Re: Radon and Lung Cancer: What the studies really say.

[BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>]

On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Kai Kaletsch wrote:



> pCi/L is not a unit of dose or exposure. It is a unit of concentration. You

> may be able to argue that pCi/L from your data can be used as a proxy

> measurement for average exposure in a county to do a test on LNT, but you

> can not use it as a measure of personal exposure. You can not say which

> "dose region" your studies give us insight into, because you cannot measure

> dose.



	--It is very widely agreed that a measurement of radon

concentration in a home give an estimate of its occupants' exposure to

radon progeny. The usual conversion is 0.2 WLM/year per pCi/L.

This is used in essentially all case-control studies as well as my

studies, and in estimates by EPA and other agencies.



> There are certainly people

> who claim to see increasing relative risk with increasing radon exposure.

> See for example:

>

> http://members.shaw.ca/eic/odds.pdf

>

> This goes down to 50 Bq/m3.



	--I tried this address and nothing came up. There are a few data

points below 3 pCi/L (110 Bq/m3), but if you look at the error bars, the

most that can be said is that they "are consistent with" LNT, or

"consistent with" increasing risk with increasing radon exposure. They are

also consistent with decreasing risk with increasing radon exposure in

that low dose range.



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

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/