Carol,

This isn't the answer you were really looking for, but it's the logical conclusion to your post. You've done all the research, have stated the situation more clearly than anything I've seen before, and know your home situation. And from what I've just read, it's obvious that you know the answer and are making a last ditch effort to see if someone can contradict it, but even if someone who is a true authority can, are you sure you want to go there?

If you really want to know for sure, talk to geologists who really and truly know what the contents of quartzite are, and the possibility that they could include uranium or radium, could release radon, etc. Is there any stone that can't? You said that marble is okay, but is that absolute, or just usually? Uranium is pretty common. Or something like that. And hire those geologists to make sure that what you're looking at really is quartzite.

I totally get being attracted to natural stone, but where you have to be so careful about marginal exposure, do you even want to risk it?

Maybe it's time to broaden your tastes? How about copper or pewter? Have you seen the recycled marbles? They're constructed similarly to Caesarstone, using resin to hold the bits together, but they're made of large chips of solid marble. It looks a lot like chipboard but made of marble, and is very cool looking, and keeps some marble out of the waste stream. In person, it has a lot more depth and yumminess than it looks like in the pictures.

Hi pillog,
Thanks for your very thoughtful comments. You are correct. The most logical thing to do in our situation is to play it very safe. We had decided to do just that, but were second guessing ourselvesÂand I guess this was, in some sense, a last ditch effort to see whether we were being unnecessarily cautious and had some additional options. That, along with a longstanding fascination with quartzite, prompted this post. (Many years ago, we had seen some drop-dead gorgeous stone, which the dealer told us was quartzite. DH had fallen completely in love with it, and had proclaimed that he wanted to put it in our kitchen when we got around to remodeling, despite the fact that the coloring of that particular stone wouldnÂt have worked well in our house.)

As for whether stones such as marble are safe, it is my understanding that they areÂat least as safe as anything can be. But youÂre right. Uranium is pretty common, so maybe this is a job for a geologist.

Or maybe itÂs just time to broaden our horizons, as you suggest. I hadnÂt heard of recycled marble countertops. IÂll definitely take a look. And we havenÂt looked into materials like copper or pewter at all. More to investigate.

Thanks again for your input. If anyone else has any thoughts, I'd love to hear those, too.

The continuing health of your DH is the main priority IMHO. I wouldn't take ANY risk. Have you checked with DH's doctor?? The doc may not have a geologist's knowledge of natural stone properties but may have some recommendations for you as I'm sure this dilemna has come up before. Good luck and continued good health for DH.

Thanks for the very kind wishes, chris. You are right that DH's health is our top priority. So far we're been extremely fortunate and we'd like to do everything we can to keep it that way. As a result, I'm obsessing about about everything in this remodel. (E.g., in addition to countertop choices, I'm now concerned about construction dust, off-gassing, and anything else that might affect the air quality in our home.) Unfortunately, DH's doc isn't very helpful when it comes to Qs about things related to radon; he doesn't want to comment on anything that's not directly within his area of training and expertise, and I can understand his stance. In the end, I suspect the problem is that no one really knows--which argues again in favor of playing it very safe, I guess.

I'm also very interested in this question. Is there no testing device that one can use to test individual slabs before purchasing?

We're on the verge of choosing a quartzite stone and I had assumed it was only granite that was the problem. Now I realize, I really don't know.

Hi bickybee,
As I understand it, testing of individual slabs before purchasing is tricky. One could head to the stone yard with a geiger counter, I suppose, in order to try to detect the presence of radioactive material (which is what produces radon) but, as I understand it, levels of radioactivity vary widely across different slabs of the same type of stone and across different portions of the same slab. Thus, it would be important to carefully test all portions of the exact slabs that one wanted to use. Of course, one would also need to isolate those slabs from other slabs in order to be sure that one was picking up readings from one's own slab only, and not slabs behind it, around it, etc. To complicate things further, it is my understanding that one cannot extrapolate directly from these readings to the radon levels one might experience if one used the slab as a countertop in one's home. Depending on the size of the room, the amount of ventilation, etc. the radon levels could vary substantially (e.g., even a stone that wasn't terribly radioactive might produce home radon levels that were higher than desirable if put in a small room in a very "tight" house). And then there's the problem of the stone yard itself. My hunch is that they won't be too keen on having people walk around with geiger counters. Even if they don't mind the idea of it, I doubt that they would be willing to move slabs around in order to isolate them for testing. So...trying to test prior to purchase hasn't seemed very practical to me and I haven't pursued that route. If one were to try that route, it would probably be important to have good equipment and someone who knew how to operate it properly. So, one might have to hire a professional. Again, I haven't tried to find such people, but a New York Times article a couple of years ago suggested that the American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists might be a good place to start. Good luck, and please do report back to GW if you pursue this issue further and find out anything useful.

