For paulines, sue, and bill, 50 pack a day granite countertop

15 years ago

It sure was hard sitting on this while the naysayers slung mud, but now it is published. The newspaper didn't print 1/10th of what they had, perhaps another story, perhaps just not enough room for it all.

I'll post more later.

Karencon, please test that shivakasi as soon as you can. Save some for testing, it will help others.

Here is a link that might be useful: A 50 pack of cigarettes a day granite countertop

Sort by:Oldest

Comments (60)

laurieanntko
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Can I interrupt this brawl to ask a practical question? I am just about to order granite (New Venetian Gold) and would like some advice on how to ascertain that we wouldn't be the "one in a million." Do I have to go buy a geiger counter? Would that test for radon as well?
chrismwgl
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Bill, you obviously think you're some kind of omnicient god or something. Just because one man who is a "director of the Center for Radiological Research" (he wants to promote the safey to radiation) says not to worry about radiation does not make it safe. If you think this fight between the granite industry & activists is rough you are in for a whallop of reality. The physicists have been duking this out for half a century & the government has buried the information & ruined careers of whoever speaks out against the hazards of radiation. Look up John Gofman, Alice Stewart, Rudi Nussbaum, Karl Morgan, Karen Silkwood.

Here's a few links for anyone who doubts low dose ionizing radiation is a hazard:

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/CNR/NoSafeThresh.html

http://www.radonserv.com/message.asp?id=555
http://www.radonserv.com/message.asp?id=556
http://www.radonserv.com/message.asp?id=554

If anyone thinks that these elevated levels of radiation coming from some stones is safe then we'll give you some and you can live with it, sleep with it, & play with it like the MIA wants your babies to play with it (you've seen their brochure, haven't you?)

