Duck and Cover, the MIA’s Response to the Granite Panic of 2008
One could be charitable and say that the MIA was caught flat footed by recent events like so many organizations that touch the countertop industry, but that wouldn’t be accurate considering the fourteen year long suppression campaign. One could say though that they aren’t responding to the issues, or shall I say issue.
We received an email last week outlining their position, along with a list of “Talking Points” for use when scared or irate customers called the granite yards or fabrication shops. This week, a local supplier of ours, Architectural Granite & Marble (AG&M) used some of the MIA response near word for word in their own warning and advice to fabricators.
The FAX starts off by saying that no doubt we were inundated by phone calls about the recent “radon scare”. They continue by telling of a conference call with the MIA that convinced them that there is absolutely no evidence that the radon emitted by granite is of harmful amounts. They close by saying the EPA statement is attached to the FAX along with AG&M’s own “Talking Points”.
The next page in the FAX has contact info for a PR firm, Cohn & Wolfe.
Their Headline screams: “EPA Confirms that Granite Countertops Pose No Significant Health Risk, Undercutting”Junk Science” Fear Mongering, Says Marble Institute of America.
They go on to say that the EPA’s recent statements (last Friday, the 25th of July) reaffirmed that granite countertops posed no significant health risks and discounted alarmist reports about the safety of granite.
They go on to quote selectively from the EPA’s statement, while seemingly ignoring that the EPA simply is saying “We don’t know, test your countertop”. They continue by mentioning that brick, concrete, and granite contain small amounts of natural radiation, ignoring the fact that some granites contain enough Uranium for profitable Uranium mining operations.
They then link to the EPA statement, which is a good thing as we will see in a minute or two.
The Press Release goes on to quote Jim Hogan, president of the MIA. Hogan claims that recent tests by university scientists and Consumer Reports show no risk. He continues by saying that every time researchers apply rigorous scientific standards, they show no risk from granite. Claiming “fear mongering”, he says their goal is to facilitate the creation of standards for testing granite countertops.
What was left out of this statements was that the “university scientists” were actually one scientist, Dr. Chyi, who refuses to answer even the most basic questions about the “study”. This “study” was not published after peer review, and while some of the actual measurements are credible, the introduction and conclusions seem to be written toward marketing efforts, not scientific goals.
The Consumer Reports “study”? Two granites,tested in a completely non scientific method. Neither was pretested to see if it warranted testing, just two random samples of granite.
No one is claiming that the majority of granites are hazardous, just that a few are potentially hazardous with enough exposure.
The MIA is attempting to put together a team of scientists and experts, but one should ask if any have recently jumped ship. No reputable scientist would remain once they realize there is actual proof that numerous granite colors pose a serious problem, nor would they be welcome to contribute if they became convinced of the issue.
What is simply hilarious is that the EPA was working to change their Friday statements as this FAX was being delivered. By 8:08 p.m that very day, Monday the 28th , a new statement was on the EPA website, complete with an extensive list of granite/Radon/radiation FAQ questions.
That will be another article, let’s continue looking at the EPA’s newest stance compared to their new stance last Friday, three day ago, a single working day ago.
The FAX closes by listing AGM’s “Talking Points” for fabricators to use when panicked or angry consumers. I have paraphrased their remarks below, will link to or scan and post the entire statement later.
* EPA says Granite Counters Are Safe They go on to claim that the EPA reviewed the studies cited in the news reports and saw no need for additional research
into the safety of granite. They claim the EPA said they had no reliable data to conclude anything.
* Junk Science Spread By Competitors. Misinformation campaigns have been fianced by manufacturers of synthetic stone to scare customers.
* Only Real Studies Financed by the MIA. Some are critical of the MIA’s scientific studies, but no one else has been willing to fund the research. If not for the
MIA, there would be no real science, only junk science.
* Consumer Reports confirms Safety Americas foremost consumer protection institute recently conducted its own limited independent tests and found no evidence
of health risks. They said none of the samples tested emitted Radon.
* Radon Emissions Tend to Be Insignificant. Some granites emit the gas, but they claim that the most active granites tested were below the EPA remediation levels.
* Solution to Radon Gas is Simple. Open a window, install a venting system. They continue to claim that soil based Radon is the largest source.
* Other Natural Stone Unaffected. They say the rumors and misinformation is about igneous stones only. They say marble, limestone, travertine, slate and
soapstone are not being questioned.
* If Appropriate. “I would never have installed granite countertops in my own home if I thought they pose any health risks at all”.
