Sorry - I should have seen that someone else posted this article

Uh-oh... NY Times article.

Thanks for posting that Janran. I was too busy with payback.

See if you can get a civil discussion going on this, I'll stay out until one of the known stoners starts denying the issues.

I just want to see what dissintersted folks think.

Payback?? You've got a long way to go, my little worm. Have you heard me yet deny the article? In fact, I've quoted it and YOU denied the quote, yourself!! Talk about cherry picking!! Once again, Al, it goes to YOUR credibility, not mine.

wow 4 posts and aready it's hot -- and that's not radiation hot!
Before you all go off on your respective rants I would like to know if this concern extends to marbles, or soapstones etc? Also it seems to me that these warehouses of slabs would be hot as well.Radon may difuse but actual radiation? And what about the poor fabricators...no wonder prices are so high.How is a regular person supposed to make sense of this? Where does the OSHA stand in all of this? I don't want to live with added toxic elements. Why would anyone? Why not check your slab? If it's an easy thing to do why not? I suspect it is not so clear cut otherwise checking the granite would be routine. The question for me is how to actually do this as a layperson.

"...there have been more reports of "hot" or potentially hazardous countertops, particularly among the more exotic and striated varieties from Brazil and Namibia.

"Its not that all granite is dangerous," said Stanley Liebert, the quality assurance director at CMT Laboratories in Clifton Park, N.Y."

The article tells you where you can get radon test kits to do your own tests. I hope it's only the exotic stones that are a problem.
The article said that tests are being done to eventually rate the stones.

Wuff!
What a lot of questions! and it is past midnight. I'll answer as many as I can with short answers.

Soapstone, no. Some marbles had some radiation, look on page 2 of the Radon/radiation page on solidsufacealliance.org for the Egyptian study link for a list.

Yup, some warehouses are pretty warm. One guy in Tacoma Washington reported 50 to 60 uR/hr just walking around the A frames in one section. Personally, I would have left the area pretty quick.

Yes, poor fabricators. Granite dust has three dangers, the silicosis from the dust, the chemical heavy metal elements (poisonous), and the radiation from the external Gamma and Beta, plus any dust inhaled or ingested has a 20 x more danger. You would think the stoners would take this seriously.

Not sure how a regular consumer could make any sense of this. I've studied this for a year and a half, sometimes six to eight hours a day or night, plus weekends. I am just now getting comfortable with many of the nuances, no doubt I still have more to learn.

OSHA has radioactive dust limits and radiation limits, the bad news is that not one single agency knew that granite had such extreme levels of radioactive elements. We show them a lab report and they go "Oh cr*p!" We have a air quality survey scheduled ASAP, they say 45 days till they get too us. Till then, it is HEPA filters on half face masks. Better safe than sorry.

Yes, for low levels of radiation, it is pretty clear cut. Hand held meters will meausre low, we know that, I was told by an expert that from 2 to six times low. So we set the "safe" level at 20 uR/hr, while trying like mad to get the consumer to go for 12 to 13 (remove background and it is around 5 or 6). Small death rate, so we use a waiver and FULL DISCLOSURE. If worried, buy quartz, laminate, soapstone, a zero radiation granite, or solid surface.

Yes, despite the screams of the stone industry, the testing is going forward. So far only Dr. Llope has tested hot granite along with the quieter ones, I sent both types and he gathered others on his own, including a few gardenwebers helping out. The MIA said in their June newsletter that there is no more need for testing, they are raising money for lawyers and PR firms. Soon Kitto will revisit, and he has found one or two moderatly hot ones, Steck has a one pretty hot sample I sent him, more going his way early next week, cutting them tomorrow.

The MIA has hired Langmuir (.85 decays per year guy), Chyi, Steck and a guy famous for doing what the EPA wanted him to do, Gascoyne or something like that. Of all of them, only Steck has any crediblity with me. He answers questions and shares data, has nothing to be afraid of.

And the industry had better not rate stones, they had better rate individual slabs.

