Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 16 (2023) 100716

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences

journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-radiation-research-and-applied-sciences

Measuring radon concentration and investigation of it’s effects on

lung cancer
Yonca Yahsi Celen a, *, Sule Oncul a, Barıs Narin a, Osman Gunay b
a
Balikesir University, Faculty of Medicine, Biophysics Department, Balikesir, Turkey
b
Yildiz Technical University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, İstanbul, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The second most significant etiological factor contributing to the development of lung cancer, following tobacco
Radiation smoking, is the presence of radon gas. Hence, the assessment of indoor radon levels within residential structures
Radon assumes paramount importance within the realm of public health. The primary objective of this investigation is
CR-39
to quantify the concentration of radon gas within the premises of Balikesir University Health Education and
Lung cancer
Indoor radon
Research Hospital as well as the Faculty of Medicine Education building situated in the city of Balikesir.
Radiation protection Furthermore, this research endeavors to ascertain the potential risk of lung cancer associated with these
measured radon concentrations. To this end, an extensive, long-term (2–3 months) radon monitoring campaign
was executed by strategically positioning Columbia Resin-39 (CR-39) solid-state nuclear track detectors at 28
distinct locations. The overarching aim of this effort is to comprehensively assess the health hazards posed to
both staff and students and subsequently institute any requisite mitigating measures. The lowest measured value
of the measured radon gas concentration is 6 Bq/m3, the highest measured value is 60 ± 8 Bq/m3. The average
measurement value is 21.96 ± 3.16 Bq/m3. The measurement results were determined to be lower than the
allowed radon activity concentration value in the “Radiation Safety Directive.

1. Introduction
Radon is a naturally occurring noble gas found in soil, rocks, water,
and air, originating from the radioactive decay of elements such as
uranium (Darby et al., 2005a). This radioactive gas is characterized by
its colorlessness, odor lessness, and chemical inertness, although it has
the capacity to form certain compounds like clathrates and complex
fluorides (Mudd, 2008). Notably, radon stands as the heaviest among the
noble gases and possesses the highest melting point, boiling point,
critical temperature, and critical pressure. It is noteworthy that radon
gas constitutes the predominant portion (54%) of the natural sources of
radiation exposure experienced by living organisms (Sextro, 1994).
There exist twenty-seven known isotopes of radon, ranging from 200Rn
to 226Rn, with half-lives typically shorter than 1 h, except for 222Rn,
210
Rn, and 210Rn, which have half-lives of 3.8 days, 2.5 h, and 14.7 h,
respectively (Deveci & Oncel, 2023). Among these isotopes, 222Rn is the
most pertinent, accounting for approximately 80% of all radon exposure
(Lauria, 2004; Pressyanov et al., 1995).
Radon is a radioactive gas that is both colorless and invisible, lacking
any discernible taste or odor. It exhibits a significantly greater density
than air, being 7.5 times heavier, and it surpasses hydrogen in density by
a factor of 100. The genesis of radon arises from the decay of radium,
itself a decay product of uranium, a naturally occurring radioactive
element that emits alpha particles. The radioactive half-life of radon gas
is measured at 3.82 days (Wilkening, 1990).
Because of uranium decay, radioactive radon undergoes spontaneous
decay upon its release into the atmosphere, giving rise to the formation
of electrically charged atoms referred to as radon progeny. These radon
progeny particles have the capability to associate with indoor dust
particles (Wilkening, 1990). The critical concern for human health arises
from the fact that these dust particles can be inhaled and subsequently
adhere to the mucous membranes within the respiratory tract. Within
the confines of the human body, these radon atoms proceed to undergo
radioactive decay, emitting a form of radiation known as α (alpha) ra­
diation. This α radiation possesses the capacity to inflict damage upon
lung cells, including the potential to alter the DNA within these cells.
Prolonged exposure to α radiation may culminate in the development of
cancer (Robertson et al., 2013).
It is noteworthy, however, that α radiation has a limited range of
travel within the human body, making it unlikely to affect organs

