The EPA’s Other ‘Hockey Stick’: the Radon Scam
posted at 10:13 pm on December 13, 2009 by directorblue
[ Enviro-nitwits ]
Every structure that is sold in the United States is generally required to undergo a “radon inspection.” This inspection is intended to detect the presence of an odorless, colorless, invisible gas that government bureaucrats claim is harmful to humans.
According to the EPA, “Exposure to radon in the home is responsible for an estimated 20,000 lung cancer deaths each year [and it] is a health hazard with a simple solution.”
Also featured prominently on the EPA’s website is a 2005 statement from the Surgeon General that states, “Indoor radon is the second-leading cause of lung cancer in the United States… It’s important to know that this threat is completely preventable.”
But is radon truly a menace? Or is it simply a made-up industry populated with bureaucrats, inspectors, manufacturers and distributors all of whom profit from the regulations?
If you sell a home and the resulting radon inspection yields a reading of 4 picocuries (pCi) per liter of air, you’ll probably be on the hook for the “abatement”. This means having a licensed installer rig up some PVC pipe, a vent and an electric fan in your basement while charging you a grand or two for his troubles.
But where did this magical 4 pCi figure come from? Curiously, a 1994 EPA report called Facts Concerning Environmental Radon stated that, “it has not yet been possible to generate convincing data on increased risk at or below 4-8 pCi/liter.”
Furthermore, the EPA’s proclamation that radon represents the second leading cause of lung cancer after smoking is misleading at best. Consider these two quotes from the public summary of the EPA report Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VI (also known as BEIR VI).
The BEIR VI committee’s preferred central estimates… are that about 1 in 10 or 1 in 7 of all lung cancer deaths-amounting to … about 15,400 to 21,800 per year in the United States- can be attributed to radon among ever-smokers and never-smokers together…
…The number of radon-related lung cancer deaths resulting from (our analysis) could be as low as 3000 or as high as 32,000. Most of the radon-related lung cancers occur among ever-smokers, and because of the synergism between smoking and radon, many of the cancers in ever-smokers could be prevented by either tobacco control or reduction of radon exposure.
“Ever-smokers” represents anyone who has ever smoked, regardless of age, duration/intensity of their smoking, or how long ago they quit. The second quote highlights the reality behind the “preferred central estimates”: most deaths pinned on radon actually were related to tobacco usage!
Put simply, “the obvious but unstated conclusion of the EPA’s BEIR VI report is clear… [they] don’t know if there is a quantifiable risk to healthy people from the levels of radon they suggest are dangerous…”
There have never been tests of the effects of varying amounts of radon in a typical home setting. The only tests originated in mine shafts in which radon was simply one of several dozen radioactive elements present. Based upon these measures, an arbitrary threshold of 4 pCi was established by bureaucrats who extrapolated the miners’ environment to those found in homes.
In other words, there has never been a verified case where home radon was linked to an occurrence of cancer. Not one case. Even a 2001 long-term study in Sweden, published in Epidemiology, concluded that “among never-smokers residential radon exposure may be more harmful for those exposed to environmental tobacco smoke.” In other words, it was difficult to characterize risk for radon along as opposed to second-hand smoke.
While the EPA crows that radon is the second-leading cause of cancer and that thousands die each year from radon, it is virtually impossible to tell whether radon or exposure to tobacco caused lung cancer!
And from these fabrications sprung countless regulations, bureaucrats, businesses, inspectors and agencies. A billion-dollar-plus industry.
All to solve a problem that you can’t see or smell and that no one ever knew existed until 1984. In fact, don’t be surprised to see Al Gore get involved with radon mitigation as this whole warming thing implodes. You see, the EPA employs 17,000 people and these bureaucrats enjoy nothing more than inventing new regulations with which they can control our lives. 17,000 people devoted to enslaving you to the cults of global warming climate change, radon and heaven knows what else.
That is why, when I’m elected President, the EPA will be limited to no more than 12 employees. I figure the fewer the bureaucrats, the less unconstitutional garbage they’ll come up with.
Hat tips: City Data and Natural Handyman. Cross-posted at: Doug Ross @ Journal.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Years ago, I analyzed the EPA’s Radon in Drinking Water regulation for the SBA. I find this quote of yours interesting:
I don’t quite remember all the specifics (this was back in 1999), but 4 pCi/L in air equates to 4,000 pci/L in water OR 4 pci/L in water equals 0.004 pci/L in air — whichever way you want to look at it.
The dearth of any risk or hazard info on Radon in water did not stop the EPA from setting the drinking water limit at 4pci/L … in WATER. That is to say, at 0.004 pci/L air-equivalent. One thousand times more stringent than any reasonable data could possibly justify. Now, any groundwater-based municipal water system must install expensive equipment to remove this infinitessimal amount of radon.
Just to give the uninitiated some perspective, the AVERAGE natural background radiation level (the outdoor concentration — i.e., the amount you and I breathe every day no matter where we go) is 3 pCi/L in air. Or, nearly three orders of magnitude greater than the amount allowed in your drinking water. I don’t think I need to mention that this level is uncontrolled, uncontrollable, and constant AND is the amount of radiation (at a minimum) that every living creature on Earth has been exposed to all day, every day, since the origin of life on the planet.