Here is a link that might be useful: American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists

Well, I'm a little bummed---I just picked out Sienna Bordeaux granite for my kitchen remodel and now hear that it *might* be one of the granites with higher radon emission. That sucks---we had the radon problem fixed in our lower level and I REALLY don't want to bring in something that might put radon back in our house. I so love the look of granite over engineered Quartz though---hmmmm, might have to pick out a different granite.....

Carol, under normal circumstances I'd tell you the risk is so minimal that it's not even worth thinking about, but as you said, yours are not normal circumstances. What I would do is find a slab yard, and explain your circumstances to them, let them know that no matter what slab you pick, you want to slap a radon test on it for a few days, just to be safe. I really don't think there'll be a problem with it. Then you'll know for sure, whether or not your PARTICULAR slab is problematic.

I know what you mean, scrappykat. Once the radon is out one doesn't want to bring it back in, but natural stone is SO pretty...Hopefully, you will find that the granite you love is just fine--or you'll fall in love with something else just as wonderful.

Thanks for the advice, Bill. I had just assumed that the stone folks would object to people trying to test their slabs, but maybe someone will understand our special circumstances and will let us do some testing. It's certainly worth a try.

They might. But I have a feeling that once you explain your situation, they'll allow it, and if they don't,

NEXT!!

Good point, Bill. There's certainly no shortage of stone dealers in my neck of the woods!

A true quartzite is composed mainly of the mineral quartz (90% or more). If there were any radon issues, it would come from the impurities in the stone. I don't think problems are likely with this stone, but I would think that any concern would also apply to engineered stone. That is made from ground up quartz (which may also have impurities) mixed with resin to hold it together. And don't some of the fancy newer colors of engineered stone also use other kinds of stone fragments, not just quartz?

Of course, one issue is that one can not be sure that the stone marked as quartzite really is quartzite.

Thanks for the additional info, cloud_swift. It sounds like the only problem, then, would be if the impurities included radioactive materials like uranium--and I suppose the newer engineered stones could contain such substances, too. I'd never thought of that.

As for deterimining whether something is truly quartzite, one stone dealer told us that he could never confuse true quartzite with granite because quartzite is so much harder and more challenging for their fabricators to work with (e.g., they have to use different blades to cut it and the blades become dull more quickly), but I don't know whether that information is accurate. Maybe we could get a sample and have it evaluated somewhere.

BTW, cloud_swift, I just saw the pic of your quartzite counters on another post. Absolutely gorgeous!!!

That sounds great, needsometips08--just what we need! How did you find the inspection service you used?

bumping, in the hopes that needsometips will see this...

still hoping that needsometips might see this...

Not to throw cold water on the testing service, but is there any way to determine if their tests are accurate? A regulating industry or standard process to follow? Since the "radon in granite" scare hit the news over the last few years, I suspect many "testing companies" have sprung up. They may or may not be legit...but w/o knowing their testing techniques, how accurate those techniques are, etc., I would not put my total trust in them.

At the very least, I'd want to be there to see what they did to test the slabs and how long the test took. With radon, it's the cumulative effect over time that is usually the problem...and usually in an under-ventilated location.

No, I'm not anti-stone, far from it...as a matter of fact, I have AB counters and love them! I just don't want the OP to get a false sense of security. Maybe contact the Geology department of a local university?

"We had our granite tested while it was still in the granite yard before we committed to buying it and it was a hassle free process. "

Since there is NO standard method established for testing for radon given off by stone any test performed is going to depend completely on the person designing and performing the test.

There is radioactivity all around us, and you are being bombarded with neutrons as you sit anywhere on the earth.
When cosmic rays from space strike the atmosphere they generate a shower of secondary particles that make it to the surface.
Neutrons are a large portion of these.

Some of the cosmic rays even make it to the surface.

There are enough particles that we see errors in large computer memories from the computer chips being hit.

The time period from radon exposure to cancer is relatively long (and the data heavily clouded by the heavy smoking almost all the exposed miners did) so any exposure now is not likely to cause any issues.

Being 20 years old with your life ahead is the time to avoid unnecessary radiation exposure.

Once you hit about 50 the odds of you living long enough to develop cancer from low level radiation exposure are rather small.

It sill sucks to have cancer, but the time is long past for any environmental changes or further exposure to prevent or cause it.

