AARST Radon Scientist Claim Nation's Policy a Failure

[epirad@mchsi.com]

Stewart,



I agree with your post below. 



 I believe we are also in agreement with the need to better follow (for BOTH 

cancer and non-cancer outcomes)individuals who received "therapeutic radiation 

exposure". For example, those individuals who received NRI or x-ray "therapy" 

for middle ear problems, etc or x-ray "therapy" used in children who were 

diagnosed with having enlarged thymus glands.  Notification of these 

individuals for suggested medical follow-up would be a good starting 

point.      



My only point in my previous post was to suggest that 20,000 was not the upper 

range suggested by the BEIR VI report that predominantly relied on findings 

from radon exposed underground miner Studies.



Regards, Bill

http://myprofile.cos.com/Fieldrw

> Hi Bill:

> 

> I'm certainly not disputing that radon exposure in homes likely causes health 

> effects. Whether it is an estimated  3,000 or 33,000 fatalities per year my 

> major 

> point is still the same. Why is our society so phobic about trivial exposures in 

> the present or 10,000 years in the future from nuclear waste disposal and former 

> nuclear defense site cleanup [which might result in a handfull of theoretical 

> deaths per year at most], when estimated risks [numbering in the thousands per 

> year] like those due to indoor radon get such lip service? Why is our nation 

> willing to spend hundreds of billions of $ to "cleanup" former defense sites 

> causing trivial exposures to anyone offsite or in elaborate schemes to reduce 

> future doses from nuclear waste disposal [which many antis claim is an 

> "unacceptable risk"] while at the same time we essentially ignore massive [by 

> comparison] indoor radon risks? What's wrong with this picture? The hyprocisy is 

> incredible. 

> 

> Back around 1978, I saw a news report on NBC news about a wonderful new active 

> solar system in New Hampshire which used solar energy to heat air which stored 

> its energy in a heat storage reservoir consisting of 80 tons of Conway, NH 

> grantite. After doing some calculations of likely radon levels inside this home, 

> I called Dr. John Harley, at the time director of DOE's Environmental 

> Measurements Lab [EML] to ask if he had a feel for the "escape coefficient" for 

> an atom of radon which would be generated in a 1" diameter piece of granite [the 

> size of the crush used in heat storage reservoirs]. He felt it would be in the 

> range of a few % and asked me what my interest was. I mentioned the NBC news 

> report on the solar home in NH and asked if DOE's Radon Studies Group which had 

> for many years had primary responsibility for making radon measurements inside 

> homes which used uranium mill tailings in Colorado, had ever made any airborne 

> radon measurements inside a solar heated home. His answer [in 1978!]: "Nobody 

> has 

> ever thought of it". Dr. Harley was quite interested in this home and I gave him 

> the details of the broadcast on the NBC Today Show that morning, although I did 

> not have the name of the homeowner. After DOE got no cooperation from NBC News 

> in 

> getting the homeowner's name and contact information, Dr. Harley asked if I 

> could 

> help him. After making a few calls to colleagues in NH at the State Health Dept. 

> I was able to get the name of the homeowner featured on NBC news, and the names 

> and addresses of several other NH homeowners who had even larger [100 tons vs. 

> 80 

> tons] of crushed granite as a heat storage reservoir.  Subsequently in a joing 

> effort between DOE's EML and the State of NH, measurements were made of airborne 

> radon inside the active solar heated home in New Hampshire featured on NBC News 

> which had 80 tons of crushed Conway, NH granite as the heat storage reservoir. 

> In 

> initial measurements in the summer with the windows to the home wide open, the 

> radon levels released by the heat storage bed astounded the DOE researchers 

> because they were so elevated.  The homeowner [who was so proud of his 

> superinsulated, active solar heated home] refused to permit the researchers back 

> in his house upon learning of the elevated radon levels observed to make 

> wintertime measurements when the levels would have been even higher since the 

> house was buttoned up. The homeowner didn't care the radon levels were elevated 

> but claimed completing the study might be "inimical to solar power development" 

> and would not cooperate!! As they say denial is not just a river in Egypt. 

> 

> Subsequently, when I was requested to assist DOE EML in making additional radon 

> measurements inside other solar heated homes with crushed granite heat storage 

> reservoirs, I found there was a DOE Solar Development division sponsored active 

> solar heated condo complex also in NH with a huge crushed granite heat storage 

> reservoir. When I was requested to do so at the EML's behest, I contacted the 

> DOE 

> Solar Division administrator and explained why another division of DOE needed 

> his 

> assistance in making indoor radon measurements, the DOE solar division 

> administrator was incredulous. He asked me how could a solar home have elevated 

> levels of airborne radon? I had to explain about the big bang, primordial 

> radioactive decay series and U-238 with a 4.5 billion year half life, the 

> uranium 

> decay series leading to Ra-226 and Rn-222, the nature of rocks in the earths 

> crust, etc. to make him realize this was real. I think for the poor DOE Solar 

> administrator it was just TMI [TOO MUCH INFORMATION].  The DOE Solar group 

> dragged its feet for 2 years before it finally cooperated with the DOE EML in 

> making some indoor radon measurements at the NH DOE solar condo complex. When 

> all 

> was said and done, the residents of this solar heated condo complex built with 

> DOE/HUD funding had higher airborne radon exposures that uranium miners were 

> allowed to receive under federal law. No surprise there since this could have 

> been easily calculated based on the pCi of U-238 per gram of granite in NH, the 

> escape coefficient for Rn-222 and the air exchange rate in the complex. At the 

> time homeowners were getting sizable tax credits to install active solar systems 

> including forced hot air systems using granite [as the rock of choice anywhere 

> in 

> New England] heat storage reservoirs. Rather droll.

> 

> I remember Dick Toohey, a respected scientist and HP, commenting in an HPS short 

> course on internal dosimetry some years ago that those in the HP profession who 

> dismiss the potential risk of radon in homes, and worry about eliminating 

> millirad exposures in their primary job duties should go out and get an honest 

> job.

> 

> Stewart Farber, MSPH

> farbersa@optonline.net

> [203] 367-0791

> 

> =====================

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 1/10/03 9:21:34 AM, epirad@mchsi.com wrote:

> 

> >Stewart,

> >

> >BEIR VI's best estimate of the number of lung cancer deaths attributed to radon 

> >in the U.S. each year was 15,400 for the exposure-age-duration model and 21,800 

> >for the exposure-age-concentration model. Many people take the average and use 

> >18,600.  The BEIR VI committee's uncertainty analyses using the constant 

> >relative risk model suggested that the number of cases could range from about 

> >3,000 to 33,000.  However, the actual 95% upper confidence limit for the 

> >exposure-age-concentration model was approximately 38,600, but the committee 

> >suggested that such an upper limit was unlikely.   

> >

> >

> >Hi Richard:

> >> 

> >> To respond to your comment.

> >> 

> >> The issue of the estimate of 20,000 deaths per year from indoor radon being 

> >> upper 

> >> bound estimates is only one [small] point about my posting vs. the AARST and 

> EPA 

> >> claims of harm. The actual risk may be zero but it is probably something 

> above 

> >> zero but far less than approximately 20,000 lung cancer deaths per year.

> >> 

> >> Stewart Farber, MS Public Health

> >> ===============

> >> 

> >> 

> >

> 

> 

> 

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

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/