I can guarantee that there will be homeowners with cancer & radioactive granite countertops coming forward now. Lawyers will iron it all out for you all.
Related Discussions
Can you guess what the bill was????
Q
Comments (138)
I didn't even want to venture a guess without some idea what was in there and the picture was pretty blurry but I could make out the Stouffer's, the water, what I assumed was pop, heard about an appliance. But didn't know if there was a trick to it about gift cards or something. But I was pretty sure it wasn't a "coupon queen" purchase by the items and quantities that I could see. Occasionally I'll do a "deli run" where I pick up deli stuff for a few days meals. Talk about adding up quick! But I have to say, spending money on food doesn't bother me so much, even if it's convenience items. As said, it's better than McJunkle's Was wondering when the answer would come! Thought maybe the Forum Gestapo would turn you in or something! :D Oh, and over $1000 CAD spent and NOT ONE DOGGIE BISCUIT???? Poor Duncan has a legitimate complaint! Just occurred to me... do you use a trailer to haul all that stuff? LOL Oh and the first thing that struck me about that picture was I have NEVER seen a store with that much open space in it! Short of when they're remodeling or resetting the store! What gives? And after flipping back and forth and taking another look at the two carts.... move over chemocurl!
...See More
Radon & Granite Article in today's NY Times
Q
Comments (42)
This is a cut and paste, so I hope Al does not get too upset. We did make mention of is name so that should make him very happy. When marketing a product, one expects a bit of hype. The idea is to show that the product is the best over the competitor's line of product. That is the trade of advertisers and the history of marketing. Some tactics used to sell can be humorous or as serious as the competition between manufacturers. Marketing tactics that play on fears of the general public can be a very powerful tool. In the present day, there's a very popular angle of "green." This is prevalent everywhere in the media. So what happens when you mix a scare tactic under the guise of environmental concern? Buildclean found the answer to that question. The premise seems of the nonprofit organization seems to be admirable but the fact that the "awareness campaign" that Buildclean is currently using seems to be curiously slanted. In fact, the target seems to be the natural stone industry. When Sara Selber of BuildClean was asked how she got involved in natural stone and radon, she explained how she was approached by the owner of C&C North America, a company that produces two products granite and a quartz product called Silestone®. "C&C North America then recruited a quartz company called Cambria, after they learned quartz was an issue, she further explained that the two companies hired her to test quartz, granite and other surfaces for radon emission. Both companies are testing their products through BuildClean, and they contracted two labs one in New York and one in Israel. We have looked all over the C&C website but cannot find any mention of natural stone. When ask what granites emit radon, Sara Selber said; "Not all granites emit radon or radiation. There are some that clearly do. There are some that absolutely don't. We don't know," she said. They're being set up as a non-profit, and they're funded with two large donations. The first is $250,000 from the makers of 'Silestone.' They manufacture quartz countertops, which is a direct competitor to granite. Silestone finance records show that they started out in April of 1998 with a an initial investment of $410K, made there first million in 1998, sales in 2002 was over $70M, and sales in 2006 was well over $260M. it is not hard to see that they have the money to invest $250,000 in a new advertising campaign. BuildClean is also getting money from Cambria, another quartz manufacturer. In fact, Cambria's marketing director is on BuildClean's board of directors. When asked about the funding Sara responds: I don't believe the issue is who our founders are. And I'm not going to have that debate." That answer seems to be clear enough. In a recent interview Mrs. Selber mentions teaming up with Al Gerhart who has some interest in the granite \radon scare. Al Gerhart is a carpenter whohappens to own a website called the Solid Surface Alliance .org. He educated himself, regarding materials he works with that may expose him to harmful elements." Upon further review it seems this "personality" is well known for his view of natural stone. All one has to do is look at the website to get the gist of his viewpoint. Coincidentally, there also seems to be a new business venture for Solid Surface Alliance as the website now sells Geiger counters to detect radiation His debates have earned him quite a place online in forums discussing the subject. After a certain debate on a well known residential forum, a renowned geoscientist in the industry concluded: "Al attempts to hijack debates by choking the system with verbal diarrhea. The problem appears to be that he has a bit of knowledge about some things but not enough sense and understanding of the subjects. In that debate on the Garden Forum he threw in so many fabrications (plain made up lies) that his credibility just plummeted to zero. Anyone who operates this way (by including a number of facts to gain an element of credibility in the eyes of a generally uninformed audience, twisting facts deliberately or because of his lack of understanding, and then throwing in a number of lies) does not deserve extended airtime. Many years ago when doing science psychology I still remember my professor giving the advice to his students that you should never engage a nutter in debate. You can never win an argument with such people. I recognized this early in the forum and that is why I would not engage him in "debate". One of his major problems is that he does not know what the numbers mean and how they are derived." In response to the buildclean tactics, The Marble Institute of America is in the process of doing their own independent study: "The Marble Institute of America (MIA) is grateful for the preliminary response from the members to the newly established Truth About Granite Fund. Based on this positive response, it's clear that their colleagues share their commitment to protect consumers from needless fear mongering by establishing standards for the testing of granite so consumers can safely and comfortably enjoy the beauty, durability and practicality of this natural stone." When we asked the MIA why Sara Speer Selber consider The Truth About Granite Fund as a draconian move that is being waged against BuildClean(TM), they simple responded: "The Truth About Granite Fund was established to help raise funds to develop unbiased, scientific standards for the granite industry, including the testing of granite for radon. No such standards currently exist in the natural stone industry. Previous tests of granite samples have found they are safe. However, the Truth in Granite Fund aims to take advantage of new, advanced scientific instruments that make testing both more practical and more accurate. Our goal is to make sure testing follows consistent protocols, so that future studies are meaningful and based on consistent, approved science not isolated methodologies or unapproved instruments. Ultimately, our goal is to make sure the granite we sell is safe." This latest sales tactic received the attention of an independent group called the Natural Stone Restoration Alliance (NSRA). The NSRA saw Radon testing as an added service that their members could provide to the homeowners along with all their other services for natural stone. Josveek Huligar, one of the lead testers and trainer for the NSRA , invited times Members of the Solid Surface Alliance dot org to discuss and provide proof of this threat to the home owners. The Solid Surface Alliance dot org agreed to provide an alleged radiation producing granite sample that they claim to have in their possession to do independent testing. After an initial agreement between the two groups it seems the Solid Surface Alliance dot org has reneged on the delivery of the alleged material. Mr Huligar was disappointed of the outcome. The NSRA than requested the name of the company that Mr. Gerhart claimed to just have rejected over 10k worth of radon producing granite. When the information was not provided, Huligar ask if he could purchase the next slab that Mr. Gerhart rejected. But for some reason Mr. Gerhart could no longer find a sample for testing. Mr. Huligar went on to say: "All we care about at this point. As for whether are not Stone adds a measurable amount of "radon" in a home, Mr. Gerhart had agreed to come to NY and pick out a hot slab that I would place in my own home after testing my home for radon. Once the granite was installed I would test my home again as described by the EPA and have it tested by someone approved by the EPA. Not only would we do the short and long term test, we would also video tape the whole event, the selection, the creation, the install, and than setting up cameras for anyone to view the stone and meters on the net. I was looking forward to do this, but at this time it appears that Mr. Gerhart has no plans on doing as he said which is a big disappointment." The NSRA plans to push for this simple test, they feel that the consumers only care about one thing; "whether or not adding granite in your home would significantly change the radon levels in a home". At present, the most prudent consumer should watch the outcome of this debate and make an informed decision, not taken in by a scare tactic by advertisers. EPA Confirms That Granite Countertops Pose No Significant Health Risk http://nsraweb.com/index.php/Latest/EPA_Confirms_That_Granite_Countertops_Pose_No_Significant_Health_Risk.html
...See More
the radon thing
Q
Comments (151)
Hey Al, first of all, if you are going to alter a quote, don't provide an easy link to it. I beileve it says 1/2 ppd NOT 12 1/2ppd and it says the 1/2ppd is what the action level for radon in the home provided by the EPA is equivalen to, not exposure from granite countertops. I consider any study you or the SSFA provided samples to, or in any way contributed to, to not be reliable due to your bias. Nor do I believe the MIA should be funding or contributing to a study if it is to be considered unbiased and reliable. WITHIN the scientic community, readings are sometimes taken at face value until proven otherwise, because reputable scientists should adhere to professional standards. You are in no way a part of the scientific community and about as biased as they come. Your readings carry no weight with me. Neither would the MIAs. Even within the scientific community, results must be reproducable before they are give too much weight. Those scientists have said they WILL publish. The thing about peer review journals, though, is that it not just up to the person who does the study. It has to have been conducted in a reliable enough way to pass scrutiny by the peer review board and accepted for publication. Saying you are going to publish doesn't make it so. I hope they do, though. That would mean at lest that others in THEIR scientific field feel that the study was significant enough to share. Then, if others in that field desire, they will conduct their own studies to determine if the results are reproducable. If not, the entire debate starts again. If they are, then we have a starting point. That is a long way from you shouting from the roof tops in forums that Shivakashi should be banned or that one guy with Lung Cancer of unkown type and medical history got it from his countertop. I certainly don't have any reason to believe you would find a single hot stone and submit as many elevated samples as you could get from it that would make it seem like you were right in your calls of the sky falling, any more than I would have reason to believe the MIA or others in the industry would hide hot stones. But it really is better if you guys have no connections to the studies at all. I am sorry Al, this may be your bread and butter, but I don't plan to make it my profession. I left that one and have made NO to attempts to go back. I disliked working with and against biased people who only want to promote their own interests. I do not sell, fabricate, mine or do anything else having to do with rock, granite, solid surface or any other type of countertop. I am a nurse. I refuse to spend my day following links from the SSFA or the MIA. If there were any independent studies from peer reviewed scientific journals linking granite countertops with cancer, I am sure you would have posted to them directly by now. I did do a quick search at one time from Pub Med and could find no studies linking granite countertops to radiation or specifically to radon exposure. I did find articles noting that radon can come from building materials in general, including cement, drywall and granites, but I mentioned that myself at one time. My impression from your reaction then was the same as it is now, that your only interest in radon or radiation exposure and health risks are if it is in granite countertops. Do you also warn your customers that most elevated radon levels come from the soil, not countertops, and that radon can also come from other building materials, and that they should test their homes and act if they find elevated levels even if they purchase solid surface countertops from you? Do you only sell and install "no VOC" cabinets and carpets and adhesives? If you have a direct link to one or more scientific journals that report on radon measurements from granite countertops in buidlings, or exposure to radon or radation from granite countertops, please provide links and I will be happy to look at a couple (not even 10 so please don't provide 50 and expect me to wade through and find a few lines that you can extrapolate into something). These are specifically studies in peer reviewed scientific journals that AT LEAST test granites of the types being used AS COUNTERTOPS. Please don't waste my time by linking to articles in publications by the SSFA or MIA or any other trade journals. In my opinion, relying on studies about granite funded by the SSFA are akin to relying on cancer studies funded by tobacco companies. I have called you strongly biased, I don't recall calling you a liar. I do have some ignorance about radiation reading and testing, it simply isn't my area of expertise any more than it is yours. However, I don't consider you any more of an expert on it and I do tend to be choosy about who I let "teach me" about any subject. No insult intended but I wouldn't consider letting a guy with a kitchen business teach me about the measuring of radon or radiation or the health effects of radon or radiation any more than you would let me teach you about how to install cabinets. I want information without the "spin". I really don't expect to ever get it from you. Sue
...See More
Eco by Cosentino - recycled glass countertop
Q
Comments (49)
I also have ECO by Cosentino in my kitchen, from 2017. I was impressed by their claims that it needs no maintenance (sealing or other) and now I have severe dark staining around the kitchen faucet (possibly due to our hard water), and no idea how to clean it, as their recommendations are to avoid all caustic or abrasive cleaning products. (Might have to experiment, since it's hard to imagine anything will make it WORSE.) (Btw, this replaced a Corian countertop & built-in sink that had a HUGE CRACK running through it, so yeah, no complaints about glass pop-outs or staining, but...) I have Vetrazzo (also recycled glass) in the bathroom, and even though they say to re-seal it, I never have and it looks great 12 years later. I don't know how it would hold up to coffee, red wine, or soy sauce spills, but at least it hasn't had a problem with water! The bad news is that Vetrazzo was bought by Polycor, which has really under-promoted it, and now it's very hard to find. I managed to get a Vetrazzo fireplace mantel in 2017 from a fabricator who had a remnant, but now neither they nor the fabricator who did my bathroom still carry Vetrazzo. I have also had Icestone in another bathroom since 2017 (I guess I am inadvertently testing all the recycled glass countertop materials) and it has also held up well. No water stains. Of the 3, Vetrazzo is my favorite because of the look (the glass bits are bigger than Icestone and just beautiful, IMHO), but I would also go with Icestone again. Don't buy ECO if you're going to have water.
...See More
revans1
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Laurie, I won't pretend to be an expert, so please verify everything I say. I believe that you should be able to rent a device that will measure radiation. I googled "radiation meter rental" and got some good hits. I'd just explain to the rental place how you want to use it, and let them help you pick which one to rent.