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yonca.celen@balikesir.edu.tr (Y.Y. Celen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2023.100716
Received 16 September 2023; Received in revised form 5 October 2023; Accepted 7 October 2023
Available online 11 October 2023
1687-8507/© 2023 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Egyptian Society of Radiation Sciences and Applications. This is an open access article under the CC
BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Y.Y. Celen et al.
beyond the confines of the lungs (Sakoda et al., 2013). Hence, lung
cancer stands out as the predominant cancer hazard associated with
radon exposure in indoor environments (Bozkurt & Ertürk, 2018; Darby
et al., 2005a; Kürkçüoğlu et al., 2010; Samet et al., 2009; Tollefsen et al.,
2011; World Health Organization, 2009).
The ingress of radon gas into buildings is attributed to various
mechanisms, including the seepage of radon gas naturally occurring in
the soil through cracks in the building’s foundation, the accumulation of
radon gas in the vicinity of buildings, its entry through doors and win­
dows driven by temperature and pressure differentials, its dissolution in
drinking water within the building, and its emanation from construction
materials comprising the building structure. This phenomenon is char­
acterized as the infiltration of radioactive elements into the building
environment. Notably, one of the primary sources of radon within
buildings arises from the construction materials employed during the
building’s construction, with many of these materials containing ura­
nium, a potential radon gas emitter (Durrani & Ilic, 1997b). Addition­
ally, an influential factor impacting radon concentrations within
buildings is the indoor air circulation dynamics, as well as the frequency
and duration of ventilation. Several studies have reported elevated
radon gas concentrations within inadequately ventilated buildings
(GÜNAY et al., 2018; Çelebi et al., 2003). Given that individuals spend a
significant portion of their lives indoors, the determination of radon gas
concentrations within buildings, which can potentially reach hazardous
levels both in occupational and residential settings, holds paramount
importance for human health.
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines radon as an inert gas
released during the decay of uranium (238U) that is ubiquitously present
in both indoor and outdoor environments (World Health Organization,
2009).
Several contemporaneous studies underscore the significance of
considering radon as a potential substantial contributor to lung cancer
incidence among the general population, who experience constant
exposure to radon through indoor air contaminated with radon
emanating from soil and water sources (Lowry & health, 1989; Samet &
Hornung, 1990). The potential exposure to radon presents a grave health
hazard, with a multitude of investigations revealing radon exposure as
the second most prominent cause of lung cancer, a disease that stands as
the foremost cause of cancer-related fatalities on a global scale (Darby
et al., 2005b; Sethi et al., 2012). These studies are particularly note­
worthy due to radon’s capacity to augment the risk of lung cancer
among smokers, establishing itself as a formidable risk factor in this
context (Möhner, 2019).
Initially, awareness of the risks associated with radon exposure was
primarily confined to the domain of underground miners. Subsequent
research has substantiated the connection between high concentrations
of radon progeny and the occurrence of lung cancer (Field et al., 2000).
Notably, studies conducted by Gaskin et al. and Ruano-Gavina et al.,
among others, have elucidated the nexus between radon exposure and
the incidence of lung cancer. These investigations underscore radon as
the second most significant global contributor to lung cancer, with lung
cancer ranking prominently among the leading causes of mortality ac­
cording to the World Health Organization (WHO) (Gaskin et al., 2018;
Ruano-Ravina et al., 2021). These authors have furnished a compre­
hensive assessment of the global burden of radon-related lung cancer
mortality, predicated on an updated database encompassing national
radon exposures for 66 countries. Their findings reveal that, in these
nations, lung cancer deaths stemming from radon exposure constitute
3.0% of the overall cancer-related fatalities, with residential exposure
models employed. The conclusion drawn from this research is that radon
substantially contributes to the mortality attributed to lung cancer on a
global scale.
Vogeltanz-Holm and Schwartz conducted a noteworthy study
