippe,
People start out volunteering to smoke then become
addicted. Lung cancer is a serious problem. The death
rate for lung cancer is over 160,000 people each year
just in the U.S. Because of the magnitude of the lung
cancer incidence and its poor survivial rate, even
secondary casues of lung cancer are very important.
My point to Howard was that I did not think it was
ethical or practical to recruit individuals and expose
them to varying degrees of radon exposure for the next
20 years.
But, Phillipe, I do agree that we should put a major
public health focus on the reduction of smoking. In
addition, efforts should be placed on limiting smoke
exposure to those individuals who do not volunteer, but
are passively exposed such as children.
The two most effective ways to reduce the rate of
smoking is via increased tax on cigarettes and by local
ordinances prohibiting smoking in public places. If you
do not currently have a smokefree ordinance in your
community I would encourage each radsafer to start such
an effort similar to the one in Iowa City:
http://www.cleanairforeveryone.org/
Regards, Bill Field
> All smokers volunteer, in full knowledge, to get lung cancer. How many
> millions are they only in the USA? If our collective objective is to reduce
> the number of lung cancers, why attack first the major cause and then move
> to the second and third ones ? It is matter of cost-benefit analysis.
>
> Philippe Duport
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <epirad@mchsi.com>
> To: <hflong@postoffice.pacbell.net>
> Cc: "Richard F. Orthen" <rorthen@EARTHSCIENCES.NET>; "Radsafe BBS"
> <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:02 PM
> Subject: Re: Radon Field Day
>
>
> > Howard,
> >
> > I don't think anyone wants to volunteer to get lung
> > cancer.
> >
> > Bill Field
> > > Good News!
> > > The Field (Iowa) and Wang (China) studies do suggest more frequent lung
> cancer
> > > at
> > > highest radon exposure than at lesser exposure, but that may be because
> there is
> > > LESS lung cancer at moderate exposure (37 Bq/cubic meter, 1 pCi/L up to
> 4x that)
> > > than with less exposure, according to the Cohen USA study!
> > >
> > > All three studies have confounders which the authors struggled to
> remove, but
> > > are
> > > likely not to be improved upon until we have placebo controlled radon
> exposure.
> > > Any volunteers?
> > >
> > > Howard Long
> > >
> > > "Richard F. Orthen" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Another from IEM's news desk:
> > > >
> > > > May 17, 2002 - Ascribe News (05/16/02) - University of Iowa Study
> Finds
> > > > Health Risk From Residential Radon Exposure Higher Than Previously
> > > > Estimated - The health risk posed by residential radon exposure may
> have
> > > > been substantially underestimated in previous studies, according to
> > > > investigators in the University of Iowa College of Public Health.
> Long-term
> > > > exposure to radon gas in the home is associated with increased lung
> cancer
> > > > risk and presents a significant environmental health hazard. "Our
> findings
> > > > indicate that the exposure assessment models used in many previous
> studies
> > > > may have underestimated the risk posed by residential radon exposure
> by 50
> > > > percent or more," said lead author R. William Field, Ph.D., a research
> > > > scientist with the UI Department of Epidemiology. The results of the
> study
> > > > appear in the May 2002 issue of the Journal of Exposure Analysis and
> > > > Environmental Epidemiology. The UI researchers examined several
> exposure
> > > > assessment methods used by previous residential radon studies
> performed in
> > > > North America, Europe and China. They compared these models to a more
> > > > comprehensive exposure method that linked a person's movement to
> various
> > > > radon measurements within a home. All of the models were assessed
> using the
> > > > same study population. The exposure methods used by previous studies
> all
> > > > produced lower risk estimates than the comprehensive method. The
> highest
> > > > degree of error was noted for methods that based risk solely on
> basement
> > > > radon measurements. "While radon concentrations tend to be highest in
> > > > basements, people typically spend limited time there," Field said. "A
> more
> > > > accurate assessment of risk can be formulated by linking multiple
> radon
> > > > measurements taken within a home to where and how much time an
> occupant
> > > > spends in the home."
> > > >
> > > > Rick Orthen
> > > >
> > >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> > > > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> > > > privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in
> error,
> > > > please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any
> other
> > > > use of the email by you is prohibited.
> > >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> > > >
> ************************************************************************
> > > > 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 can view the Radsafe archives at
> http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
> > >
> > > ************************************************************************
> > > 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 can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
> > >
> > ************************************************************************
> > 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 can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
> >
> >
>
> ************************************************************************
> 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 can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/
>
************************************************************************
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 can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/