Radon is a gas that builds up to its natural saturation point over time, so the radiation meter will not directly measure it. There is a connection, though, between radiation and radon....you can't have radon gas in the absence of a source of radioactivity. For me, a low-enough reading on the radiation meter would assuage any radon fears.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
If anyone thinks that these elevated levels of radiation coming from some stones is safe then we'll give you some and you can live with it, sleep with it, & play with it

I have, now, for my entire life, even as a child (My father and grandfather were also contractors). How long am I supposed to wait before it shows its effects? We're up to 50 years now.

I can guarantee that there will be homeowners with cancer & radioactive granite countertops coming forward now. Lawyers will iron it all out for you all.

Yeah, they'll CERTAINLY straighten things out. These would be the very same lawyers who successfully sued to have the phrase "Contents may be hot" printed on the sides of McDonalds coffee cups. Those are MY heroes!

Bill, you obviously think you're some kind of omnicient god or something.

Not at all. I'm here for one purpose-- to try and help people. AS I said above, I have nothing against the message, SO LONG as it comes from an unbiased source. Al's NOT that source. He's made it very clear that he wants to sink ALL natural stone, in lieu of the plastic crap he pushes. If he'd been straight about the risk, he would've gotten a helluvalot more credibility, than going from town to town (or forum to forum) ringing the bell exclaiming that the sky is falling!! Yes, the article gives food for thought. But the article itself-- the same instrument that gives one cause to think about this whole thing, also says that the odds are so overblown as to have a better chance to be struck by lightning. Tell me where that makes me coming across as some kind of god?

If you think this fight between the granite industry & activists is rough you are in for a whallop of reality.

You do what you have to do. So will I. I've already been threatened with corporate lawsuits and worse for exposing problems. You've got a long way to go.
janran
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
There's a saying in medical school "Half of what we are going to teach you is wrong, and half of it is right. Our problem is that we dont know which half is which"

Until we have definitive evidence on this or any other health issue, all we can do is make the best decision for ourselves based on current knowledge and opinions.

I for one have to priortize my fears and worries or I couldn't leave my house...or dye my hair...or eat non-organic vegetables...or...

I'm willing to be in denial on this issue...there are too many others with more substantial evidence.
cate1337
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
This has gotten ridiculous.

Al, as an average KF member, I'm just not listening any more. My attention span has been exceeded. I was interested when the discussion started, and I've followed it off and on over the past two year. It's gotten me concerned about the unidentified quartz particles in my counter. Now, however, I'm overloaded by the facts, propaganda, and mix of accurate and inaccurate interpretation of data. Let's be honest: I'm not going to have my counter tested, and I'm not going to rip it out. I don't have the time and energy to devote to that. Frankly, the invective and mixed-up logic here has turned me off to the whole thing. I suspect I'm not the only one. I probably shouldn't enter the fray; but I wanted you to know that, if your audience is truly the average consumer, and if you're truly concerned about our safety, you're not reaching me any more. Keep working with the NY Times, with legitimate peer-reviewed journals, and with other reputable outlets. I'll read those. However, when I come back to GW to the ranting, raving, and name-calling, it's hard to give even the legitimate information the time of day.

Bill et al.: What are you getting out of continuing the conversation? I for one wouldn't think worse of anyone for simply letting the thread go.
revans1
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Cate, I agree that engaging Mr. and Mrs. Al is fruitless. It should be possible, though, for this board to just ignore them, and then have a substantive and quite possibly informative discussion of this topic.
tklahr
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Al, youve been building this moment up for so long now, but it doesnt appear that this article has had quite the impact you thought it would. After reading your posts throughout the past 18 months or so, Ive formed a pretty firm opinion of you, as many others have done it seems. Whatever impact this article would have had (at least on me) has been significantly lessened by your behavior on this forum. Basically, all of the attacks and distortions have numbed me to your message. As cate1337 mentioned, whether or not there is any truth to what you say here is no longer relevant to me. As a result of reading your posts, when I read an article like this I immediately become skeptical. Your warnings have had the OPPOSITE effect on me than what you intended.

Even though I am probably a lost cause for you, Id like to offer a few suggestions so that your future posts might be a little more effective. Honestly, if you do these things, members here (who have not already formed the same opinion as I) will be able to read your posts with an open mind and may actually agree with you from time to time:

1. Try to be nice. Im not talking about not calling names or not making threats. I am suggesting that you try to avoid belittling, intimidation, and using fear to make most of your arguments. You talk about civility in a lot of your posts, but you have a long way to go on this one. If you are much more cordial than those you are debating, it will go a long way.

2. More importantly (and this one Im sure will be harder for you) try to let your information speak for itself. Inserting creative titles for your links or putting words in the mouth of the EPA does NOT help. Its really hard to get anything out of a lot of the information you present because you apparently feel the need to twist the facts, interpret them for us or add a little something extra (and untrue) to drive home your point. Whatever information you have, by all means offer it here, but try to let it alone and allow it to speak for itself.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Bill et al.: What are you getting out of continuing the conversation? I for one wouldn't think worse of anyone for simply letting the thread go.

