https://www.cancer.org/cancer/non-small-cell-lung-cancer/abo...
Most people who get and die from lung cancer are not smokers. Like my mom.
This is not true:
More than 161,000 lung cancer deaths are projected to occur in the U.S. in 2008. Of these, an estimated 10–15% will be caused by factors other than active smoking, corresponding to 16,000–24,000 deaths annually.[1]
That said:
lung cancer in never smokers would rank among the most common causes of cancer mortality in the U.S. if considered to be a separate category
https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/basic_info/risk_factors.htm
> Cigarette smoking is the number one risk factor for lung cancer. In the United States, cigarette smoking is linked to about 80% to 90% of lung cancers. Using other tobacco products such as cigars or pipes also increases the risk for lung cancer.
[...]
> People who smoke cigarettes are 15 to 30 times more likely to get lung cancer or die from lung cancer than people who do not smoke. Even smoking a few cigarettes a day or smoking occasionally increases the risk of lung cancer. The more years a person smokes and the more cigarettes smoked each day, the more risk goes up.
It's true that not all lung cancer is caused by smoking.
If you want bang for your buck, buy a radon detector and mitigate [slab vacuum treatment or regular ventilation] where you find levels > 100bq/m^3 [probably your basement]
Joking aside, I agree the products will improve but I feel Airthings have gone a long way to prove the reliability of their product and a future where we trust “something from amazon” isn’t all that wacky as we already live in it.
This isn't some sort of exaggeration, house fires have started due to counterfeit electrics.
People here on HN have reported getting counterfeit body wash, counterfeit books, counterfeit diapers, and counterfeit toys from Amazon plus there's a lawsuit against Amazon for selling counterfeit eclipse glasses.
https://www.dailydot.com/news/amazon-marketplace-conterfeit-...
>In 2012, Amazon Marketplace was identified by the Consumer Fraud Center as America’s single-largest counterfeit outfit, warning shoppers to be on their guard over the holiday season. [1]
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2017/05/18/amazon-counterfeit...
[1] Due to comminging policies items from marketplace sellers can end up "sold and shipped by Amazon."
No, I bought it from a retailer that isn't a multi-seller marketplace known for mixing inventory from unreliable sellers who push counterfeit products where they are a middleman with those that they are selling themselves as the retailer.
These kits are fine if you want to check or sell your house - in most cases the amount of radon in your house is determined by your local geology. If you pass an absorption test, it's unlikely you'll suddenly find dangerous levels of radon in the future.
The advantage of the real-time detectors is that they're real-time, but it's hard to prove that they're calibrated.
Hopefully one day we see slab depressurization become standard in all houses with below grade construction, combined with a realtime sensor just like you would have a smoke alarm.
When I did Radon measurement for my house the guidelines for getting an accurate reading was to measure for 2 month between October and April to mitigate those factors.
I move it from room to room every few days. I was surprised that the upstairs bedroom read as high as the basement (but none are high).
Also, as every website points out, the readings vary quite a bit through the day, and from day to day.
I also noticed that the readings increase when it rains (my current theory is that the low pressure that precedes rain pulls more radon from the ground).
Opening windows helps a lot.
Sounds like an opportunity for a fun project. Set up a webcam (or laptop with a cam?) and take screenshots/snapshots of the feed every n minutes. OCR the output and append to a log file.
I actually went to the effort of decompiling the source code to their Android app as I want to integrate the Wave product to my SmartThings hub so i can automatically ventilate if levels go too high. I find my radon levels build up from around 60 to 200bq/m^3 over time [takes about a month], and my basement walk out opening for 15 minutes once a month tends to lower them < 100bq/m^3 again. The goal i have is to intercept the BT traffic and send it to SmartThings from there over an internet connection or local wifi, ideally automating turning on a vent to the outside that is located near the ground level.
I also learnt a while back that different countries have different levels of "acceptable" radon in residential properties. Currently Canada has a limit set pretty high compared to the rest of the world (200bq/m^3), where as most European countries are suggesting < 100bq/m^3. I found that in the code they consider this when deciding what colour LED to show on the device: https://gist.github.com/ndroo/384bceeb16d771757b6996bd28001d...
