Radiation schmadiation
Predictably, the reactionaries over at Treehugge r went to town over this granite counter radiation thing. So much so that I dropped them from my blogroll. It's a pity too. Treehugger started as a forum for rational discussion about sustainability got hijacked by the eco-madmen on the fringes. Anyhow, the guy from Treehugger who picked up the supposed story and ran with it to all kinds of illogical and irrational ends got taken to task in the reader comments that followed his posting. It very nearly renewed my faith in humanity. So humanity's off the hook but alas, Treehugger's going to have to work a little harder to win back my favor. I know, that has them shaking in their boots I'm sure.
Anyhow, here's what my new hero Anthony published at the granite tale on Treehugger:
Most elements have naturally going on radioactive isotopes. Most items you come upon are mildly radioactive. For instance, dwelling next door to a nuclear energy plant normally provides a radiation dose equivalent to consuming one banana an afternoon, or drowsing with a person else in place of through yourself.
This article speaks of picocuries however offers no statistics about what sort of dose people residing in a home with this kind of counter pinnacle will be predicted to simply get hold of. How many millirem/yr could be much more applicable, in view that rem is the maximum extensively standard unit of biologically equivalent dose.
Natural heritage radiation in maximum parts of the human-inhabited world ranges from three hundred-six hundred millirem/12 months or so. In a few it's miles as little as 200, in others as excessive as 10,000. And each study achieved comparing individuals experiencing exceptional ranges of heritage radiation to date has proven no indication that low-stage doses have an effect on the price of cancer in any statistically observable manner.
And the comparison with smoking is not only unlikely, but misleading as well. Yes, smoking allows more radiation to get to the lungs- several thousand millirem per year, by some estimates I've seen. But that isn't why smoking causes cancer. Lung cancer caused by smoking comes from the chemical toxins in the cigarettes, not radiation. Radiation is actually a remarkably weak carcinogen. For example, the >100,000 atomic bomb survivors who have been studied extensively since 1945 have shown only a 6% higher rate of cancer than the general population.
Please, positioned the risks in perspective. Even taking as a right the hypothesis that low-dose radiation works much like high-dose radiation (the linear non-threshold speculation, that risk of cancer varies linearly with dose all of the way right down to zero dose), very few deaths are due to radiation. We knowingly live with many, many toxins and carcinogens in our home a long way greater dangerous than granite counter tops. We willingly get into our automobiles and experience our bikes with nary a concept. This is as bad as the concern-mongering over the mercury in CFL's.
Anthony, I haven't any concept who you are but you deserve an award.