wherein they assessed the potential impact of radon on lung cancer
development (Vogeltanz et al., 2018). Their investigation involved a
review of 20 different studies and commenced with a simple query:
2
Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 16 (2023) 100716
“Have you heard about radon?” The findings indicated that a substantial
portion of the population, particularly younger individuals, and those
with limited educational backgrounds, were unfamiliar with the concept
of radon. This lack of awareness was significant and underscored the
need for educational initiatives regarding radon exposure and its asso­
ciated risks. Lopes et al. conducted a study that corroborated the out­
comes of Vogeltanz-Holm and Schwartz. This study surveyed the
Portuguese population and revealed that most respondents had never
encountered information about radon. Moreover, even among those
who were aware of radon, there was a marked deficiency in under­
standing its associated risks and consequences of exposure (Lopes et al.,
2021). Hence, it is apparent that there remains a considerable deficit in
public awareness regarding the actual consequences of radon exposure,
particularly in indoor environments not linked to mining activities.
Despite numerous studies investigating lung cancer risk factors, the
realm of indoor radon exposure remains insufficiently explored. For
instance, Lorenzo-Gonzalez and Ruano-Ravina scrutinized the relation­
ship between residential radon exposure and lung cancer risk, involving
3,704 individuals. Their study demonstrated that the incidence risk of
lung cancer escalated with increasing radon exposure, with a significant
correlation observed when radon concentrations surpassed 50 Bq⋅m− 3.
Notably, among smokers, the risk of lung cancer exhibited a substantial
increase in tandem with rising radon concentrations (Lorenzo-Gonzalez
et al., 2020). Furthermore, Rodríguez-Martínez et al. delved into the
association between residential radon exposure and lung cancer inci­
dence, ultimately concluding that radon exposure predominantly led to
the development of small cell lung cancer (Rodríguez-Martínez et al.,
2018).
Given the recurrent and frequently cited link between residential
radon exposure and lung cancer, there is a justifiable need for alterna­
tive methodologies to establish and communicate this relationship
effectively to the public, both in residential and occupational settings, to
mitigate the risk of exposure to elevated radon concentrations.
The objective of this study was to assess the levels of radon gas
concentration within two specific locations in Balikesir, namely, the
Balikesir University Health Education and Research Hospital and the
Faculty of Medicine Education building. The overarching goal was to
gauge the potential risk of lung cancer associated with radon exposure.
To achieve this, the study involved the measurement of radon concen­
trations within distinct areas of interest, including the ground floor,
basement-1, and basement-2 levels within both the hospital building
and the Faculty of Medicine facility.
2. Material-method
In the study, passive solid-state nuclear trace detectors known as CR-
39 (poly allyl diglycol carbonate) were used as a service purchase from
the Turkish Energy, Nuclear and Mining Research Council (TENMAK)
company (www.tenmak.gov.tr). The preferred passive measurement
method has many advantages over the active measurement technique
and is more suitable for long-term measurements (Kürkçüoğlu et al.,
2010). Basically, the measurement process is based on highlighting and
counting the traces left by the energetic alpha particles that emerge
during the decay of radon on the nuclear trace detector made of plastic
plates. The detectors used in the measurements consist of a diffusion
container with a diameter of 26 mm and a height of 55 mm and a CR-39
detector placed inside the lid of this container (Fig. 1).
CR-39 plastic nuclear trace detectors are widely used for Radon
measurement in the natural environment and are preferred because they
do not require any signal processing or power supply during the mea­
surement of radiation concentrations, availability, low price, sensitivity,
and practical use (Bozkurt & Ertürk, 2018; Fazal-ur et al., 2003). It is one
of the most useful nuclear signature detectors for measuring indoor and
outdoor radon concentrations in any research area. The lid of the
diffusion vessel is designed to allow only the radon gas in the mea­
surement environment to enter the vessel and to filter radon degradation
Y.Y. Celen et al. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 16 (2023) 100716

