81–90 of 361 posts
Are lung cancer rates up? Obviously eliminating or reducing the primary cause will lead to larger percentages of the other causes among cases.
Yeah, this title for the article is really terrible. The "why" that scientists are investigating is not why many lung cancers aren't in nonsmokers. The "why" they are investigating is "why are these non smokers getting cancer?". Once smoking stops being such a dominant cause, you put more energy into the other cases.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought a house in the hills of Los Angeles and we tested for radon. Turned out it was very high, and LA is one of the few places in California that has high radon. We got it mitigated, and it wasn't that expensive. I talked to neighbors and real estate agents, and no one wanted to know anything about it. I was shocked. Everyone is pulling the wool over their own eyes here.
> We got it mitigated, and it wasn't that expensive What's the process, usually, adding some special ventilation system to the house?
1. The ventilation isn’t really “in the house” - the fan pulls from below the slab (and exhausts outside) to prevent radon seeping through. 2. Based on the best guess about my home age/area and radon patterns in my house, the slab was probably poured around the furnace, so the mitigation will include disassembling/reassembling my furnace to seal underneath.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought a house in the hills of Los Angeles and we tested for radon. Turned out it was very high, and LA is one of the few places in California that has high radon. We got it mitigated, and it wasn't that expensive. I talked to neighbors and real estate agents, and no one wanted to know anything about it. I was shocked. Everyone is pulling the wool over their own eyes here.
> We got it mitigated, and it wasn't that expensive What's the process, usually, adding some special ventilation system to the house?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> primarily to get rid of a microplastics emission source I wouldn't be surprised to learn that inhaled microplastics were causing an increase in lung cancers. We know they end up deep in the lungs.
Personally, I more suspect vehicles. We got a grip on particulate emissions from diesel engines, but brakes and tires still emit fine dust particles. The average one way commute is 30 minutes in the US, so you're breathing in pretty filthy air for an hour a day...
Not being a scientist of any kind, I fully believe it is fossil fuel emissions, mainly from autos. When I was very young, where I lived, a city of 100000, I would say less than 50% of the people there drove plus most worked in the city they lived in. Now, almost every household has at least 2 autos and most drive at least 10+ (16km) miles to work. But , I also wonder if this is tied to the general increase in cancers…
Ohh it's definitely cars. In more ways than one. A lot of "poor" countries have life expectancies comparable to the US. The big difference is they don't have a culture of every single person needing to own a car that spray carcinogens all over the place. Obesity, which is its own massive wrecking ball, is also significantly lower in these "poor" countries. The arrogance of laughing at poor people riding bikes to work…
The second leading cause of lung cancer is radon. My high schooler came home and said her science teacher said everyone should do a radon test. I scoffed, but humored her by getting a kit from Home Depot and sending it away to a lab. The results came back very high. So I purchased an electronic radon monitor and it showed almost the exact same results. Well, crap. I installed a radon mitigation system and now the num…
What slice of my mortality pie was radon before and after spending $5000? Could I spend $5000 to cut a bigger slice out of it in another way, like eating better or hiring a grizzly bear to make me exercise more often?
I think action is better than decision paralysis, but I wish I could make much more informed decisions.
Non-paywall: https://archive.ph/nsMoH Site is flagged as it hosts pedop. material.
I used to live by a busy street in a semi-dense part of town. Cars would be going around 45mph. When I moved from that apartment after 4 years. I was shocked by the amount of black dust covering everything. from the walls to the shelves and floors. I think it was all tire pollution so switching to 100% electric won't mitigate. It was pretty shocking and I wondered how much i increased my risk for lung cancer or other…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought a house in the hills of Los Angeles and we tested for radon. Turned out it was very high, and LA is one of the few places in California that has high radon. We got it mitigated, and it wasn't that expensive. I talked to neighbors and real estate agents, and no one wanted to know anything about it. I was shocked. Everyone is pulling the wool over their own eyes here.
> We got it mitigated, and it wasn't that expensive What's the process, usually, adding some special ventilation system to the house?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought an Airthings radon monitor because of that stat, and one thing that I have learned is that those mitigation systems do not necessarily work. I have a system that works, but initially, even though my house had a system, it did not reliably keep the radon levels below the federal action level. Barometric pressure, temperature, and HVAC all seem to have some bearing - tightening the house for air leaks actually…
> tightening the house for air leaks actually did a lot of good in keeping levels low Wait, really? Intuitively I would expect the opposite, that a draftier house is better for radon levels indoors
Drafts form either from temperature differential and wind outside pushing in.
Radon coming up from the ground is still heavier than air, so it won't mix in very well if it can't displace anything.
It's not a perfect solution, as air movement from circulation will help it mix in, but a good envelope will help a mitigation system out quite a bit.