Cate-- As a matter of fact, I answered that very question. If you go to the thread "That Radon Thing", I answered that question very succinctly. I don't want anyone thinking that I give Al ANY kind of credibility by my silence. Trust me-- I'd save a small fortune in Maalox if I DID ignore these threads.
november
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
I'm with Cate. I've been reading these posts for sheer entertainment value for a while, but yikes. I think everything probably kills you. This is probably why people live to be in their 80s or 90s instead of living to age 150. Environmental toxins, food-borne toxins, atmospheric radiation, on and on and on... If the granite doesn't get you (and I have granite! and I love it!), the non-organic milk will.
lisagraz
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Al
I will test my granite because I dont want to win the 1 in a million lotto. I want to say I support your views and evidence on this issue and I think you have been more reasonable and polite than any of the stoner fanatics that oppose you. Why are they so worried --it seems that the people in the articles with dangerous levels of radon replaced the granite with a safer substitute.The granite business will survive.
neesie
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Thanks, Bill, for so eloquently putting into writing what I'd like to say to that "damn Al."

I don't think I've ever seen him post anything normal on a forum regarding kitchen questions, design or opinions on appliances and faucets. He just has an agenda to discredits granite every chance he gets. Fine. Don't buy it for your home, Al. You are getting more than just irritating now.

BTW, Good Morning America just resurrected the cell phone link to cancer this morning. Al, if you're so worried about getting cancer I assume you have a cell phone. Get rid of it now! Bad phone! Bad phone! Also: the sky is falling!
kailleanm
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
You guys actually sound kind of silly. You can disagree with this Al guy's delivery and style of posts, but it does seem as if there is enough info out there to at least warrant looking into it more.

If I were purchasing one of the newly introduced granites, I would definitely be interested in seeing if there was any truth to all the hype.

Of course it doesn't mean everyone should rush to rip out their beloved granite counters, but if purchasing new, why wouldn't you be prudent? Why just stick your head in the sand?
laurieanntko
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
I agree with kailleanm...and thanks so much to revans1 for the practical advice on how to be prudent.
karencon
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Well, this is the first time I'd be in the running for the "one in a million". Even though I knew it was coming, it didn't feel to great to see this article with the picture of my beloved granite. Hey guys, the granite in question is not a new exotic.....members here have informed me that my granite was popular about 5 years ago. We have been living with ours for almost three years.

Hey Al, I get it, I get it! I should test. Do you want to send me back into therapy? The ciggarette comments are just not necessary. I'm a mother..........already have plenty to be freaked by. Please stop using me to try to scare everyone else.
jerzeegirl
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Isn't concrete also a source for elevated radon levels in the home? Concrete is a pretty common building material.
doc8404
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
I'm no stone expert all all. BUT . . . .

Gramma and Grampa's house in Berks County PA had a tested radon level of over 200 times the 'normal' US background level.

You see, their stone house was build directly on top of a solid rock (granite) ledge with no floor in the basement - just dirt, rock and a bit of mud.

My grandparents lived in the house for all of their lives. Gramma died of heart trouble when she as 91. Grammpa died of old age at 96.

Good enough for me!!

Love my stone countertops - hehehehe
kailleanm
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
My understanding is that concrete is not a source of radon itself, but it is porous and thus allows, for example, ground radon to leak through basement floors, drains, etc.

It is not a source of radon, but neither is it a barrier to radon.
jerzeegirl
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
kailleann: I think it's can also be a source. I read somewhere that they tested a building in So. Florida because they were finding radon on the upper floors of the building and discovered that a concrete ceiling was the source of the radon.
kailleanm
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
It seems you are right jerzeegirl. Interesting! Apparently, it varies greatly by region, depending on the type of stone used in concrete.

I guess we should have our concrete counters tested, too. I did read that the off-gassing (correct term?) of radon from concrete is worse when it's new (particularly, the first two years), and increases with humidity (I'm on the Wet Coast! :-0 )
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Hey JG-- Who needs the HT forum!! :-)

This is nothing-- you oughta see the OTHER threads.
luvmyguys
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
I'm with kailleanm, laurieanntko, revans1, and lisagraz. I keep going back to the rest of the "one in a million" quote- the part that says "If you can choose another counter that doesnt elevate your risk, however slightly, why wouldnt you?"" And I mean choosing another granite counter. I just want to know how to find that safer top. Revans, I think your idea is a good one. Thank you for suggesting it.

Frankly, both sides of this debate lost their credibility with me a while ago. Both sides, in mho, have used personal attacks rather than staying focused on the issue. Al is a master at pushing people's buttons and the "stoners" are masters at reacting. I think the pro-stone people give Al a lot of power by constantly reacting to his posts.

clinresga-
I just have to comment- I agree with the risk benefit analysis but we certainly take action to minimize the risks of daily life. I drive but use a seat belt and my car has front and side air bags, I go out in the sun but use sunscreen (and take Vit D because I didn't get enough UV), I wash all produce carefully, I buy organic beef, I don't drink at all, I exercise and try to eat a healthy diet. And I'm smart enough not to stand in an open field during a lightning storm. Why would I want to intentionally bring extra radiation/radon into my home and expose my kids if there was a safer alternative? That's nutty.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Why would I want to intentionally bring extra radiation/radon into my home and expose my kids if there was a safer alternative?

There's the problem right there, and why I've reacted to Al every time he's shown his "face" in here. You want to talk about safer alternative, but that can still be granite!! Unfortunately, these alarmist kinds of statements will completely drown that fact out.

You know, several times now, Al's talked about how "green" the solid surface countertops are, and how much better they are for everyone. He's now added to that by scaring the pants off of everyone about all natural stone (Note I didn't say granite-- there's already one person in here worried about her soapstone because of this clown).

Every time the discussion of green building has come up in this forum, I've said the same thing. There's absolutely no such thing as "green" building. Everything we do, affects the environment in one of two ways. Either it takes something out of the environment that WAS there, or it puts something back into the environment that shouldn't BE there. Now think about that when you start thinking about those plastic countertops (Corain, Silestone, etc.). Think about what got PUT into the environment while creating that plastic, not to mention the sludge created while turning the plastic sheet into those lovely countertops and then think about just how little damage is done to the environment taking a stone out that's almost as common as air. Might there be some that shouldn't be used? Obviously so. But by NO MEANS does that mean that even CLOSE to all of it is bad.

Now you do with your kitchen as you wish. Just before you make your decision, use a little common sense.
jerzeegirl
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Why would I want to intentionally bring extra radiation/radon into my home and expose my kids if there was a safer alternative?

Because it's possible that there is a granite that might be "safer" than an alternative material you might chose to use. I suppose even laminates can be unsafe if they are applied on plywood that is off-gassing formaldehyde.
stonegirl
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
As a "stoner" I have to chime in here. We are needled by Al and his antics because he willfully spreads misinformation.

He is quite a master at that too, because he takes a kernel of truth and pads it with a tremendous amount of huff and puff and turns it into a bugaboo that makes Godzilla look like a cute little gecko.

There is a huge piggy bank behind the manufactured surface industry (as in DuPont, Samsung and a few others) and they are trying to win back market share by intimidating consumers away from natural stone. Follow the money behind BuildClean, as merely one example. The stone industry, because of lack of organization and regulation, does not have the same unified clout and has to rely on educated craftspersons to spread the word and educate folks.

