Radon-related Lung Cancer Deaths and Mitigation Cost Effectiveness in a Radon-prone Region

Can a significant number of radon-related lung cancers be averted by mitigating existing single-family houses whose radon is above the action level? Would societal resources be used cost effectively by a comprehensive measurement and mitigation policy using the existing or some other radon action level? Simple questions, complex answers. The risk of lung cancer depends on the radon exposure in living spaces. Radon concentration distributions and population densities can vary on several spatial scales, so an analysis for an entire country may reach different conclusions than a regional analysis. New information has been discovered about indoor radon distributions, residential radon risk, effectiveness of installed mitigation systems, and costs of mitigation systems since the last analyses. Costeffectiveness analysis itself has also advanced. A protocol developed for the WHO International Radon Project and applied to the United Kingdom reached the conclusion that remediating existing homes in the UK was not cost effective. Those authors also thought it likely that this conclusion would apply to most developed countries. A cost-effectiveness analysis is underway for the Upper Midwest, a radon-prone region of the United States. This analysis uses actual regional radon distributions and measurements of effectiveness of radon mitigation, system costs, and risk models. The preliminary results suggest that a regulatory policy for radon measurement and mitigation with widespread compliance could save many lives at a cost much lower than direct medical treatment.