The purpose, of course, of regulating Radon in drinking water to such a low level was two-fold:
1) There is no water with Radon levels so high that it would make sense to regulate it; so the threshold must be lowered until a significant number of water systems become subject to regulation; AND,
2) There was (at that time) no way to directly regulate or mandate concentrations of Radon in indoor air, because of individual property rights. That is, the EPA has no jurisdiction over your home or what goes on inside it. Whether realistic or not, the purpose — the GOAL — of the Radon in Drinking Water regulation was to create a backdoor into your home such that the EPA would eventually gain jurisdiction to regulate radon levels within your home. Once radon within homes was placed within EPA jurisdiction (presumably by Judicial Fiat), then EPA easily argue for jurisdiction over EVERYTHING within your home.
I say that this was the case “at the time” only because the Constitution, and even the Rule of Law, are entirely defunct in this country now. The EPA now UNARGUABLY has jurisdiction within your home, without your home, within or without your very body, to regulate whatever they wish, whenever they wish, for whatever reason they wish. This is UNARGUABLY so because the Government SAYS it is so (or would say so, if it/they were asked). There is nothing else.
Not anymore.
Eyas on December 13, 2009 at 10:47 PM
I should also have started out by saying that this is a great article. I’m glad someone is paying attention to it.
One last interesting point/question:
EPA has a habit (mandate?) of speaking of the benefits of their regulations in terms of “lives saved” (remind anyone of “jobs saved”) or in terms of “cancer cases avoided”.
Have you ever wondered what the total would be if all of the claimed “lives saved” by all EPA regulations were added up?
My personal guess is that the EPA has saved at least several hundred quadrillion (~400,000,000,000,000,000) lives so far.
And all for merely several hundred billion dollars**. They’re so cost effective.
They’re sooo cool!
**(in current dollars, obviously. because the change in your pocket may very well be worth several hundred billion DOLLARS by the end of 2010)
Eyas on December 13, 2009 at 10:58 PM
We’re trying to sell our house in Illinois and had to have a radon “mitigation” system installed to the tune of $800 plus. The house has a walk-out basement which opens to 1-acre of trees and wildlife. Can’t imagine where all the horrible stuff is that is supposed to do us in. Ridiculous stuff like this and a property tax rate almost 6 x what we now have in Alabama explains why Illinois is hurting so much. By the way, the house has been on the market since April…
texabama on December 13, 2009 at 11:21 PM
I had forgotten about this issue, Blue. Here are some more helpful facts. Radon is one of the noble gases. Noble gases have one thing in common — they do not ordinarily react with any other chemicals to form compounds. This means that there is no mechanism for radon to be retained in the body, unlike, say iodine. Iodine 131 is radioactive, and is released in significant quantities when U235 is fissioned. The problem with I131 is that iodine is needed by the body, and is concentrated in the thyroid. This is one reason why regular iodine is added to table salt — to keep a surplus of iodine in the body, so the iodine 131 will not accumulate in the thyroid.
Nice article.
To texabama — Glad I sold my IL home (with basement) in 1995, just prior to the new radon regs. The property taxes were outrageous then, I can just imagine now. Hope your home sells soon.
GnuBreed on December 14, 2009 at 12:38 AM
I know it sounds childish, but I like blog posts that contain lots of pictures.
Very interesting information also, Eyas.
BadgerHawk on December 14, 2009 at 8:54 AM
Don’t forget, these were some of the first green jobs the govt created. They created the fear and they created the fix.
Kissmygrits on December 14, 2009 at 9:04 AM
From NIH…
Jeff2161 on December 14, 2009 at 12:29 PM
From, Junk Science…
Jeff2161 on December 14, 2009 at 12:43 PM
Figures.
MassVictim on December 14, 2009 at 2:00 PM
Well, given the fact that my back yard is about 98% granite (dig down 20 inches and there it is – my neighbor, who is the original owner of his house, said they had to blast out all the foundations) and given the fact that when I bought my house it tested at 20 pCi, I was actually glad that I was able to get a grand knocked off of my closing costs to put one in.
4 pCi may be a bit rediculous for a regulation, but 20 can’t have been good.
crazy_legs on December 14, 2009 at 2:19 PM
crazy_legs,
One of the figures that has also stuck in my head since I dealt with radon issues, was a little factoid from a guy living someplace in Massachusetts whose basement had a radon level of 8 MILLION pCi/l. As far as I know, he’s still living and cancer-free.
You needn’t have worried at all about a level of 20, or 200 for that matter. And that’s assuming that, at some level, radon can cause lung cancer.
I probably would be more than a little disconcerted by a level of 8 MILLION; but, then, the remediation usually consists of installing a fan in your basement to blow the radon outside. So, better safe than sorry is a fairly good rule for homeowners, but not a terribly good justification for an insistent, and vastly overblown, fear-campaign followed by massive regulation.
Eyas on December 15, 2009 at 10:38 PM