This is why we find Al so irritating. He is knowingly and gleefully spreading a lot of dubious "facts" and rely on his verbosity to wear people down.

Should you be concerned about building materials in your home? Sure - it is your and your family's health and happiness at stake. Is this radon/radiation/cancer thing a valid concern? MAYBE. There just is not enough valid and impartial research to corroborate this either way.

On the other hand: People have since the dawn of time been living in and around rocks of various descriptions - from the first people dwelling in caves, to modern man living with stone tops in his kitchen. There has never been a recorded case of any kind of building stone related occurrence of ill health (bar maybe a piece of rock falling on someone causing injury or death). This would lead me to believe that there is not a really big deal to be worried about.

Yes - I am biased and yes, too, I am tired of trying to prove a negative, as Al is constantly trying to make us do.

By being overly loud and confusing, Al has created an environment where doubt flourishes. The only thing I can ask of you is to let cooler heads prevail and to look at the entire matter without losing the forest for the trees.

Thanks,
Adriana
kailleanm
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
It's misinformation to you, because you do not share Al's opinion.

To those of us just seeking to know more about this issue, it's just plain information. Which we will then weigh against the opposing information you provide. That's how decisions are made and knowledge gained.

Shouting down other people and name calling, whichever "side" it's coming from, doesn't contribute to knowledge sharing.

Neither do self-appointed hall monitors.
revans1
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Adriana's post was civil, reasonable, and well-informed. She didn't deserve your reply, kailleanm.
kailleanm
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
I'm sorry if my post indicated I was only addressing stonegirl. I addressed her specific use of the word "misinformation" only.

But I did not mean to suggest her post was name-calling. I meant that generally on posts that this Al guy is involved with, there is a lot of name calling and personal attacks which do little to add to anyone's knowledge. Very sorry, Adriana, to come across as speaking only to you. I should have been more clear.

In fact, no one poster stands out on these "debates" for me amid all the din and insults.

As to the hall monitor reference, again, I meant the wider group who keeps telling "Al" to go away and stop spreading false information. At this point, no one seems to be providing any definitive proof that he is wrong. Therefore, some of us, including myself, might be interested in at least some of what he has to say. Just as I am interested in hearing from those who believe differently and have knowledge to back up their opinions.
miles661
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Not so suprising is how this topic has appeared on IkeaFans and HGTV- the two other boards I participate on. I don't have granite (could never afford such a luxury) so I'm kinda on the fence about this issue. I'm thinking that we all die from something. And I've yet to hear of any demonstrable proof that granite countertops are dangerous in any way. A crisis today is yesterdays' old news.
Does anyone remember original Fiesta Ware from the 30s? The original Fiesta Ware Red was made with a uranium right up until '43.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
kailleanm-- the theory that some granite may be hot is pretty much a given. I even said so in another thread, many moons ago. I also agreed that atleast for the moment, today's article SEEMS to be unbiased. But even that article states that it's a very small percentage of GRANITE that may be hot. If you were to believe Al, ALL stone, granite or not-- every single piece of natural stone is hot, and festering with bacteria, just WAITING to make your kids sick and kill the old and weak. I'm sorry, but the way he's blown it way out of proportion is misinformation.

You're wrong.
Circus Peanut
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
It hasn't escaped my attention that for someone who fights so vocally on behalf of the consumer, this guy Al has remained conspicuously silent in response to the numerous worried homeowners' questions on this topic today, despite his self-proclaimed superior knowledge in the field.

For the forum members: are there any real actions that granite owners can take who are worried? Good references to sources for reputable local or national testing offices, standard procedures, guidelines for what should even be tested for, etc? Perhaps it would be good to put together a thread with concrete suggestions. (No pun intended.) I nominate Revans1, who seems pretty clear-headed and helpful about this stuff.
paulines
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Mrs. Al wrote, "If you think this fight between the granite industry & activists is rough you are in for a whallop of reality."

Holy carp, please don't tell me you consider yourself among activists, lolol

And kailleanm, Bill is right, you're wrong. Anyone who sells something that *they believe* is and go on (and on and on) record saying is dangerous, dirty and inferior is an opportunist, a bottom feeder.

For pete's sake, he even misleadingly titled this thread and then makes up some cock & bull reasoning for his 'mistake'.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
My suggestion, (even though I'm not revans1) would be to get in touch with your respective state governments, and ask them where you can get radiation testing done. As for radon testing, just about any building inspector should be able to help you with that.
luvmyguys
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Stonegirl-
Thanks for your thoughtful post. I agree with much of it, and I too, am getting tired of Al's verbosity (love that word- it really fits here). Al, we consumers get the point, OK?

bill_vincent and jerzeegirl-
Just want to clarify when I said in my earlier post about "choosing a safer alternative," I meant choosing a safer granite. I mentioned that in the first paragraph but I guess I wasn't clear. I love the look of granite and am not considering solid surface despite Al's verbosity -lol. That's why I still read these threads- in hopes of finding out how to tell the difference between "hot" slabs and "quiet" ones. Since our remodel hasn't started yet and I still have a choice, I would really prefer a quiet one- just in case.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
chrismwgl is "Mrs. Al"??

Good to know. Birds of a feather, and all that.
brindamour
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
You know, I'm not going to add to the debate one way or the other. However, I will say that when I saw the NYT headline this morning I knew it was going to turn into a raging debate here on KF.

Thank you, Adriana, for the laugh I got at the visual of a caveman getting bonked on the noggin by a falling rock.

I happen to live in a semi-ancient home with a stone foundation sitting on granite ledge, and even knowing that there was a debate raging about radon/radiation levels from counters, I STILL opted to go with a material straight from Mother Earth's bounty. If the counters (Verde Butterfly if it matters at all) don't get me, then something else surely will.

Bill, you have consistently been a voice of reason on this topic and many others. Thank you. If you ever want to get together for cup of tea or coffee in my section on New England I'd be all for it. We could sit on a couple of boulders and chat.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
brindamour-- we could do that!!
brindamour
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Sounds wonderful! Thanks for the link. I'll post over there so as not to further derail this thread.
kailleanm
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Thanks to everyone who informed me I'm "wrong" - wrong for what? Wanting to get as much info as I can so that I can decide for myself what seems most reasonable? Wrong for saying lay off the insults on both sides?

I guess it's another case of "if you're not with us, you're against us."
hotgranitekills
Original Author
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Clinresga,

If you work for a company taking care of pilots, would it not follow that having higher radiation doses allows the pilots to fly more hours per week? Saves airlines money? My point is hardly any advice from those who stand to benefit from higher radiation standards is credible. If I am wrong, I posed it as a question, it doesn't apply if you work for the pilot union.

Dr. Chiodo told me on the phone a few weeks ago (he called me), that a storm of lawsuits were coming. As a business, I can't afford to win too many lawsuits like that.

