Nationwide survey of radon levels in indoor workplaces in Mexico using Nuclear Track Methodology

Espinosa, G.; Golzarri, J.I.; Angeles, A.; Griffith, R. V.

doi:10.1016/j.radmeas.2009.10.035

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous indoor radon surveys pointed out a different distribution of indoor radon levels in DW and WP located at the same area and thus subject to the same geogenic radon influence. In some cases, WPs seem to have higher radon levels compared with DW (4,5), whereas in other cases opposite conclusions were drawn (6). This can be a consequence of different construction styles, different occupation factors, intended use and different 'building physics' in terms of air circulation.…”

Section: T He European Basic Safety Standards (Eu Bss)mentioning

confidence: 91%

Radon levels in dwellings and workplaces: a comparison with data from some European countries

Trevisi

Leonardi

Buresti

et al. 2022

radon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: According to 2013 European Basic Safety Standards (EU BSS), legal and administrative consequences of having an area declared as radon priority area (RPA) concern workplaces (WP) and public buildings, as well as dwellings (DW). However, RPAs in many cases are defined as higher levels of indoor radon in DW. The reason is that most data are available for DW. So far, indoor radon data for WP (except for schools) and public buildings are scarce. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare indoor radon levels in DW and WP in a given area and to evaluate whether they have different distributions and different average levels. Design: Austria, Finland, Germany, and Italy provided indoor radon data on DW and WP. Data related to WP were aggregated in the same grid, as already done for data on DW, to update the European Indoor Radon Map. Based on 10 km × 10 km grid cells, the same statistics are computed for both datasets. Thus, two structurally equal datasets for each country were generated to be statistically compared. Results and conclusions: Generally, there are numerous indoor radon data on DW than data on WP. Statistical analysis suggests that in all the countries, indoor radon levels – in terms of arithmetic mean (AM) of the natural logarithm-transformed data – in WP and DW are statistically different (P < 0.05), as well as from those referring to schools. The difference in distributions is neither attributable to the effect of geology nor to the effect of different sample sizes. The correlation between aggregated data is positive in the sense that if the mean (over grid cells) radon concentration increases in DW, it increases in WP as well. Compared with DW, in all countries indoor radon levels in WP seem to be statistically different, but the results are not enough to draw final conclusions: on-purpose designed surveys could be a useful tool to better understand this phenomenon.

show abstract

Section: T He European Basic Safety Standards (Eu Bss)mentioning

confidence: 91%

Radon levels in dwellings and workplaces: a comparison with data from some European countries

Trevisi

Leonardi

Buresti

et al. 2022

radon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many technical and scientific groups have measured indoor radon concentrations in homes and workplaces in several regions in Mexico [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12], (Table 1) using a variety of different measurement methods. The results of these studies (and other relevant studies to be explained below) form the basis for our estimations of the lifetime relative risks of LC induced by radon exposure for the Mexican population.…”

Section: Materials and Methods Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of epidemiological risk of lung cancer in Mexico due indoor radon exposure

Angeles¹,

Espinosa²

2014

AIP Conference Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this work the lifetime relative risks (LRR) of lung cancer due to exposure to indoor 222 Rn on the Mexican population is calculated. Cigarette smoking is the number one risk factor for lung cancer (LC), because that, to calculate the number of cases of LC due to exposure to 222 Rn is necessary considers the number of cases of LC for smoking cigarette. The lung cancer mortality rates published by the "Secretaría de Salud" (SSA), the mexican population data published by the "Consejo Nacional de Población" (CONAPO), smoking data in the mexican population, published by the "Comisión Nacional Contra las Adicciones" (CONADIC), the "Organización Panamericana de la Salud" (OPS) and indoor 222 Rn concentrations in Mexico published in several recent studies are used. To calculate the lifetime relative risks (LRR) for different segments of the Mexican population, firstly the Excess Relative Risk (ERR) is calculated using the method developed by the BEIR VI committee and subsequently modified by the USEPA and published in the report "EPA Assessment of Risks from Radon in Homes". The excess relative risks were then used to calculate the corresponding lifetime relative risks, again using the method developed by the BEIR VI committee. The lifetime relative risks for Mexican male and female eversmokers and Mexican male and female never-smokers were calculated for radon concentrations spanning the range found in recent studies of indoor radon concentrations in Mexico. The lifetime relative risks of lung cancer induced by lifetime exposure to the mexican average indoor radon concentration were estimated to be 1.44 and 1.40 for never-smokers mexican females and males respectively, and 1.19 and 1.17 for ever-smokers Mexican females and males respectively. The Mexican population LRR values obtained in relation to the USA and Canada LRR published values in ever-smokers for both gender are similar with differences less than 4 %, in case of never-smokers in relation with Canada population the differences in LRR values are less than 2% and in never-smokers for the USA population the differences in LRR values compared with the Mexican population are about 10%.

show abstract

“…2-The lung cancer cases per year per million (CPPP) it should be noted that different baseline cancer rates are used to convert the results from relative risk to absolute risk; ICRP report. The conversion factor for cancer cases per year per million per person (CPPP) is given by [7]: (CPPP) = A.E.D × (18×10 -6 mSv/y), 3-The Potential Alpha Energy Concentration (PAEC) in terms of worker levels (WL) units was obtained using the relation [8]: PAEC (WL) = F × C Rn / 3700 (2) Where F is the equilibrium factor 0.4 and C Rn is the activity concentration of Radon in Bq/m 3 .…”

Section: C-measurements Of Indoor Radon Gasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of the peculiarities of workplaces are: (a) multistoried buildings with large entrance hall; (b) presence of air conditioning or forced ventilation; (c) widespread use of ground floor or basements; (d) high probability of finding elevated temperatures and high levels of humidity, dust and aerosols. Such workplace characteristics might result in large spatial and time variations of Radon, thus requiring an appropriate monitoring strategy [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indoor risk assessment of radon gas in the science college buildings-University of Mustansiriyah using RAD-7 detector

Ridha¹

2019

IJP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present work, a set of indoor Radon concentration measurements was carried out in a number of rooms and buildings of Science College in the University of Mustansiriyah for the first time in Iraq using RAD-7 detector which is an active method for short time measuring compared with the passive method in solid state nuclear track detectors (SSNTD's). The results show that, the Radon concentrations values vary from 9.85±1.7 Bq.m-3 to 94.21±34.7 Bq.m-3 with an average value 53.64±26 Bq.m-3 which is lower than the recommended action level 200-300 Bq/m3 [ICRP, 2009].The values of the annual effective dose (A.E.D) vary from 0.25 mSv/y to 2.38 mSv/y, with an average value 1.46±0.67 mSv/y which is lower than the recommended the range 3-10 mSv/y [ICRP, 1993]. While the values of lung cancer cases per year per million person vary from 4.50 per million person to 42.84 per million person with an average value 24.35±12 per million person which is lower than the recommended range 170-230 per million person [ICRP, 1993].The values of the potential alpha energy concentration were found to vary from 10.18 mWL to 1.06 mWL, with an average value 5.79±2.8 mWL which is lower than the recommended value of 53.33 mWL given by [UNSCEAR, 1993].

show abstract

Nationwide survey of radon levels in indoor workplaces in Mexico using Nuclear Track Methodology

Cited by 15 publications

References 15 publications

Radon levels in dwellings and workplaces: a comparison with data from some European countries

Radon levels in dwellings and workplaces: a comparison with data from some European countries

Study of epidemiological risk of lung cancer in Mexico due indoor radon exposure

Indoor risk assessment of radon gas in the science college buildings-University of Mustansiriyah using RAD-7 detector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About