Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've bought several houses in the past, and my new purchase is the first one I have ever tested for radon. Frankly, I've never even heard of the supposed impact on our health at all.
My test came in at 1.9 pCi/l. Less than half of the recommended EPA safe level of 4.0. I guess 1.9 isn't exactly safe either! The house I'm buying has an active radon mitigator (still not sure which kind, I guess there are several). Should I attempt to mitigate further??
Now I'm wondering how bad the homes I've owned in the past would have tested. I understand the average homeowner has never tested their home.
So, is this much ado about nothing? Or are homeowners putting their heads in the sand regarding this problem?
IMO, it's a head in the sand thingy, but exacerbated by the entities who benefited in the past from pretending radon was nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, the U.S. government was one of these entities, as a Google search about radon's history will reveal.
Yes, it's a real threat. Minnesota is one of the states with higher radon levels and the State of Minnesota Health Department publishes this informative brochure: http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/e...onbrochure.pdf
I've bought several houses in the past, and my new purchase is the first one I have ever tested for radon. Frankly, I've never even heard of the supposed impact on our health at all.
My test came in at 1.9 pCi/l. Less than half of the recommended EPA safe level of 4.0. I guess 1.9 isn't exactly safe either! The house I'm buying has an active radon mitigator (still not sure which kind, I guess there are several). Should I attempt to mitigate further??
Now I'm wondering how bad the homes I've owned in the past would have tested. I understand the average homeowner has never tested their home.
So, is this much ado about nothing? Or are homeowners putting their heads in the sand regarding this problem?
I recently bought a five year-old home. An independent test for radon, where the detector was placed in the basement for two days, gave a reading of 5.9 pCi/l. This is 50% above the EPA-recommended limit of 4.0 pCi/l. Before purchasing a radon mitigation system, I researched the technical literature on radon and its health impacts. Here is a summary of what I found.
The non-mainstream school of thought, as represented by the Worcester, MA, study published in 2008, demonstrates a hormetic (beneficial) effect of radon exposure in the range about 2-7 pCi/l. In that range, radon exposure is associated with decreased incidence of lung cancer relative to the zero exposure case. Think of it like a vaccine.
The mainstream school of thought, as represented mainly by linear extrapolation of high radon exposure miner studies to low exposure residential conditions, and also by direct residential measurements like the Iowa study, assumes that any level of radon exposure is harmful. The Iowa study is probably the best of the litter, but it normalizes on much of the (potentially) hormetic region, and therefore is not able to demonstrate hormesis, if indeed it is present. By this normalization, it is constrained to demonstrate increasing cancer incidence with increasing radon exposure throughout the test range.
A 2009 study by three Oxford Professors (Gray et al), published in the British Medical Journal draws from the mainstream studies. It shows that, for non-smokers, going from zero radon exposure for many decades to the EPA-limit exposure for many decades increases the risk from lung cancer death at age 75 by 1 in a thousand. And this is a worst case effect compared to the Worcester study that demonstrated hormesis. For all practical purposes, for non-smokers exposure at the EPA-limit is a non-existant problem. For smokers, that is another story, but they have far more to worry about from the smoking than from the radon.
My new residence had been vacant for a few months before I moved in. After reading the research literature, and seeing the large uncertainties with respect to adverse radon impacts at low concentrations, I decided to perform my own radon tests. I bought an electronic radon meter, and placed it in the basement on 24 April. On 28 April, when I moved in, the meter read 5.0. This is a time-weighted integrated average over the four days. Since that time, I have not opened any basement windows, but have opened windows on the first and second floors. The readings in the basement have been dropping about 0.5 points per day, and this morning the reading in the basement was 3.5. This means the three-day average in the basement was 1.5 pCi/l, which is the amount necessary to bring the time-weighted average concentration from 5.0 for four days to 3.5 for seven days.