Laurieanntko,
New Venetian gold is usually low, .15 mR/hr to .25 mR/hr combined radiation (not all is a problem unless some of it indicates Radon). But get it tested, it isn't worth even a one in a million chance.

By the way, that quote was way off. BEIR VII gives the risk of 1 rem as 4 in 10,000. 1 mR x 730 (2hrs per day x 365 days) = .73 Rem (simplified Roentgen into Rem)
More like 2.92 deaths per 10,000 or 292 per 1,000,000 risk. Dr. Llope commented tonight on that portion of the article, gave me the 4 per 10,000 per Rem risk rate.

So NVG at say .2 would have a risk of .58 per 10,000 or 58 deaths per 1,000,000

Lots of people blaming me for all the fuss, but this time others are defending my posting the info. All remember this, all of this started when one lady asked about red granite. I simply said that the reds were the highest radiation in many cases, told her to think about picking another color. Then the abuse started.....

People called me a liar, stupid, twisted, pathetic, I could go on and on. I patiently replied to every single attack with volumes of facts. I had to.

Some posters new to the fray pointed out that my facts were lost in the personal attacks. Well, that was the intention of my foes. They learned early on to get the thread dirty enough, and it would be deleted, here and on HGTV.

I do slip into sarcasm on occasion, usually pointed at a long, long, time antagonistic person. Usually one who refuses to admit when they have been proven wrong.

But, today is a new day. I see three or four posters defending my posting the info and chastising those who attempt to shout it down. As long as that continues, I will ignore the personal attacks from the other side and just answer questions like those of Laurieanntko.

You all watch my back and I'll try to be more polite.

Tklahr,
I am truly sorry for the belittling, someone calls me a liar over and over again without once proving a single instance and I resort to belittling.
Not sure when I was intimidating, please provide examples so I can do better.
The facts are scary, not my portrayal.
Now I have to defend my EPA statements. Paulines, Sue, and Bill have long claimed I was twisting the facts despite posting emails from the EPA. Now all see that the EPA isn't conducting studies because of lack of funds, not lack of interest. I can tell you that the regional head of the EPA was very, very, helpful and concerned. They are doing what they can with what budget they have. If the Argonne National Lab finds a funding source, perhaps that will help. We do have a US senator willing to pursue funding for health risk studies on granite. Soon we will have that conversation, been holding off for about three months to firm up the alliance.

Now, TKlahr, unfortunatly you also had to write that I was twisting facts. Name three and provide proof that the facts were presented unfaithfully. See how this gets started?

Lisagraz,
Thank you. I have tried. I agree replacing with safe granite is okay. Just remember that I can not ever, ever, say to one of my customers that a particular granite is safe unless it has zero radiation or Radon.... .01 uR/Hr of Gama has a tiny risk, 2.92 deaths per million. A very small risk, but if taken with informed consent, I have no quarrel with those that take it. I say use the stuff in outdoor kitchens, little use= little exposure.

Neesie,
that doesn't say I haven't posted on other subject, it says that you haven't seen it. Proves nothing. Is there a particular reason for cursing me?
By the way yourself, CBS morning news should be interviewing Stan Liebert, one of my allies, in the morning. Stan is getting some of the samples we are cutting tomorrow, 12.5 mR/hr (3,650 death rate per 1,000,000) There are those scary facts again, sorry. Wouldn't you want to know though?

kaileanms and laurieanntko,
Thank you for your kind words and for standing up to the mob. My delivery and style would be much different if the mob would attack the facts not the person. In most cases, I just deliver them.

Sorry karencon,

Like I said, ventilate. Open a door for half an hour, or a nearby window. Run your vent a hood. And don't freak out yet. No one knows for sure it is as hot as the others. And there were others, perhaps Stan will be able to speak of them in the morning and also bring up John the contractor.

Jerzeegirl,

I have not done deep research, but I have been told by one that has that concrete can have as much as 20 pCi/G of Radium present (parent element of Radon). The Houston granite top had 1,130 pCi/G of Radium. Some states have concrete standards, many don't. Some that do set limits of 5 pCi/G for the completed mix, 10 pCi/G for any one material in the mix. Floriday is studying concrete Radon, it is an issue.

I'll tell you who is the expert in this, Bill Levy of Floriday, Associated Radon Services. There is a link on my blog site.

Luvmyguys,
Am I a master of pushing buttons? Or am I just hitting nerves? But, your opinion is yours and it was well presented, so I have no problem. Thanks for supporting the issues.

Randy,
kaileanms post wasn't offensive nor pointed at anyone in particular. If some took it that way, they were looking for the offense.

And for the 10,000 th time, no one has ever heard me say all granites are dangerous. There was an expert quoted today that said no amout of radiation is safe, was it the one in a million guy? Technically only granite with zero radiation are "safe", might be one or two like that. Absolute black has always been hard to measure, we will find others.

Circus peanut,
Today I handled phone calls all day long, while trying to run my shop and employees. Companies wanting meters and training to use them, icons of our industry, senior editors of trade journals, numerous allies in this effort. I managed to take a few hours in the morning post the links cause if someone was considering granite today and didn't have this info, they might make a costly mistake or someone might be harmed.

Then tonight, as usual it takes three hours to answer emails. Then our Gamma Spectrometer arrived, just had to set it up and see it work. With that, we can get a true number of the decays per minute. A quick digression here, remember the MIA's Laungmuir comment about .85 of a atomic decay per year from his example of a granite countertop? This machine counted like a half million decays in about one hour, Bordeaux. I think my estimation of Langmuir being off my 93 billion is way off, what comes after billion? Trillion?

Kaileanms,
welcome to my world, they have attacked everyone that has stood up to them so far. Please don't let them intimidate you.

Now, I feel better. I'll start ignoring the silly ones as long as you guys keep them off my back. The simple fact is that there is no one else with the facts of the stone business, the health aspects, the radiation measurement experience, the access to samples, or who has the contacts that I have. I'll keep on getting the info posted, will try to be nicer as long as someone has my back.

Thanks,
Al
miles661
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Still I wonder... What's the big deal?
We're all gonna bite it anyway.
A bus.
A coronary.
Lightening.
Kindness.
Something.
So when will this little business of some minor radiation THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LIVING WITH FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS finally blow over?
Very soon I hope.
I don't know about anyone else but the science lessons bore me faster than hetero sex.
sue_ct
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
"I guess it's another case of "if you're not with us, you're against us."
No it isn't, Kailleanm. If you are concerned, please have your house tested and the NY times article gives people who can do testing. Your local building dept or unversity can likely also direct you, or you can look up "radon" in the local yellow pages. The cost mentioned isn't bad.
Regarding the countertops, the problem is that there is no list of which granites might give off higher levels of radiation or radon, what percentage of those granites are likely to be a problem, just how much of a problem they are, or even if a small percentage of all types can give off some. That is why unbiased studies need to be done. Until they are, if you really want to be sure, yes, it looks like you will have to test your own slabs.
I believe the NY Times article actually states that the smoking example is 1/2 pack, which is 10 cigarettes, not 12 1/2 packs or 50 packs, which is 250 cigarettes and 1000 cigarettes per day respectively. It is the "action level" in your home at which the EPA recommends acting that is supposed to be the equivalent of smoking 10 cigarettes per day. I did not see any examples at all relating readings from countertops to cigarette smoking. That would be a very difficult calculation to make because readings seem to vary so widely and everyone spends different amts of time at the countertops. The only thing there seems to be good information on is the overall levels in your home.
"It's misinformation to you, because you do not share Al's opinion.
To those of us just seeking to know more about this issue, it's just plain information"...