Hi, buehl & brickeyee--
I share your concerns about testing--which is why I was very curious about what needsometips had done (e.g., how s/he determined that the testers were qualified, that the testing was actually done and the results were valid, etc). There is certainly room for abuse by charlatans, but I guess it depends on what sorts of guarantees these inspectors provide. While there is no standard method of testing granite slabs for radon emissions, there are standard procedures for testing the levels of radon in the kitchen after the countertops have been installedÂand presumably that would allow one to assess the accuracy of results provided by slab testers. E.g., If radon levels are substantially higher after countertop installation than beforeÂespecially if kitchen readings are now higher than radon readings on lower levels of the home (where radon concentrations are naturally highest), one can reasonably conclude that the countertops are the culprits. As an aside, I suspect that the base rates for "hot" stones are so low that an unscrupulous testing company could just pretend to test slabs, tell everybody their slabs were OK, rip out and replace any that proved problematic after installation, and still come out ahead financially. So I guess the accuracy of the pre-installation testing wouldnÂt really matter as long as the testers stood by a post-installation guarantee; it would be like purchasing insurance, just in case one happened to get a bad slab and oneÂs kitchen wasnÂt well ventilated enough for the resulting radon to dissipate on its own.

And, yes, brickeyee, I agree that radiation is all around us and the most important time to try to shield oneself from potential carcinogens is when one is young. Alas, one cannot turn back time, the effects of exposure appear to be cumulative, the amount of time from radon exposure to cancerappearance remains an open scientific question, and I prefer to think of 50 as middle-aged :-), so I guess I figure itÂs still worth thinking about avoiding needless exposure.

Again, however, I donÂt normally spend my life worrying about such thingsÂand IÂm not suggesting that other GW-ers start worrying about this issue, either. If it werenÂt for DHÂs medical history, I doubt that IÂd be pondering this. (And for those of you who are wondering, DH did smoke for a timeÂas a teen in Europe back when seemingly everybody smoked and people didnÂt fully understand the risksÂbut had quit long ago [several decades before his cancer appeared], and was in perfect health when they found his tumor completely by accident. We also lived for some years in a home that we now have reason to suspect had extremely high radon levels, but weÂll never know for sure.)

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts and your wisdom.

"he effects of exposure appear to be cumulative"

Cumulative in possibly increasing the risk 30 years later.

As a radiation worker (cyclotrons) we try to hold annual exposures to 2 millirads.

A CAT scan can run to 15-18 Rads (yes, 7,500 times our 'working' exposure).

Even an airplane flight of a few hours is more than 2 millirads, and much more near a pole (like flying to Europe from the US).

"I prefer to think of 50 as middle-aged :-), so I guess I figure itÂs still worth thinking about avoiding needless exposure. "

Are you really worrying about living ANOTHER 50 years?
That would put you at 100, well past normal life expectancy.

Hi brickeyee,
Cyclotrons, eh? The depth and breadth of your knowledge continue to amaze me. Given our earlier exchanges about pocket doors, I would have assumed that your background was in construction rather than physics but then again, most of my physicist friendsÂespecially those in experimental physicsÂare amazingly handy.

Just for the record, while studies indicate that many, many people in their 50's (and even some in their 60's and beyond!) consider themselves middle-aged, I was kidding (hence the emoticon); I don't really expect to live to 100. Still, I tend to live my life as if I'm going to be around for a while.

The issue of how to think about cumulative radiation exposure and risks for different age groups is an interesting one. It could be that the DNA damage done by radiation exposure takes so long to translate into cancer that people neednÂt worry about exposure late in life. Alternatively, it could be that it simply takes a long time for most people to accumulate enough exposure to trigger a cancer, and that once that happens, the cancer develops relatively fastÂor that usually it takes decades to hit the "magic" exposure limit, but in persons who are vulnerable by virtue of age [quite young or quite old], genes, or ill health, the process is faster or the magic number is lower. So far, the scientific literature on this point is inconclusive (e.g., at least one meta-analysis found no evidence that the strength or nature of relation between residential radon exposure and lung cancer varies with age; another review suggested that the relation might be weaker in the oldest age groups).

Of course, youÂre right that we are exposed to lots of radiation from other sources, including those that most people arenÂt aware of (e.g., I was unaware of airline flight radiation until DHÂs oncologist used that example as a standard of comparison for CT scan radiation, and even some medical professionals have become aware of the sometimes very high doses from CT scans only recently, as a result of some recent studies that got a lot of media coverage). So, one has to keep all of these things in perspective, this is true.

Have a great day.

I was just looking at quartzite myself and I think if I was to endanger a future grandchild knowing that I have the wrong product for a countertop, without having it checked, I would not be able to live with myself. If I didn't know, it would be different, with the guilt issue of course. I don't have grandchildren but could within the next ten years so I am looking for the safest options because of the fact that I am aware of this information. I will research as much as possilble but I am still wondering how safe quartzite is and wonder what other products are available that are as safe for young ones to be around though I doubt my grandchildren would be here that often. I wonder if I should choose another material that is beautiful but what would that be? I did see in my reading that the dangerous granite was called creme bordeaux or something because it was one that I had written down as liking when I considered granite.