Map of roughly risk of radon: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-07/documents/zo...
Given that lung cancer is driven by a) smoking, then b) radon, one would expect some level of correlation here.
Given that lung cancer is driven by a) smoking, then b) radon, one would expect some level of correlation here.
So, no, don't believe your map.
Then the map doesn't show risk of radon. It's worthless for that purpose.
"Different political institutions have different standards for what is a radon risk."
It's a map of different political institutions then. That's fine. Just don't try to sell a map of political institutions as a map of radon risk when that is obvious bullshit. I mean it's completely obvious from the boundary.
100% obvious bullshit.