Unfortunately, not everyone goes back to the source to verify what is said. This smoking statement is just one example.

There is a saying I like, it is "Trust but verify". The problem is that when you do try to verify and it is repeatedly not verifiable, the trust dies.

The problem with Al to me is kind of like the problem medical people have with hypocondriacs. The problem with hypocondriacs is that they get sick too. So just when you start to disregard everything they say, it turns out something is true. It can just be exhausting to get to the truth. :)

Sue
oruboris
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Uncorked a good [if modest] Barefoot Cab tonight. The 'cork' was plastic, because no one has been able to proove, to the statisfaction of the lawyers, that natural cork is food safe-- a couple thousand years is far too short a test period, I guess...

So the producers of wine and the enjoyers of wine take it in the shorts-- my 'cork' smelled a bit like the La Brea tar pits-- and the lawyers get richer.

Oh yeah, remember the Alar scare? Apples were deadly, killing people at random like drunken hyperactive pcp snorting roid raging teenage white suppremicists with machine guns. Wasn't safe to walk the produce aisles without a bullet proof vests. Parents everywhere replaced the evil fruit in their children's diet with safe, wholesome french fries.

I suppose what bothers me most about this thread is the unabashed glee, the 'I'm right and you're wrong take that suckers we're gonna sue you into the poor house' tone of the original post. It's why I don't care about politics any more-- I'm tired of the 'Gotcha!'

Because, as we all know, if it's in print or on the innerwebs, it abostively posilutely must be true.

Just ask the lawyers.
paulines
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Here's a thread initiated by mrs. Al on a site more or less devoted to solid surface fabricators. What I found particularly interesting is that andy did't find a single 'hot stone' in among the 3 yards he tested.

Anyone know who furnished the test subjects for the study?
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Now I have to defend my EPA statements. Paulines, Sue, and Bill have long claimed I was twisting the facts despite posting emails from the EPA.

No, actually we've accused you of twisting the facts BECAUSE of posting emails from the EPA. What you were saying was contradicted by the references you were posting, and still are.

If the Argonne National Lab finds a funding source, perhaps that will help. We do have a US senator willing to pursue funding for health risk studies on granite.

So long as the funding doesn't come from SSA, or BuildClean, or others like them, I'd be behind that 100%.

Now, TKlahr, unfortunatly you also had to write that I was twisting facts. Name three and provide proof that the facts were presented unfaithfully. See how this gets started?

Lisagraz,
Thank you. I have tried. I agree replacing with safe granite is okay. Just remember that I can not ever, ever, say to one of my customers that a particular granite is safe unless it has zero radiation or Radon.... .01 uR/Hr of Gama has a tiny risk, 2.92 deaths per million. A very small risk, but if taken with informed consent, I have no quarrel with those that take it. I say use the stuff in outdoor kitchens, little use= little exposure.

First you challenge someone to show where facts "were presented unfaithfully", and then in the very next line, you provide it for her!! Once again, making it sound like all granite is dangerous, when that's a big load of hooey!! Al, you make it too easy to discredit you.

By the way yourself, CBS morning news should be interviewing Stan Liebert, one of my allies, in the morning. Stan is getting some of the samples we are cutting tomorrow, 12.5 mR/hr (3,650 death rate per 1,000,000) There are those scary facts again, sorry. Wouldn't you want to know though?

Just so long as he lets people know it's not all, or even MOST granite that are problematic. Otherwise, he may end up getting served in the very near future.

They just announced the story coming up, and even one of the anchors asked if this study was funded by the formica people!!
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Just a couple of posts from that thread:

Mrs. Al (Christina):

I don't know if Al has already posted this but here goes & I hope Andy doesn't delete it either!

Here's the NY Times article Al has been warning people about for the past 2 weeks.

I've seen your posts Andy and I think you're pretty low. How much ___ did you kiss at the MIA?

Andy:

Christina,

I will go easy this time, but the next time you make a comment about my post being "Low" I won't be so kind. You are way out of line here considering what I have put up with to support you and Al.

First I will start by saying that you, BuildClean, the MIA and others have no conclusive, scientific data to support your claims. NONE at all. You are doing testing now and have had some input from scientist, but that doesn't make it true.

They used to believe that silicone implants would kill you. Lawyers put companies out of business and only to find that there is absolutely no evidence to back the claims.

Research on Granite materials being unsafe is a noble effort and much appreciated. However, doing this research under the banner "Solid Surface Alliance" is not appreciated by many folks in the Solid Surface industry. Associations should inform and protect the interests of the industry they support. It shouldn't be their primary goal to knock down a competing product.

As far as ass kissing goes, I haven't kissed any as of yet. I will let you know when I do. The MIA did a study by a scientist and I posted the study. Take the information and do what you need with it. I am not here to tell you what to think, I am just here to provide the information that others are putting forth. Would you rather the people in the industry be ignorant.

I tested granite slabs with a meter Al sent me. I tested three slabs yards, posted the highest readings from them all, discussed it here and determined that none of the slabs posed a real threat to anyone.

And finally, as far as deleting the link to an article, none of these granite threads have been deleted and you know it. I don't much appreciate you coming on the FabNet, posting your findings and articles and then accuse me of deleting them when you know otherwise.

