President Trump has declared war on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), vowing to eliminate it "in almost every form" and leave just "little tidbits" intact. In practice, that translates to reducing the agency's budget by a third, including nixing programs pertaining to residential risk from radon gas accumulation.
While many of Trump's proposed EPA cuts are controversial, it turns out this one actually has significant backing within the scientific community. The reason, as Wired explains, is the EPA's standard for indoor radon exposure (4 picocuries per liter of air) is based on fuzzy science:
That number, 4 picocuries, is a funny one. Because here's the thing: The scientific model used to come up with that limit says there's no acceptable level of radon exposure. None. It's called the linear no-threshold model, and it's used to estimate risk for low doses of carcinogenic materials. See, it's not hugely controversial to link lung cancer to high radon levels, like those found in a mineshaft. But it's impossible to directly establish a link between low levels of radon and cancer. [...]In fact, the Health Physics Society (a large scientific organization for radiation safety specialists) has officially stated that radon produces no statistically measurable health effects until levels reach about 27 billion picocuries. Even the EPA itself, in its 2003 assessment of household radon risk, seemed to agree ... [Wired]
The gap between 27 billion picocuries and 4 picocuries is an expensive one: While the EPA does not have regulations forcing homeowners to take action to reduce radon levels, it does encourage testing and home improvement, and these guidelines inform state- and municipal-level radon regulations.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Worse yet, there's evidence low-dose radiation provided by radon could lower cancer risk, which would mean "the EPA's guidance levels aren't preventing cancer — they're causing it." Read the rest of Wired's report here.
Continue reading for free
We hope you're enjoying The Week's refreshingly open-minded journalism.
Subscribed to The Week? Register your account with the same email as your subscription.
-
Ten Things You Need to Know Today: 23 September 2023The Week’s daily digest of the news agenda, published at 8am
-
Pinochet’s coup in Chile 50 years on
The Explainer Half a century on, the former leader still sharply divides opinion in his home country
-
The Week Unwrapped: Ghost tankers, loyalty cards and contempt
Podcast Should we be worried about illicit oil tankers? What are the limits to protests outside court? And are supermarket loyalty schemes all they seem?
-
Russian lunar spacecraft crashes into the moon
Speed Read
-
Hurricane Hilary bringing unprecedented storm warnings to Southwest
Speed Read
-
NASA fully restores contact with Voyager 2 spacecraft
Speed Read
-
The US just banned most incandescent light bulbs, and few people even noticed
Speed Read
-
NASA loses contact with Voyager 2 probe
Speed Read
-
20 dead and 27 missing after lethal downpour in Beijing
Speed Read
-
Biden keeps U.S. Space Command in Colorado, reversing Trump move to Alabama
Speed Read
-
Scientists revive 46,000-year-old worm that was frozen in permafrost
Speed Read