Of all of them, only Steck has any crediblity with me

Well, THAT'S a "glowing" recommendation!!

*shaking my head*

Al, do yourself a favor. If you want ANY of these studies to have any kind of credibility, get yourself and Christina as far distanced from them as possible. Believe me when I tell you-- ANYTHING you two touch will not be believed by most. I've been all over the web. You know that.

Houstonarchitecture.com
houserepairtalk.com
Inspectionnews.net
Natural Stone Restoration Alliance
Fabricatornetwork.com
Thefloorpro.com

And I bet there are quite a few that I've missed. In EVERY SITE, WITHOUT FAIL, you and Christina have either had the same kind of reception as you've had here, or you were originally welcomed... even helped initially, and then you wore out your welcome by biting the hand that fed you (Andy). NO ONE will give any credibility to anything you touch.

Please believe me when I tell you I truly want to see a PUBLISHED study I can trust, and with you anywhere near them, I'd sooner trust a pathological liar.

Life is too short to bother reading another one of these long growing postings on this subject!

I've got your message, anyway, Bill. Thanks for getting it out. You've earned your good reputation, and I'll always listen to you.

Where can one get a list with the popular name(s) of a stone along with it's radioactivity or radon levels? Is Danby marble safe? How about the black finer grained granites?

I don't understand why engineered stone is safe when it has such a high amount of quartzite which is supposed to be one of the worst offenders.

There is NO LIST. It DOESN'T EXIST. Sorry for the Caps but this has been stated about a dozen times in the last few days here.

Sue

Just wondering, did you actually read the NY times article linked above or just the headline?

"Indeed, health physicists and radiation experts agree that most granite countertops emit radiation and radon at extremely low levels. They say these emissions are insignificant compared with so-called background radiation that is constantly raining down from outer space or seeping up from the earths crust, not to mention emanating from manmade sources like X-rays, luminous watches and smoke detectors."

"The average person is subjected to radiation from natural and manmade sources at an annual level of 360 millirem (a measure of energy absorbed by the body), according to government agencies like the E.P.A. and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The limit of additional exposure set by the commission for people living near nuclear reactors is 100 millirem per year. To put this in perspective, passengers get 3 millirem of cosmic radiation on a flight from New York to Los Angeles."

"A 'hot' granite countertop like Dr. Sugarmans might add a fraction of a millirem per hour and that is if you were a few inches from it or touching it the entire time."

I you want to be absolutley, 100% sure your granite is at ZERO, buy a gadget and test it yourself. Then test your house anyway, because most radon in homes does not come from granite! So you could have a 100% zero emitting stone and still have high radon levels in your home. Really, some serious education has been going on for about 20 years on Radon in homes. Where HAS everyone else been or has every one of you tested and made sure you don't have radon in your homes from COMMON sources?

Sue

Thank you Sue - we need to be reminded to keep this in proportion. Here in CT, we're probably pretty knowledgeable about radon, because it's well established that we are in a high-radon area, because of the bedrock. My house was tested as a condition of sale - normal procedure hereabouts - and a radon remediation unit installed, which is basically a pump, which pumps the air from beneath the foundation slab, up above the height of the house. Simple air circulation is removing the radon from concentrating in the house (especially likely in the basement).

Radon is naturally occurring in this area, but is only likely to reach the EPA level of concern in an enclosed space - in other words, I'm not at risk in the garden, but could be if I spent prolonged periods in the basement, without the unit.

Radon testing should be a standard part of a house purchase. There are even home DIY testing units available in hardware stores.

I think everyone needs to recognise that the potential increased risk is really, really small, and we deal with far higher levels of risk every day. We continue to eat foods that we know aren't good for us. We continue to accept the use of pesticides. This is just something new in our experience, which has unfortunately become an irrational discussion because of the heat generated on this site by various parties.

Deep breaths, read the NYTimes article again, ventilate your houses well, take appropriate testing if you're concerned, but DON'T get drawn into the internecine warfare that's going on at this, and apparently many other, websites.