Wow! Is this not amazing?
This isn’t the first time they said the testing is over with, they said that in their June Newsletter as well.
By Junk Science, they are referring to Dr. Llope of Rice University who is testing granite samples using Gamma Spectrometry. This device counts the decays, but also gives an energy level for the radiation being produced, allowing an expert to prove what radioisotope is in the granite. With that info, the radiation readings can be corrected to show exactly how much radiation a person is being exposed to.
Only Real studies financed by the MIA? The Chyi study wasn’t published, which is the only true mark of a truly scientific study. The only other “study” was a few years ago when they paid a retired geologist to say that the average granite countertop has only one decay per year! Even a low level granite will have many decays per square inch per minute. A medium level granite will have billions, even trillions of decays per year. The MIA has a long history of paying for opinions and then calling them studies.
Consumer reports, well, two small samples put in a room with a radon detector. Hardly a real world test, hardly scientific.
Radon emissions. Most of the average granites, Uba Tuba, Santa Cecilia , are low. Maybe 4 to 6 pCi/Sf/Hr Radon emitted. Then there are some that emit over 600 pCi/Sf/Hr. We are talking about tens of thousands of pCi of Radon per hour. Without a constant flow of fresh air or ventilation, the Radon levels will rise. Radon has been proven to add to a homes Radon level.
Sure ventilation will help, after you spent thousands to build energy efficient. I have no problem with ventilation being used, just tell the consumer that it will be needed before you take the deposit.
Other natural stone, well some Marble has been tested. Some slate has been found to be elevated. I’d check all natural stone before installation.
And the last “Talking Point”, well, when is it appropriate to lie to a consumer? When is it okay to convince them to use a product because you yourself used it? Why is it germane what you “thought”? Why not make it scientific by measurements?
While writing this article, I took some time to call our local AG&M location to warn them of the EPA’s changing position, that they really needed to read the new statement and reconsider AG&M’s position in light of the new info. In return, I got a earful of “Harmful plastic vapors, poisonous dust and glue used in solid surface”. I calmed her down, reminded her that I knew far better than she did that solid surface had none of those issues, reminding her of solid surface’s NSF51 rating, it’s FDA approved materials, and the vast number of tests that are done prior, during, and after solid surface is made. At the end, I reminded her that we were her customers, we wanted them to stay in business, that we had helped in the past (We had done a quick survey of her yard, even her desk that showed slightly hotter than normal), and would be here if they needed any help in the future. Kim agreed to pass the info along to her company president.
Sadly, it was no surprise that we received an email a few minutes later, firing us as a customer and requesting that we remove any links to the AG&M website. They also requested that we remove any reference to them being a supplier.
Not a problem, I’ll refer to them as a former supplier that fired us for supporting the testing of granite. Here is the email off our website contact form.
“name = Kim Redbird
email = kimr@agmgranite.com
Comments = If you reference AG&M anywhere on your website, our owners
have asked that you please remove AG&M as one of your vendors, suppliers
or anything related to your company.
Thank you.”
One Response to 'Duck and Cover, the MIA’s Response to the Granite Panic of 2008'
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
on August 1st, 2008 at 8:12 am
Looks like the MIA removed their “talking points” off their website. We noticed that they had been sanitizing their site the last few weeks, I guess the digital age version of shredding and burning the files.
What is also very interesting is that not a word was heard from the MIA today. Hiring a new PR firm?
http://www.marble-institute.com/pressroom/pr072908.cfm
Notice the claims to EPA support are gone? Quick work, I wonder what the EPA said in that meeting yesterday with the MIA?
Here they claim Dr. Steck supports their work.
http://www.marble-institute.com/industryresources/expertcomments-072908.cfm
But the work is very old. Dr. Steck did send me a copy of the data results, which indeed show little Radon on the samples tested. But it seems they were all US varieties, not the exotics that are causing the problems.
And of course they quote the EPA, even though the MIA retracted their claim of support.
Size and Kathren don’t have a clue on the amount of Uranium or Radium being found in these stones, not 10 ppm that they claim, but ten to fifty times that. Both are no doubt responsible scientists, but without knowing the facts, they can’t speak to the issues.
Did you notice that there are no links connecting the quotes to where they were drawn from? I bet that is no accident. Easy to take out of context that way.
And Langmuir’s comments are in stark contrast to Dr. Chyi’s Crema Bordeaux finding of .27 pCi/L. That is about 67% of the average outdoor air Radon levels, no where near 270,000 times less! Are they saying that out door air is 72,900 pCi/L?????