solidsurfacealliance.org Blog

I get some flack for posting the MIA’s propaganda, but sometimes the light of day and some comments interspersed are the best way to address it.

Here is their latest, much better than normal but still lacking. My replies are interspersed in bold type.

Quote:

“A considerable amount of research has been published in peer-reviewed scientific literature and all of it comes to the same conclusion: the levels of radon emitted into the air from a granite countertop are not excessive and not showing any risk for the population in their homes,” said Dr. John McCarthy, president of Environmental Health & Engineering, a public health consulting firm in suburban Boston.

Okay, two things stand out, the lack of any comprehensive studies on Radon and granite countertops and the claim of zero risk from small amounts of Radon. The scientific consensus is that Radon and radiation are linear in dose/risk ratios. I also would like to point out that Dr. McCarthy doesn’t point out which exact studies he is referring to, making it impossible to verify his claims.

McCarthy, who holds degrees from Harvard University and Boston College and has overseen more than 2,500 indoor environmental quality assessments, said some news stories about radon and granite have failed to address the critical role that air dilution plays in testing, measuring and interpreting radon levels in homes.
“To properly measure radon, one must calculate the emission rate in connection with the area of granite and the volume of air in the home,” he said. “Much like paint fumes do, radon generally will dilute into a home’s air. These concentrated emissions will generally dilute down to harmless levels. To get even close to the type of dangerous levels of radon exposure that’s been reported in news articles recently, a consumer would have to completely seal off the room and stay in that room 24/7 — for 72 years.”

Again McCarthy is missing several points. First, while the homes volume does provide a dilution factor, the experts calculate the RISE in Radon levels by using the Radon emission and the amount of fresh air entering the space. It troubles me that McCarthy is unaware of this common practice in the Radon field. He treats the home as if it was static, no air leakage or ventilation, when in fact the ventilation factor is more important than the rate of Radon emission. Then McCarthy descends into the ridiculous, claiming that a rooms Radon level would continue to increase for 72 years. Radon levels will increase only in a closed room for a few weeks at most, until a point is reached where the Radon being created is less than the losses from Radon decay. Remember it has a half life, 3.8 days, so some of it is always decaying into the next lower elements. At some point, it reaches equlibrium as it is decaying as fast as it is being produced, usually in a matter of three weeks or less.

This one point tells me that Dr. McCarthy is very, very, ignorant of Radon science. No doubt he has some expertise and experience in something, but it isn’t Radon.

Dr. David Ropeick, author of the book “Risk,” agreed with McCarthy that recent media reports are needlessly confusing consumers about the safety of granite countertops.
“Compared to all the risks in people’s lives, the risk of radon exposure from granite countertops is as close to zero as you could hope to get,” Ropeick said. “Granite is a natural stone and some samples emit a tiny amount of radon. It’s scary for people to hear that, especially when that’s all that’s being reported. But many of the reports are looking past the important scientific facts that show with the dilution of air, any amount of radon coming off the stone is negligible.”

Dr. Ropeick also omits several facts, the most important is the MIA/Chyi study that found very large amounts of Radon emanating from Crema Bordeaux. He also has not taken the time to call the Radon experts in the NY Times story, or read Dr. Kitto’s findings of one to two pCi/L increase in Radon levels in homes from granite Kitto has studied. What baffles me is that these “experts” don’t pick up a phone and call Stan Liebert or Dr. Llope and ask for proof before blindly proclaiming chicanery. Ropeick also doesn’t address the linear aspect of Radon risk, where even a small amount carries a small risk. Like McCarty, he omits to address ventilation, depending upon the volume of a home to continue to dissapate Radon.

Health Physics Society (HPS), a scientific and professional organization whose members specialize in occupational and environmental radiation safety and which has no connection to the granite countertop industry, took issue with the New York Times story, “What’s Lurking in Your Countertop” published July 24, 2008. According to an HPS fact sheet about the Times story:
– The procedure used by the contractor was not appropriate (as per Environmental Protection Agency radon measurement methods) and did not provide a real idea of the amount of radon in the ambient kitchen.

No, the method used to find the 100 pCi/L of Radon was the standard EPA approved method. The HPS worked with the MIA to forge their statement, they have admitted that, but they chose not to contact anyone in the NY Times story to verify any of the methods or measurements found. What they are refereing to as flawed methods is one of the many tests performed, where a container of known volume is placed over a Radon test kit or meter so that the emission FROM the granite can be proved and measured. In the lab, they would use the same method that the MIA/Chyi study used, placing a known volume of granite in a known volume container, then after an elapsed time, measuring the Radon produced. Same method used in both Liebert’s testing and Chyi’s testing, only a matter of scale. Had the HPS taken the time to call either Liebert or Dr. Kitto, they would have learned that lab tests showed over 4,000 pCi of Radon per square foot were being eminated from the Sugarman’s Shivakasi granite countertop, leading to 100 pCi/L Radon levels in the kitchen.

Dr. Toohey, the president of the HPS wrote this in an email to Christina.
“If I scale the gamma ray measurements for our example to your result, I get about 60 pCi/L radon, which is in the same ballpark as the 100; however, that still assumes no air mixing between the kitchen and the rest of the house, still, that could get the air in the house as a whole over the EPA guideline. So we do, as we said, advocate testing for people who may be concerned.”