Here in Maine, I also had to have my house tested for radon as part of the condition of sale, with contingent remediation paid for by the seller if deemed required, as per state-set allowable levels. This isn't the case everywhere? Perhaps only here in the Northeast?

Wouldn't those who live in a high radon area want to be extra careful not to introduce additional sources of radon into your homes, if it can be helped?

With most cancer-causing agents, isn't it accululative levels and effects that are the most cause for concern?

"Wouldn't those who live in a high radon area want to be extra careful not to introduce additional sources of radon into your homes, if it can be helped?
With most cancer-causing agents, isn't it accululative levels and effects that are the most cause for concern?

Yes, but that is not the true nature of our Western Culture. Having granite c-tops is all about vanity- not necessity. Just like having plastic surgery, an invasive procedure with inherent risks. People die everyday from willingly exposing themselves to dangerous situations all in the name of vanity.

"Fair and Balanced Fox News" health reporter has stated that it wasn't vanity that keeps their granite countertops in their home - Miles he said they have been the best wearing and most beautiful countertops they have ever had! First they had formica and then they had solid surface. They'll keep their granite countertops Thank You!

How did you like the way they started with that old radon scare video from years past? Pretty funny stuff!

there is probably more radon in your house slab or basement than in granite. and keep in mind it's the New York Times that reported this :)

Wouldn't those who live in a high radon area want to be extra careful not to introduce additional sources of radon into your homes, if it can be helped?

Absolutely. I'd much rather have one of the solid surface countertops that will offgas for atleast a while anyway-- you know-- the ones made from the same toxic polyester resin that's used in fiberglassing.

kailleanm-- I don't mean to focus on you, but you really seem to have been sucked in by the hysteria. Yes, there's a problem, and yes, it must be addressed. HOWEVER, it has been EXTREMELY overstated. There are very few stones that emit anything NEARLY enough to be cause for concern.

This is exactly the reason I don't let this go.

I just went to another thread where I'm working with a guy to try and help him with his tile countertops. After spouting about how dangerous granite tops are, and how no one should even take the chance, waht's the very first thing you do? Suggest CONCRETE countertops!! Concrete is already a KNOWN source of radon!!

Bill, I'm not sure why you're being so hostile towards me. I'm actually not at all sucked in by the hysteria. It's just something that I knew very little about before, and am interested in learning more.

Also, I was unaware that concrete was also a source. I had already said to Jerzeegirl who first drew this to my attention, that I would be interested in having my counters tested. Note I did not rush to instantly rip them out of my house. I LOVE them and will weight my love of them against the level of risk determined through further investigation.

I'm aware there are "dangers" in the environment all around us. I'm simply someone who is always interested in learning more about this and how, through relatively small changes, I can mitigate the cumulative effects of these hazards for me and my family.

I'm not at all alarmed, Bill, simply curious. You, on the other hand, seem hell bent on making everyone take your word that it is nothing to be concerned about and are discouraging further discourse.

QUOTE: "I just went to another thread where I'm working with a guy to try and help him with his tile countertops. After spouting about how dangerous granite tops are, and how no one should even take the chance, waht's the very first thing you do? Suggest CONCRETE countertops!! Concrete is already a KNOWN source of radon!!"

Bill, you must be confusing me with someone else. I have not at all spouted off about the dangers of granite. I have said several times I know very little about this and am just learning. I have asked others who know more why they wouldn't mitigate their risks if a problem was found. Just questions Bill. Not spouting off.

Please back off.

Before I answer, please, then explain this statement:

Wouldn't those who live in a high radon area want to be extra careful not to introduce additional sources of radon into your homes, if it can be helped?

You're a very intense person, Bill. I don't understand what there is to explain.

If you already know you are living in an area that is naturally high in radon, and if it is determined granite is a legitimate concern (PLEASE NOTE I SAY IF), then wouldn't you want to reconsider the granite?

