Exposure to low levels of radon appears to reduce the risk of lung cancer, new study finds

[Mugu]

Exposure to levels of radon gas typically found in 90 percent of American homes appears to reduce the risk of developing lung cancer by as much as 60 percent, according to a study published in the March 2008 issue of the journal Health Physics. The finding differs significantly from the results of previous case-control studies of the effects of low-level radon exposure, which have detected a slightly elevated lung cancer risk (but without statistical significance) or no risk at all.

The study, undertaken jointly by researchers at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Fallon Clinic, and Fallon Community Health Plan, is the first to observe a statistically significant hormetic effect of low-level radon exposure. Toxins and other environmental stressors (including radiation) that have a beneficial effect at very low doses are said to exhibit hormesis (scientists believe that the low doses of toxins may stimulate repair mechanisms in cells). Home exposure to radon, a naturally occurring radioactive decay product of radium, has been thought to be the second leading cause of lung cancer, after cigarette smoking. Chemically inert, it can percolate out of the ground into basements.

The study was initiated and managed by Donald F. Nelson, now professor emeritus of physics at WPI, during the 1990s, a time when concern over the link between residential radon exposure and lung cancer was growing. Nelson says the aim was to try to establish what level of radon exposure actually correlated with significant lung cancer risk and to establish a safety zone for home radon levels. “We were certainly not looking for a hormetic effect,” says co-author Joel H. Popkin of Fallon Clinic and St. Vincent Hospital in Worcester. “Indeed, we were stunned when the data pointed to that conclusion in such a strong way.”


Complete article at:
http://www.physorg.com/news125672761.html

[Fireweed247]

1. The new American science

Probably some idiots mixed up the results because I don't believe this for one minute.

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Wow. In the 80's, I was forced to spend $$$ to test my house for radon before a

relocation firm would pick it up because everybody was saying radon caused cancer!

[Marnieworld]

3. I do not believe this

I bought a house a few years ago and we had it tested before the purchase. The levels for radon were 400 times the safe amount. The prior owners had both died of lung cancer and the neighbor in the house behind me soon did as well. We of course had a removal system put in before occupying. It definitely causes lung cancer. Have your homes tested.

[Muttocracy]

4. the EPA action level is still justified by this - question of statistics

This paper is mostly about the statistics - whether there is a linear dose effect from zero to the EPA action level (4 pCi/L). They're showing reduced risk along that range but still the greatest risk at the dose range > 4pCi/L. So the usual message for homeowners, to install special ventilation systems if the test result is over 4pCi/L still holds. If my quick skim of the actual research paper is right.

And as always, correlation is NOT causation.

[magellan]

5. Just one question

Should I snort it or light it up?