Respectfully,

Andy
hotgranitekills
Original Author
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Plenty of whoppers told on this thread.
The 4 pCi/L was equated to a half pack of cigarettes, the Dr. Sugarman home had 100 pCi/L, 25 times the 4 pCi/L .
For the math challenged, that would be 12.5 packs a day of radon FROM THAT COUNTERTOP.
No list of hot granite will ever replace testing each and every slab and every square foot of that slab. Thinking that a study can prevent that from happening is ignorant.
Kailleanm,
I think by now you can see why these people came to hate me so much. Like you, I asked questions. Like you, I provided proof that was not to their liking. You are walking the same road I walked, dare to disagree and they attack you.
In the end, do we respond to the mob or do we remember that the past few days completely discredited them? Imagine being in their position, caught defending purveyors of toxic products, being unmasked first by me, then by Dr. Llope, then by the mainstream media reporting what the scientists were reporting.
Then again, the morals and values of one that would stand up against a mob wouldn't likely be able to imagine themselves in their position.
Fabnet, the forum being used to club my wife, was started as a multi material site. A few months ago, an influx of granite companies started advertising, then a huge number of posts about this very subject were removed from public view, even members had to sign up to read them. A few years previously, the exact same thing happened to the threads on granite and bacteria, removed to beyond view of the public and most members.
Christina is really, really, P.O.ed at the guy that runs the site. As they say in Mexico, the guy took the silver instead of the lead. I rarely post there anymore, just when it suits my needs, releasing new info to the fabricators. One of the reasons is that many of the posters there are more concerned about their pocket book than doing the right thing. As an example, Andy found granites at 60 and 80 uR/hr, the safe level is from 40 to 20 depending on what level of risk you are prepared to take as a business or as a human being.
Me? I say never throw away a tool, even a badly bent one. You just might need it some day. I use the site for my own needs, after several years of providing a lot of the content. Industry heads read the thing daily.

Look, this entire hateful opposition to the testing effort is just about money. The other side would rather families be harmed rather than lose a few bucks in a slow time, how can one begin to think that one can reason with the like?
iamnodiy
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
I was watching the news tonight and I saw the granite segment for the first time. It really wasn't any different than when they reported on cell phones and brain tumors. It didn't give anymore information than the preview gave. Granite is a popular product that many people have now, just like cell phones are. The report gets your attention and you stay tuned to the station. We have Corian. Granite is not our thing so I am not trying to push rock on anyone.
My concern is all of the vegetables that keep turning up with ecoli. People have actually gotten sick from that. I still havn't eaten a raw tomato. When they report that a person has developed granite induced lung cancer then I will be concerned. In the mean time I will just keep an open ear and an open mind. For what it's worth I would rather take my chances in a room full of granite than a room full of second hand smoke.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Al, it's not that people in the industry are afraid of the message. They're afraid of the sensationalism that you bring to it. It's not a danger to their pocketbooks. It's a danger to their LIVES, and you know it. You've joyfully proclaimed more times than I can count that shops all over the country are going to close because of this, and lawyers are going to have a field day.

It's not the message. It's your attitude. You want to know the worst part about it? You're not even going to take this criticism as constructive. You'll cry about how I'm attacking you. So be it.

I just don't see how someone can be so happy about ruining so many lives.
bill_vincent
15 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
This from someone who was originally interested in HELPING you:

In a recent interview Mrs. Selber mentions teaming up with Al Gerhart who has some interest in the granite \radon scare.

Al Gerhart is a carpenter whohappens to own a website called the SolidSurfaceAlliance.org. He educated himself, regarding materials he works with that may expose him to harmful elements."

Upon further review it seems this "personality" is well known for his view of natural stone. All one has to do is look at the website to get the gist of his viewpoint. Coincidentally, there also seems to be a new business venture for Solid Surface Alliance as the website now sells Geiger counters to detect radiation

His debates have earned him quite a place online in forums discussing the subject.

After a certain debate on a well known residential forum, a renowned geoscientist in the industry concluded:
"Al attempts to hijack debates by choking the system with verbal diarrhea. The problem appears to be that he has a bit of knowledge about some things but not enough sense and understanding of the subjects. In that debate on the Garden Forum he threw in so many fabrications (plain made up lies) that his credibility just plummeted to zero.

Anyone who operates this way (by including a number of facts to gain an element of credibility in the eyes of a generally uninformed audience, twisting facts deliberately or because of his lack of understanding, and then throwing in a number of lies) does not deserve extended airtime. Many years ago when doing science psychology I still remember my professor giving the advice to his students that you should never engage a nutter in debate. You can never win an argument with such people. I recognized this early in the forum and that is why I would not engage him in "debate".

One of his major problems is that he does not know what the numbers mean and how they are derived."

In response to the buildclean tactics, The Marble Institute of America is in the process of doing their own independent study:

"The Marble Institute of America (MIA) is grateful for the preliminary response from the members to the newly established Truth About Granite Fund. Based on this positive response, it's clear that their colleagues share their commitment to protect consumers from needless fear mongering by establishing standards for the testing of granite so consumers can safely and comfortably enjoy the beauty, durability and practicality of this natural stone."

When we asked the MIA why Sara Speer Selber consider The Truth About Granite Fund as a draconian move that is being waged against BuildClean(TM), they simple responded:

"The Truth About Granite Fund was established to help raise funds to develop unbiased, scientific standards for the granite industry, including the testing of granite for radon. No such standards currently exist in the natural stone industry. Previous tests of granite samples have found they are safe. However, the Truth in Granite Fund aims to take advantage of new, advanced scientific instruments that make testing both more practical and more accurate. Our goal is to make sure testing follows consistent protocols, so that future studies are meaningful and based on consistent, approved science not isolated methodologies or unapproved instruments. Ultimately, our goal is to make sure the granite we sell is safe."

This latest sales tactic received the attention of an independent group called the Natural Stone Restoration Alliance (NSRA). The NSRA saw Radon testing as an added service that their members could provide to the homeowners along with all their other services for natural stone. I am one of the lead testers and trainer for the NSRA , invited times Members of the SolidSurfaceAlliance.org to discuss and provide proof of this threat to the home owners.

The SolidSurfaceAlliance.org agreed to provide an alleged radiation producing granite sample that they claim to have in their possession to do independent testing. After an initial agreement between the two groups it seems the Solid Surface Alliance has reneged on the delivery of the alleged material. I was disappointed of the outcome. The NSRA than requested the name of the company that Mr. Gerhart claimed to just have rejected over 10k worth of radon producing granite. When the information was not provided, I ask if he could purchase the next slab that Mr. Gerhart rejected. But for some reason Mr. Gerhart could no longer find a sample for testing. Mr. Huligar went on to say: "All we care about at this point. As for whether are not Stone adds a measurable amount of "radon" in a home, Mr. Gerhart had agreed to come to NY and pick out a hot slab that I would place in my own home after testing my home for radon. Once the granite was installed I would test my home again as described by the EPA and have it tested by someone approved by the EPA. Not only would we do the short and long term test, we would also video tape the whole event, the selection, the creation, the install, and than setting up cameras for anyone to view the stone and meters on the net. I was looking forward to do this, but at this time it appears that Mr. Gerhart has no plans on doing as he said which is a big disappointment."

The NSRA plans to push for this simple test, they feel that the consumers only care about one thing; "whether or not adding granite in your home would significantly change the radon levels in a home". At present, the most prudent consumer should watch the outcome of this debate and make an informed decision, not taken in by a scare tactic by advertisers.

For paulines, sue, and bill, 50 pack a day granite countertop

Comments (60)

Related Discussions

hotgranitekillsOriginal Author

hotgranitekillsOriginal Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

hotgranitekills
Original Author

hotgranitekills
Original Author