Radon - Fact v. Fiction

[Caoimhín P. Connell]

Hello Gents!

Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Happy Birthday and all the rest!

Sorry about the cross posting of this post, and sorry I haven’t been participating on the boards lately – been slammed over the last several months. (Probably just as well for the Global Warming nutters, otherwise I would have had a lot of fun with the recent disclosure of widespread academic fraud in the Global Warming nutter’s camp– something that legitimate climatologists have been whining about for decades).

In any event, the academic fraud issue should be a clarion bell to those who think that objective science is used by policy wonks. Wrong.

I have just finished revising two web sites in another area where we see junk science predominating in the public view with the silly meaningless manipulations of confusing numbers – residential radon. The discussions won’t make some of you happy – but, what can I say? The truth is what it is, without regard for men’s desires (including my own).

The pages include new and updated references, and reflect the current state of scientific thought on the radon issue. My spelling has not improved, and any criticisms along those lines would be appreciated.

The discussions are:

General Discussion on radon – occurrence and risk:

http://www.forensic-applications.com/radon/radon.html

And minor revisions to the famous literature review page:

Radon Risk and Cancer

http://www.forensic-applications.com/radon/reviews.html

Cheers!

Caoimhín P. Connell

Forensic Industrial Hygienist

www.forensic-applications.com

(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

AMDG

[kurt]

I love this guy.

Shaking up conventional wisdom is a worthy pursuit.......

[Chad Fabry]

Hi Caoimhín,

First, thanks for the perspective. It was a red eye read slightly less engaging than Mark Twain witticisms, but I found it quite interesting.

For non scientists like me, an acronym and definitions section would be nice. I know you explain them in text but a handy place to check would expedite the learning process.

You asked for typos. I found the following sentence near the beginning when I still understood everything you wrote with a bit of my intellect left to spare. Sometime after I noticed this sentence my brain was too busy to notice typos.

When a daughter is airborne, it has an electrical charge associated with (it?) and it has an higher probability to adhere to other airborne particulates and dust...

[Tom Raymond]

"For non scientists like me, an acronym and definitions section would be nice. I know you explain them in text but a handy place to check would expedite the learning process."

Perhaps margin notes would be best, I found myself looking to see how much article was left at every foot note.

There are a few more typos sprinkled throughout, fortunately most occur in less than technical descriptives.

Thank you for sharing, very interesting. I'll read it again when my brain stops hurting.

Tom

[gtblum]

Has there ever been a study done based on information gathered from the thousands of us with documented life time exposure to radiation?

If not why? Every second of time spent in a "high rad" or a "locked high rad" area has to be accounted for and, periodically surveyed for changing conditions. Would it not be a more controlled environment to perform a study?

Is there a difference between the term "off gas" and radon?

You don't here the word "radon" spoken in a nuke plant.

You will lose your shirt and temporarily lose anything made of plastic (glasses,helmet, badges) and stand in front of a fan until it blows off of you.

What about the uptake levels in that environment?

[John Dirks Jr]

I bet radon mitigation contractors will feel more challenged by this than home inspectors.

As home inspectors, we provide information that people want. I think that regardless of any debate, if a person wants information that I can provide, I'll do it. A person calls and wants to know the radon level in a home. I can do a test and provide a result.

Any ongoing debate that may be related to the topic is not my primary concern at that point. I don't hype radon. I give test results that people ask for.

When they call with a concern, should I debunk and send them away?

[gtblum]

As home inspectors, we provide information that people want. I think that regardless of any debate, if a person wants information that I can provide, I'll do it. A person calls and wants to know the radon level in a home. I can do a test and provide a result.

Any ongoing debate that may be related to the topic is not my primary concern at that point. I don't hype radon. I give test results that people ask for.

When they call with a concern, should I debunk and send them away?

Let your conscience be your guide. We get paid to tell the truth. Right?

Now that you have this information, you can't go back later and say you didn't know.

