Before I begin I have to let you know I borrowed that title.
As any dedicated Realtor would do, I recently did some research into a concern I had about an inspection. What I stumbled upon was one of the biggest conspiracies since the Kennedy assassination.
While radon testers, radon mitigators, the EPA, and some medical and real estate professionals want everyone to believe that "Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer after smoking" there is NO PUBLISHED EVIDENCE pertaining to residential radon levels and their relationship to lung cancer.
In fact, the only available information on the effects of Radon are studies done on Uranium miners. The EPA funded study "Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VI" by the National Academy of Sciences that produced the EPA recommendation of an annual average of no more than 4 pCi/L is based solely on the Uranium miners and advanced mathematical formulas that estimate the effects in a residentail or commercial indoor setting.
Interestingly, while the EPA recommendation (4pCi/L) is what radon specialists use as a guide to determine whether mitigation is needed, The National Council of Radiation Protection recommends a level of no more thatn 8 pCi/L indoors, and in Canada the level is closer to 20 pCi/L.
So when Radon "is estimated to be responsible for 21000 deaths from lung cancer annually" the word estimated is not used because of some uncertainty in the exact number but because there are NO statistics for Radon related lung cancer deaths in the general public.
In fact, the actual estimates from the EPA study range all the way from a high of 32000 to a more realistic low of 3000 and more specifically, between 2900 to 2100 in non-smokers. It is also estimated by the EPA study that approximately 1/3 of those deaths could be avoided by reducing radon in homes to below recommended levels. This means that by mitigating Radon, a non-smoking homeowner reduces their risk of radon related lung cancer from 2 in 21000 to 1 in 21000.
Also interesting, is the fact that most mitigation is done based on the results of one or two 48-72hr tests even though according to the American Lung Association "a long term (over 90 days) test gives a more accurate annual average Radon level thatn a short term test, because Radon levels vary day to day and season to season."
To me there are way to many gaps in the science to even worry about Radon in the home. The fact that at least "8 large scale residential studies of (Radon in) households around the world" were not used by The National Research Council in any of it's risk projection models also leads me to believe those numbers were to low to cause the necessary scare. The scare that is needed due to the the fact that Radon specialists need to be EPA or state certified, meaning that the EPA is generating income from the certification and education of Radon Specialists, which is sure a good way for the Agency to make back the money it spent sponsoring BEIR VI. And the best way to make sure their are plenty of specialists is to create a need for them with a low recommended maximum radon level.
Please feel free to comment on this information. It's info you won't find from most Realtors because they are too concerned with thier exposure to liability but I am more concerned with promoting the truth.
Jeff