My area is also built on granite, so if I find that my concrete countertops are posing an unacceptable (to me) additional risk, I would have to ask myself whether to keep them. I have no idea if this is the case. As I have stated repeatedly, this issue is new to me and I'm just trying to learn all I can.

What do you find so offensive about this?

IF it were a legitimate concern, then yes, I'd most likely look at another countertop surface. What I'm trying to get across to you and everyone else, is that it's NOT a legitimate concern.

Please-- if I'm coming across a little strongly with you, I apologize. I don't mean to single you out. The things you keep saying though, indicate to me that you believe this is a widespread problem, and it's not. Are there stones that may be hazardous? Maybe. Is this something that's common? Not in the least.

What I find offensive, isn't so much from you, but in general, the panic being caused by someone who's pulling the strings, and then laughing his butt off, all the way to the bank. In the mean time, he's singlehandedly trying to sink an entire industry, by spreading this alarmist crap, with just enough of a spark of truth to make fabricators rightly concerned, and ambulance chasing lawyers salivating. There are already law firms advertizing on the net for anyone who feels they may have medical problems as a result of their countertops. This is alot more than just looking out for the safety and well being of the consumer.

I don't know if it's a widespread problem. I suspect it ranks even with a bunch of other pollutants/contaminants/dangers in our environment. I tend not to be a nutter worry-wart about these things, but if it's easy for me to eliminate one of the risks I try to.

I'm not quite sure where you're getting the idea I'm so alarmed. I'm truly not. I'm just asking questions and learning what I can. Mainly because I have an interest in doing over houses and like to use earth-friendly materials where it is cost effective, reasonable, and aesthetic to do so.

I very much understand that you're trying hard to tell people it's not a legitimate concern. But Bill, that is the conclusion that YOU have reached based on your own experiences and what you've read/researched. Someone else may have done their own research and decided it is a legitimate risk, or at least one they prefer to avoid.

From the limited reading I've done so far, there is nothing CONCLUSIVE either way to say how much people need to be concerned. So once again, we are left to our own devices to make decisions for ourselves as best we can.

I'm not disrespecting you or your experience, but neither am I convinced that you are the sole authority on this subject and your word should be good enough for me. No offense, I just tend not to believe the word of one guy on the internet -- just as I don't trust that Al is 100% accurate in all he says.

Plus I find it hard to believe that one guy acting alone is solely responsible for all the questions and "panic" as you put it.

No it's not just Al to not believe - it is the consento engineered stone people behind this hysteria!

Thats right - competing materials that people are not buying. Notice that all the hype is about "exotic" granite, the ones enginnered stone has failed to mimic in their extrusion process and granite gravel and boat resin with a pesticide thrown in they call "MicroBan".

It's no wonder nothing will grow on it cause it is a poison thrown in the mix.

From the limited reading I've done so far, there is nothing CONCLUSIVE either way to say how much people need to be concerned. So once again, we are left to our own devices to make decisions for ourselves as best we can.

Let me then ask you-- how do you prove or disprove a negative? It's impossible, and AL and his SSA knows it.

I'm not disrespecting you or your experience, but neither am I convinced that you are the sole authority on this subject and your word should be good enough for me.

No offense taken. Additionally, I agree that what you're doing is the prudent thing to do. But what you might do is in one of these threads (I believe it's the one addressed to Paulines, Sue, and me), I listed a number of different sites where Al has posted. Now, these sites consist of both stone sites, AND solid surface sites. One is even an architectural site. Go check those sites, and see how many of the experts from BOTH sides of this issue agree with what Al has tried to spread.

Sorry about that-- it was THIS thread!! Here's the list of sites:

Houstonarchitecture.com
houserepairtalk.com
Inspectionnews.net
Natural Stone Restoration Alliance
Fabricatornetwork.com
Thefloorpro.com

Actually, at thefloorpro.com , in all fairness, I'm also one of the pros on that site. I also joined the debate, already in progress on the NSRA site. But even there, as I said, it was already well underway when I got into it.