This is his revised opinion, sent to us on Tuesday of last week, after the publication of the MIA press release. This was before he was showed the Kitto result on the Shivakasi. Toohey was using the Gamma radiation levels off that top to validate Stan Lieberts finding of 100 pCi/L of Radon in that kitchen.

– Even if the measurement had been valid, one measurement result based on one type of granite in one particular home is not an indication of radon exposure in any other kitchen with a granite countertop.

How true, which is why we say that all granite countertops must be tested. One could read the HPS comment as if one bad granite doesn’t make them all bad. We agree, no one is on record as saying all granite is bad.

– The bottom line: No action needs to be taken to remove granite countertops in existing homes.

True to the extent that testing should be done prior to removing anything thought to be of concern. Were a granite countertop found to be emitting high Radon levels, action would certainly be warranted. But a blanket statement such as they gave is irresponsible at best.

Indeed, Health Physics Society President Richard E. Toohey, Ph.D., CHP said that someone spending four hours a day every day of the year in a kitchen with a typical granite countertop would have their chance of cancer increased by just one in two million. By contrast, the chance of contracting cancer each year simply from background radiation in the environment is three in 10,000.

Again we agree, at least on his first point if he is refering to Radon alone. Still, given the knowledge and choice in the matter, wouldn’t it be best to avoid that small risk? And if 50 million people are exposed to granite, that would be 25 extra cancer cases per year. A small risk for those that dodge the bullet, an agonizing death for the unlucky 25 people in that year.

I want to mark his last sentence though, 3 in 10,000 risk of contracting cancer from normal background radiation in any given year. We will return to this statement at the end of this rebuttal.

Toohey’s perspectives are echoed by the Washington State Department of Health (WSDOH). On its “Radon Outreach Program” website maintained by its Office of Radon Protection, the WSDOH states: “For a person to be exposed to a noticeable amount of radiation, they would have to spend many hours per day lying on the counter. This is unlikely, so the public health risk is extremely low.”

Again we have a quote with no link to the entire statement, one is left wondering what level of radiation they are refering to, and why is it necessary to lie on the countertop?

Offering yet another view on the safety of granite is the American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists (AARST). In its “Position Statement: Granite Countertops and Radon Gas” released Aug. 4, AARST states “while natural rocks such as granite may emit some radon gas, the subsequent levels of radon in the building that are attributable to such sources are not typically high.”

Again we have experts not consulting those who have measured and found otherwise. They are simply ignorant of the levels being found. That will change at their Las Vegas meeting.

The AARST statement says that “soil, sand and rock underneath the home are the primary sources of indoor radon gas” and offers the following advice to consumers concerned about the presence of radon in their homes:
“The best approach to reduce radon in the home is to install an active soil depressurization system (ASD) and reduce the entry of radon coming from the soil. In some cases, increasing the entry of outdoor air to the home is an appropriate method to reduce radon levels by dilution and improve indoor air quality. Both of these methods require a qualified radon mitigation professional to design and install the appropriate radon reduction system.

Now it should be clear why AARST would prefer that high levels of Radon be blamed on soil based Radon. They sell mitigation systems. You want to sell a $400 testing job, or a $400 testing job followed by a $2,000 or $4,000 ventilation system? Removing a granite countertop doesn’t pay a lot of money.

Only in extreme cases would removal of the granite be necessary to reduce the radon concentration, assuming appropriate measurements confirm it as the significant source.”

Now we are in complete agreement, it will be rare that a top needs removed. Ventilation can address some of the cases, but one should factor in the cost of the air exchange system and the increased costs of heating and cooling.

Jim Hogan, president of the Marble Institute of America, said he could understand why the issue of granite and radon has become emotional for many consumers, but he encouraged them to consider all the facts.
“We all have to make our own choices and decisions about things in our home,” Hogan said. “But the bottom line is that when it comes to countertops, the science tells us there’s no reason to make health issues a factor in whether you choose granite. ”

Hardly, and one must remember that the MIA spend 14 years say that Radon and radiation from granite was impossible to measure.

About the Marble Institute of America
For over 60 years the Marble Institute of America (MIA) has been the world’s leading information resource and advocate for the natural dimension stone industry. MIA members include marble, granite, limestone, sandstone, and other natural stone producers and quarriers, fabricators, installers, distributors, and contractors around the world.

And a constant source of missinformation on all of the health risks of granite. More discussion below on the most damning statement that the MIA included in this press release.

SOURCE Marble Institute of America
Copyright (C) 2008 PR Newswire. All rights reserved
Top stories
2:21 AM today Australian business conditions at near 7-year low
4:53 PM 8/11/08 U.S. stocks close modestly higher after oil pares losses
4:54 PM 8/11/08 Delta, Northwest pilots approve pact

Now, we marked one of Toohey’s statements above for later discussion:

The MIA has to respond I guess, but by now it ought to be clear that the facts are against them. Their only path to recovery for their industry is to admit the issues exist, then work hard to remove the dangerous granite countertops from homes and workplaces, then clear out any hot stones in inventory, while preventing the importation of any more high radiation level granites.