The level's they use i personally find a little irresponsible, I'd prefer they pick reliable research (1) and go by that. Experts in Canada acknowledge our recommended levels are out of date and need changing, hopefully an update comes soon that lowers what is acceptable. For now, I've told the app I live in France.
Here is a snippet that I find interesting from the study:
"Radon levels greater than Health Canada’s acceptable limits (of 200 Bq/m3) for the naturally occurring but cancer-causing gas were detected in all areas, with one in eight containing dangerously high radon levels between 200 and an astounding 3,441 Bq/m3. The World Health Organization estimates that the relative lifetime risk of lung cancer increases by 16 per cent for every 100 Bq/m3 of chronic radon exposure. Surprisingly, the scientists found that newer homes, built within the past 25 years, contained substantially higher radon gas levels compared to older homes."
The goal of Airthings states they want "to make radon sensors as common as smoke alarms". I don't know how many lives per year smoke alarms save, i imagine a lot, i would guess if everyone had one of these we would see a massive public health spend drop in relation to lung cancer treatments.
Expensive, but hopefully they get cheaper with time. If you can afford one, get one.
https://www.epa.gov/radon/find-information-about-local-radon...
In other words, if your neighbor gets a test and finds acceptable levels, would it still be a good idea to get a test/monitor for your house?
You can actually test for this on empty lots by keeping the tester under a flipped-over bucket (using the bucket as a cover).
> Lung cancer mainly occurs in older people. About 2 out of 3 people diagnosed with lung cancer are 65 or older, while less than 2% are younger than 45. The average age at the time of diagnosis is about 70.
[honest question] Could this have any impact on the perceived priority of studying lung cancer? (i.e., you're already near EOL when diagnosed with it?)
20 years is a long time... everything you do between 15 and 35? The majority of life's accomplishments for most -- you could do that all over again between 65 and 85, now with the capital and experience to do something interesting.
I think computer-assisted medical developments might push that out another 5 years in the next decade or two; so the life expectancy is 25 instead of 20 from age 65.
I was having a great day.
No reason for your day to be spoiled!
Granted, that's the 33 percentile for age of diagnosis. In the UK at least, median age at death is more like 75 [1].
But...for breast cancer median age of death is also about 75. [2]
AFAIK there isn't a dramatic age difference.
[1] http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-s...
[2] http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-s...
Not to be picky, but the US stats are mean, which is different from the median.
We rarely discount medicine for the myriad other medical problems that occur from many other activities like eating bad foods (way worse than smoking), avoidable stress (not addictive) and the various substance abuse from pharmaceuticals et al.
The latter nicely fits with an externality argument based on scarcity of resources in research & treatment. At this point, if you accept all those premises, lung cancer research for smokers is a negative externality for all the non-smokers in need for research & treatment.
And it's not necessary that those premises are accepted on an individual level; it's enough to just teach them. Long term policy making is in many value questions just a proxy for mass education.
You currently don't have any of that for the misuse of medicine, etc.
While self inflicted illnesses are (and should be) covered by health care, there is a point in trying to avoid those rather than making them easy to treat. Deterring people from smoking while researching treatment for other forms of cancer can save more lives in the long run.
Yet, as US taxpayers, we have subsidized a synthetic opioid epidemic for almost 20 years, and state governments use legal settlements against drug distributors to subsidize treatment (which are not standardized) and fund the purchase of more pharmaceutical products (suboxone and narcan).
Banning a drug will only lead it to go underground. If you ban cigarettes, everything moves to the black market. The US has experienced in past decades that banning drugs and fighting their distribution is not necessarily effective. If you legalise a drug but tax it heavily (and provide other restrictions), you control the supply chain (ensuring quality) and can recover some of the costs via taxes.
"Overall, the chance that a man will develop lung cancer in his lifetime is about 1 in 14; for a woman, the risk is about 1 in 17. These numbers include both smokers and non-smokers. For smokers the risk is much higher, while for non-smokers the risk is lower."