Blondell,
actually we do have a list, for all the good it does. It is a guide, but you still have to test YOUR slab. I keep track of measurements and can sometimes give a range of readings, sometimes one or none. Better than nothing.

There is no comprehensive list because consumers didn't know to demand one.

Strangely enough, Absolute Black and Black Pearl is okay, but black spots can be the hottest spots in a slab. Go figure.

Some marbles have been tested, page two on the Radon page on the ssa site. Probably not the same ones, but you will get a feel for the material. My guess is that marble is a good bet, just check it before you buy it.

Where did you hear that quartzite is a problem?

As to engineered stone, I haven't found a problem with any of it, but I've only tested four brands so far. Entire sample boxes sent to the experts, but we won't know the results till the study is published. We even tested a warehouse full of the stuff, over 5,000 slabs present. Not one beep from the meter the whole time. Dr. Hans did make accusations about some engineered stones, but despite repeated requests, he refuses to name names, brands, or colors. I smell a rat.

"health physicists and radiation experts" wouldn't know beans about a granite countertop. Studies listed on our site show that some are over the UN "safe" limits, but even those are low compared to some of the ones being studied now. Did you see that CBS morning show? First sample, 4 pCi/L, then the reddish and black sample under the survey meter, Niagara Gold which tested at 500 pCi/L. That would be one of my samples, Dr. Llope has one to, off the same slab.
The funny thing is that that slab remnant was only 220 uR/hr, which better equipment read at 900 uR/hr. We cut up a slab into samples today that had hot spots of 700 uR/hr from our meter. No telling what the level of Radon from that one will be. Samples already shipped to the scientists, all of them. Nannana nana..... sorry, I am trying.
And granite radiation being insignificant compared to the background levels? No way, few granites are less than background, very few. Most run from tripple to quadruple. I found a few dozen over eight times background on one of my latest slab yard surveys, and some at 36 times background.
I haven't seen it myself, but BEIR VII was quoted saying that many die from the effects of background radiation. Using the standard risk/exposure rates, I figure 1.29 per million or around 387 Americans per year.

The NRC may have adopted the 100 mR/yr limit, but most other agencies did too no matter where you live. The cold hard facts are that a one millirem granite countertop with two hours of use per day would put you over your max allowed limit in 50 days. And today, two news crews and a newspaper photographer were freaking out because my PM 1703 meter was beeping from six feet away from the slab we were cutting. I would take a step back, so would they.... that slab was putting out 4 millirem Gamma on contact.

And the "toxic polyester resins"? Those ones that have a NSF51 rating? The ones made with only FDA approved materials? Like the acrylic resins and ATH used in dental work?

Sorry, Al. That just doesn't cut it for all Solid surface. I've been in more homes than I can count, doing tile work in other areas while solid surface was being installed, and more times than not, I could smell polyester resin. I'll never forget that smell from when I used to use it for pouring chemical terrazzo with it. That stuff will stone you even with a respirator on when it's raw (uncured), and I could smell it very distinctly from the new countertops. Just for that reason alone I'd never use solid surface.

Radon or not, but my brand new bathroom vanity with granite countertop purchased at Costco and delivered today DOES show a 6 times elevated background of beta-emission as I have measured today with a survey meter. This comes to 600 cpm from individual spots exposure at 1 inch distance. Do I want to expose myself and my family to these levels on every day basis? Need to do math for the amount of total millirems being exposed to and talk to a health physist at the university I work.

What? Wha??? My hot tub is made with MicroBan. Do I have to consider getting rid of it, too?

Sigh...just kidding.

Gotta' lighten up folks.

Im extremely disappointed by all the recent media attention about granite countertops and radon. Whats most upsetting to me is there simply is no reason for consumers to panic. Why? Lets consider the facts:

On Friday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued statements that reaffirm that granite countertops pose no significant health risk. The statement says: "While natural minerals such as granite may occasionally emit radon gas, the levels of radon attributable to such sources are not typically high. EPA believes the principal source of radon in homes is soil gas that is drawn indoors through a natural suction process. Granite is a natural mineral formed by earth's geology. It is mined and used to produce commercial products such as countertops. It is possible for any granite sample to contain varying concentrations of uranium that can produce radon gas. Some granite used in countertops may contribute variably to indoor radon levels. However, EPA has no reliable data to conclude that types of granite used in countertops are significantly increasing indoor radon levels."