These results are so radically different from the initial tester quantitatively and qualitatively that I will run basement tests in another more isolated location to see if the numbers hold. But keep in mind that I have done no mitigation on the basement, and I expect that a) opening the basement windows, b) sealing the cracks and sump area, and c) possibly using a ceiling fan will drive the numbers down further. There is research in the peer-reviewed technical literature that shows each of these simple mitigation techniques can reduce radon concentrations substantially, at least in the environments in which they were tested.
IMO, it's a head in the sand thingy, but exacerbated by the entities who benefited in the past from pretending radon was nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, the U.S. government was one of these entities, as a Google search about radon's history will reveal.
Yes, it's a real threat. Minnesota is one of the states with higher radon levels and the State of Minnesota Health Department publishes this informative brochure: http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/e...onbrochure.pdf
Better safe than sorry...
However, if a hormetic effect exists (see my post above), then over-remediation can actually increase one's risk for lung cancer. I personally don't believe the OP has a problem with a 1.9 pCi/l reading.
Atcshane2, I think we are in the same boat. I'm insanely phobic about things like this and tend to obsess on the worst-case scenarios over and over. We've lived in our ranch-style home for 16 years and never tested, and spend most of our time upstairs, but my kids like to video-game in the basement. Something has compelled me to want to do the test.
There is just too much information on this topic on the internet - it will give you "paralysis of analysis" and send you running to the psychologist. It's also tough to disseminate between the accurate and misinformation. I think Oldnavy1 has given us some excellent, unbiased information - when you go to a company site that does testing or mitigation, the story you read is very one-sided, but that is how they make their money.
I just ordered an electronic continuous tester that has received good reviews and plan on taking some readings, I'm just scared to death that I have a problem and myself or family have been subjected to high radon levels. I guess I'll run the test set for a week or so to get an initial average reading and then see what I have and where to go from there.
Atcshane2, I think we are in the same boat. I'm insanely phobic about things like this and tend to obsess on the worst-case scenarios over and over. We've lived in our ranch-style home for 16 years and never tested, and spend most of our time upstairs, but my kids like to video-game in the basement. Something has compelled me to want to do the test.
There is just too much information on this topic on the internet - it will give you "paralysis of analysis" and send you running to the psychologist. It's also tough to disseminate between the accurate and misinformation. I think Oldnavy1 has given us some excellent, unbiased information - when you go to a company site that does testing or mitigation, the story you read is very one-sided, but that is how they make their money.
I just ordered an electronic continuous tester that has received good reviews and plan on taking some readings, I'm just scared to death that I have a problem and myself or family have been subjected to high radon levels. I guess I'll run the test set for a week or so to get an initial average reading and then see what I have and where to go from there.
I probably bought the same tester you did. It's very valuable, but has to be placed properly. I wouldn't be overly concerned. According to the BMJ study I referenced above, you need to be exposed for decades to serious levels before effects begin to be noticed. If you're not a smoker, there is little to be worried about, for modest levels, according to the BMJ article. If you are a smoker, there will be an enhancement of lung cancer risk due to radon, but the key is to quit smoking. Let me know how your readings turn out.
Will do. We have always been non-smokers, so that eases my mind. I just have a phobia about being exposed to harmful substances, hopefully the readings will be reasonable.
I suspect the reason the levels are so low in the OP's house is the mitigation that was done. When I improved my basement to 100% usable space, I did the mitigatiin. Cost about $2K in 2006. Added perfed tubing before the floor was poured. It comes out in the equipment room and runs up to the roof outlet with an online fan.
There is a certain subdivision in my area that seems to be built upon lots of the rock, which produces radon.
Most of the homes have mitagation systems. Whenever I have clients that purchase in the n'hood, I make sure they test, especially if they have basements. We have seen some very high readings without the system.
I spoke with someone at the EPA a while back about the radon. According to them, the test is done at the "worst case sanerios"...when the home is totally closed. That is fine for testing but not how we live. Also, according to her, you'd have to really be exposed to living with radon years and years before you'd have any issues. And...this was amazing to me...every time you open your door or window, radon comes in and radon goes out.
Vicki
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
