Radon in your home could be more dangerous than mould
By Fiona Wagner • Bankrate.com

According to the recently released Report of the Radon Working Group on a New Radon Guideline for Canada, "uncertainty existed with the projection of lung cancer risk from occupational radon exposure to the public for residential exposures."

That means these occupational extrapolations were not seen to be as reliable as targeted population studies, which weren't yet available, even though similar studies had already prompted the World Health Organization to classify radon as a human carcinogenic and recommend that remedial measures be considered for buildings with radon gas concentrations of 100 to 300 Bq/m3.

More radon education needed for housing industry
Critics have long argued that Canada was too lax, while others have said the U.S. was alarmist and extreme. But here we are, 20 years later, and three percent of Canadian homeowners might soon find their homes unsafe.

According to the report, "the benefits to be gained from a lowered radon guideline will not be realized simply by publishing a revised number. A strategy will need to be devised to encourage widespread compliance with the new guideline."

Industry members such as contractors, realtors and home inspectors will need to be educated about testing and mitigations techniques, building codes may be upgraded and radon tests might become mandatory for future real estate transactions. These aren't the only challenges, though. Canadians will need to be educated about the health risks and why it is important to test their homes.

Radon more dangerous than mould
"Most of our activities are doing environmental and mould assessments," says Frank Haverkate, president of Haverkate & Associates Inc., a Toronto-based environmental testing and consulting company. "Unless we have a client that is well aware of radon or has spent some time in the U.S., most people in Canada don't even know about it."

This ignorance could be deadly.

"Radon exposure is probably more dangerous than mould," says Haverkate. "At least mould will at least start to show you some short-term health issues. Radon shows you absolutely nothing until you get lung cancer."

Rather than quibble about what exposure level is safe, it's important to keep these guidelines in perspective -- any radon exposure can pose a health hazard.

"There's always a danger in creating acceptable levels," says Haverkate. "4.0 pCi/l [equivalent to 148 Bq/m3] doesn't mean you're safe. You're still smoking the equivalent of half a pack of cigarettes a day. You're still running that risk of lung cancer, but it's obviously less than some at 10 pCi/L [370 Bq/m3] or higher."

The only way to know if your home is safe is to test.

Testing your home for radon gas
"Testing is so inexpensive and it's so easy to fix [a radon problem] once you know you've got it," says Haverkate. The trick is figuring out whether you've got it."

Adds Don Fugler, senior researcher, policy and research division of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, "I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to spend that $50 to $100 just to either consider it or eliminate it as a risk in your house. Just do it, just once in the history of your house. Then you don't have to think about it anymore if you come up with a low rating."

For more information on how to test your home for radon, check out Bankrate.ca's story The risk of radon in your home.

Fiona Wagner is a freelance writer in Georgetown, Ont.