kurt Posted April 27, 2016 Report Posted April 27, 2016 And by association, Radon? http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 88744.html
Steven Hockstein Posted April 27, 2016 Report Posted April 27, 2016 Many years ago I inspected a house in Western NJ and the radon level was a few hundred pCi/L. I don't remember the exact level but I was shocked at how high it was. There was a very old couple living in the house in this rural area and they were as healthy as you would want to be at their age. They both smoked cigarettes like chimneys. To this day I am convinced that they both had lung cancer and that the natural radiation treatments were working.
Marc Posted April 27, 2016 Report Posted April 27, 2016 Our world has just become a great deal more complex. Many more variables now, variables that are almost impossible to measure. Marc
Jim Baird Posted April 27, 2016 Report Posted April 27, 2016 Down here the franchise, corporate type inspectors love to talk about bugabears that media have latched onto. "We specialize in radon and mold. Ask about our inspection packages..."
Jim Katen Posted April 27, 2016 Report Posted April 27, 2016 This is old news. The risk from radon and radiation in general is just not well understood. That makes people uncomfortable and public officials tend to set up rules on the side of what they believe is "caution." This is, in part, why "action levels" for radon are really absurd.
kurt Posted April 27, 2016 Author Report Posted April 27, 2016 It's old information, but it's hardly old news. It's not, and has never been, news. That's the problem. No first tier news organization has given any of this any coverage. Der Spiegel getting on it is rather amazing.
Mark P Posted April 28, 2016 Report Posted April 28, 2016 The radon action level of 4.0 pCi/l is not a health based threshold; it is more of a skill / equipment / knowhow threshold. The general idea is the less radiation we are exposed to the better. The 4.0 was chosen as the level at which a mitigation system could achieve a significantly lower level of radon inside the home.
Leighton Jantz Posted April 28, 2016 Report Posted April 28, 2016 Many years ago I inspected a house in Western NJ and the radon level was a few hundred pCi/L. I don't remember the exact level but I was shocked at how high it was. There was a very old couple living in the house in this rural area and they were as healthy as you would want to be at their age. They both smoked cigarettes like chimneys. To this day I am convinced that they both had lung cancer and that the natural radiation treatments were working. Just a thought... If I have high levels of radon in my home, can I go ahead and remove the asbestos tiles in the basement myself? (Insert chuckle here)
Jim Katen Posted April 28, 2016 Report Posted April 28, 2016 The radon action level of 4.0 pCi/l is not a health based threshold; it is more of a skill / equipment / knowhow threshold. The general idea is the less radiation we are exposed to the better. The 4.0 was chosen as the level at which a mitigation system could achieve a significantly lower level of radon inside the home. It started out that way. Now it's being touted as the "danger" threshold. The radon lady at the last ASHI conference was *absolutely* telling people that 4 pCi/l was a health based action level.
kurt Posted April 28, 2016 Author Report Posted April 28, 2016 Just a thought... If I have high levels of radon in my home, can I go ahead and remove the asbestos tiles in the basement myself? (Insert chuckle here) That's funny.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now