Comments on: Indoors, Radon Stands Out http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2014/01/indoors-radon-stands-out/ The EPA Blog Sun, 28 Jun 2015 17:19:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.1 By: Maria Mincey http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2014/01/indoors-radon-stands-out/#comment-25221 Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:54:35 +0000 http://blog.epa.gov/blog/?p=22648#comment-25221 Great Article! Thanks for sharing……

Best Regards
Maria Mincey

]]>
By: Chuck Elkins http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2014/01/indoors-radon-stands-out/#comment-25220 Thu, 09 Jan 2014 19:55:51 +0000 http://blog.epa.gov/blog/?p=22648#comment-25220 In writing the above comment, I was not clear that I meant a pack of cigarettes PER DAY.

]]>
By: Chuck Elkins http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2014/01/indoors-radon-stands-out/#comment-25219 Thu, 09 Jan 2014 19:54:17 +0000 http://blog.epa.gov/blog/?p=22648#comment-25219 I agree with the seriousness of this issue. However, it appears that EPA has not revisited the 4 pico curies standard for radon since it was established decades ago. I personally was involved in deciding on that number when I worked at EPA, and I can tell you that I was told that it was equivalent to smoking a pack of cigarettes and the only reason we established such a high number (in a publication, not as a standard) was because EPA’s Office of Research and Development told us that they could not assure us, after only 1 year of engineering research on homes, that a more stringent level was technically achievable. I would hope that the engineering has improved considerably after all those years and that EPA could establish a more health-protective level. Of course, I have not kept track of the health research on radon, and if, by chance, the risk of radon exposure has decreased significantly because of advances in our understanding, than the level of 4 may still be justifiable. In any case, it would make sense for EPA to revisit this number and assure the American public that in abating to a level of 4, they are in fact protecting themselves from a serious risk of getting cancer.

]]>
By: Bouchakour http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2014/01/indoors-radon-stands-out/#comment-25218 Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:05:19 +0000 http://blog.epa.gov/blog/?p=22648#comment-25218 Hi,
What is positive and interesting is that always ends by learning from our bad experiences
Radon is not the only element prohibited, the lamiante is also.
Regards

]]>
By: Israel Tuoeg http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2014/01/indoors-radon-stands-out/#comment-25217 Wed, 08 Jan 2014 06:16:30 +0000 http://blog.epa.gov/blog/?p=22648#comment-25217 Great Article! Indoor Air Quality is very important. Radon is a big Issue bust so is Mold.
This Website Covers more aspects of Indoor Air Quality and Removing Mold from your Home!

]]>