How do you feel about getting paid for providing results from tests that you know may be flawed and inaccurate at best?

[Nolan Kienitz]

Caoimhín,

Great information. A lot to learn.

Good to see you squeezing out some time to post.

[Tom Raymond]

As home inspectors, we provide information that people want. I think that regardless of any debate, if a person wants information that I can provide, I'll do it. A person calls and wants to know the radon level in a home. I can do a test and provide a result.

Any ongoing debate that may be related to the topic is not my primary concern at that point. I don't hype radon. I give test results that people ask for.

When they call with a concern, should I debunk and send them away?

Let your conscience be your guide. We get paid to tell the truth. Right?

Now that you have this information, you can't go back later and say you didn't know.

How do you feel about getting paid for providing results from tests that you know may be flawed and inaccurate at best?

All EPA positions are constructed in a politically based reality rather than a scientific one, just look at the upcoming lead paint rules for proof. They (the EPA) have established regulations and protocols for testing and reporting in the limited context of what we do, should we abandon a revenue stream because the protocols come from politics as opposed to science? If so then don't bother to renew your HI license, our licensing laws are born of politics not science.

I see your point, I prefer science over politics, but like John said performing a test and delivering a result is what the consumer wants regardless of whether the understand what that means. Sell it to them or someone else will, and sleep well too as long as you follow protocol.

Tom

[Tom Raymond]

Good morning, Gents:

Tom R-

Hmmmm… margin notes? Now that would put me outside of my abilities. I wrote the page in long hand HTML. I don’t how to do margin notes. But it’s a good idea.

CPC,

If you read more of my posts I think you'll find that I'm long on good ideas that are hard to impliment.

Long hand HTML, is that anything like long division? I think my brain is gonna hurt again[]

Tom

[gtblum]

Caoimhín,

Thanks for your answer. An uptake is ingestion or inhalation of radioactive particulates. I now see that it would'nt apply here.

I see your point, I prefer science over politics, but like John said performing a test and delivering a result is what the consumer wants regardless of whether the understand what that means. Sell it to them or someone else will, and sleep well too as long as you follow protocol.

Tom

Tom,

I'm sorry but, I guess I'm one of those fools that sleeps better with an empty wallet and a clear conscience. I believe in, what goes around comes around.

In my mind, this is no different than finding an FP panel and not sharing the history because I wasn't specifically asked about it. Maybe that's a poor example but, you get my drift.

On the other hand, if I provide the the client with this documentation and they still insist, no problem I'll sleep like a baby too.

I guess it all depends on what price you can be bought for.

[John Dirks Jr]

Caoimhín,

Sorry for the slight drift but have you see this article? Theres a summary on page 4.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/image ... candal.pdf

[Caoimhín P. Connell]

Hello Gents!

Although I understand the Moderator’s good intentions. I cannot participate in a forum where my posts are edited (it creates very serious problems for me in depositions and direct and cross examinations when opposing counsel brings up language from the web attributed to me but edited by someone else). Therefore, I have removed my previous posts, since I’m not sure which ones were edited and which were not.

Although I respect the Moderator’s authority over his board, and suggest he remove any post of mine he doesn’t like, I would ask the Moderator not to edit my posts thus allowing me to continue to participate in this wonderful forum.

Cheers!

Caoimhín P. Connell

Forensic Industrial Hygienist

www.forensic-applications.com

(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

AMDG

[Inspectorjoe]

........

Although I understand the Moderator’s good intentions. I cannot participate in a forum where my posts are edited (it creates very serious problems for me in depositions and direct and cross examinations when opposing counsel brings up language from the web attributed to me but edited by someone else).

So you start this thread by disparaging "Global Warming nutters".

Sheesh.

------------------

John, you may want to look at this: The "Climategate" facts

[hausdok]

Hi All,

I've responded to Caoimhín via email. Let's keep it about the content of the original post, and not about testosterone, so I can keep my pruning shears on the shelf.

OT - OF!!!

M.