The statements can be found at the EPA website, at http://iaq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/iaq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=5103&p_created=1212758208&p_sid=Au1wNF9j&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfcm93X2NudD0yMSwyMSZwX3Byb2RzPTM3MCZwX2NhdHM9JnBfcHY9MS4zNzAmcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHlwZT1hbnN3ZXJzLnNlYXJjaF9ubCZwX3BhZ2U9MQ**&p_li=&p_topview=1

Consumer Reports, America's foremost consumer protection institute, recently conducted its own limited independent tests of granite countertops and found no evidence that granite countertops pose a health risk. In fact, none of the granite countertops tested by Consumer Reports were found to be emitting radon. According to Consumer Reports, similar findings were recently generated by other well-conducted studies of granite countertops, and those studies found that, of a large number of countertops tested, only a few samples emitted minute levels of radon.

Beyond the EPA statements and Consumer Reports tests, countless studies over the years have found that the granite commonly used in countertops is safe to consumers. One of the most recent studies was conducted by the University of Akron. Dr. L.L. Chyi, who led this study, concluded that "Radon in countertops is not an issue." Results of the Akron study are available on MIAs website, www.marble-institute.com.

To eliminate confusion resulting from the junk science and inconsistent testing thats been played up in the media these past few days, the Marble Institute is working with scientists and other experts to establish universal standards for testing granite countertops for radon emissions. The goal is to build a scientific consensus around testing protocols so that all research can be done consistently.

Yes, the Marble Institute of America represents granite manufacturers and, yes, were committed to looking out for their best interests. But were equally committed to looking out for the best interests of Americas consumers. Thats because we understand that is in everyones best interest to confirm once and for all that granite is every bit as safe as it is beautiful, durable and practical.

Jim, welcome to the forum. I've heard alot about you, from BOTH sides of the "aisle". Good to finally "meet" you!! If you haven't already there's another forum you might want to poke your head in. This one's mostly pros, though:

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

Hey Huligar-- you followin me? :-)

The Marble Institute of America wants to reassure the public that granite countertops are safe. Research shows granite countertops pose no threat.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Consumer Reports and repeated independent studies have shown granite countertops pose no health hazard.

-EPA stated Friday: "EPA has no reliable data to conclude that types of granite used in countertops are significantly increasing indoor radon levels." (http://iaq.custhelp.com/cgibin/iaq.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php)

-University of Akron researchers found no threat. (www.marble-institute.com/industryresources/radontesting_u-akron2008.pdf)

An independent scientific analysis of a variety of studies shows that, accounting for normal airflow in the typical home, radon contributed by granite countertops ranges from 0.01 0.02 pCi/L levels that are 200 to 400 times lower than the EPA guideline of 4 pCi/L.

-By some measures, the amount of radon emitted by a granite countertop is less than one millionth of that already present in household air from other sources. Many granite countertops do not emit radon at all, and those treated with sealant reduce emissions even further.

Silvia Osante
Cohn & Wolfe on behalf of The Marble Institute of America

Thanks, Sylvia.

Actually, the EPA did not say they supported the MIA's claims. The EPA did issue a new web page with new info on radioactive granite countertops, http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/index.html.

Even the MIA retracted their claim that the EPA supported them, in a news letter to their members. We have the news letter posted on the blog, see link.

Oh, HORSECRAP, Christina. After the garbage you and your husband have been shoveling, there's nothing on that SSA site I'd give a lick of credibility, and there's NOTHING on the EPA website link you posted that says a damn thing about not supporting the MIA claims. All it says is that you should have your home tested, and that goes for whether OR NOT you have granite countertops!!