Table 1
Radon concentration values according to Hospital Ground Floor measurement
points.
No Dedector Location Value Unit

1 EA2852 HZ1 30 ± 4 Bq/m3

2 EA2876 HZ2 12 ± 2 Bq/m3
3 EA2875 HZ3 17 ± 2 Bq/m3
4 EA2877 HZ4 13 ± 2 Bq/m3
5 EA2889 HZ5 7±1 Bq/m3
6 EA2873 HZ6 15 ± 2 Bq/m3
7 EA2888 HZ7 10 ± 2 Bq/m3
8 EA2893 HZ8 27 ± 4 Bq/m3
9 EA2862 HZ9 16 ± 3 Bq/m3
10 EA2800 HZ10 6±1 Bq/m3
11 EA2878 HZ11 13 ± 3 Bq/m3
Fig. 1. View of the diffusion vessel containing the CR-39 nuclear trace detector. 12 EA2851 HZ12 15 ± 3 Bq/m3
Mean 15,1 ± 2,4 Bq/m3

products. Diffusion containers containing CR-39 detectors were

removed from their sealed aluminum foil packages and placed at 28
Table 2
measurement points in Balikesir University Health Education and
Radon concentration values according to measurement points in the Hospital
Research Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Education building (Fig. 2). Basement Floor.
These measurement points were chosen as close to the respiratory level
No Detector Location Value Unit
as possible. Since more radon gas accumulates on the ground and
entrance floors, it was preferred to place plastic nuclear trace detectors 1 EA2858 HB1 29 ± 4 Bq/m3
in these areas. They were left in place for approximately term (2–3 2 EA2898 HB2 27 ± 4 Bq/m3
3 EA2891 HB3 14 ± 2 Bq/m3
months) to record radon exposure. 4 EA2872 HB4 16 ± 2 Bq/m3
The detectors collected at the end of the measurement period were 5 EA2881 HB5 22 ± 3 Bq/m3
placed back in aluminum foils to prevent radon entry outside of the 6 EA2853 HB6 20 ± 3 Bq/m3
measurement, wrapped in a way that would not allow air from the 7 EA2871 HB7 34 ± 5 Bq/m3
8 EA2886 HB8 23 ± 4 Bq/m3
outside, and sent to TENMAK for analysis. The processing and counting
Mean 23,1 ± 3,4 Bq/m3
of alpha traces recorded by CR-39 detectors were carried out in the
TENMAK Health Physics unit, the measurement results were evaluated
and the results (in Bq.m− 3) were sent to us.
Table 3
Radon concentration values according to measurement points on the Ground
3. Results and discussion
Floor of the Faculty of Medicine Education Building.

In buildings with high levels of radon concentration, the main entry Dedector Location Value Unit

mechanism of radon gas into the building is in the form of gas flow into 1 EA2887 TFZ1 24 ± 3 Bq/m3
the building through cracks and gaps in the ground, which occurs due to 2 EA2892 TFZ2 54 ± 7 Bq/m3
3 EA2884 TZF3 60 ± 8 Bq/m3
temperature and pressure differences between the soil under the foun­
4 EA2882 TFZ4 11 ± 2 Bq/m3
dation and the building. In addition, there may be other mechanisms 5 EA2870 TZF5 30 ± 4 Bq/m3
affecting radon concentrations in indoor spaces. It is known that venti­ 6 EA2894 TFZ6 22 ± 3 Bq/m3
lation conditions in buildings affect the radon concentration in the 7 EA2890 TZF7 27 ± 4 Bq/m3
environment (ICRP Publication 65, 1993). 8 EA2865 TFZ8 26 ± 3 Bq/m3
Mean 27,7 ± 3,7 Bq/m3
The detectors placed at 28 points, whose location information is
given in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3, recorded the radon levels in these

Fig. 2. Balikesir university health education and research hospital and faculty Fig. 3. Radon concentration values according to Hospital Ground Floor mea­
of medicine education building (https://earth.google.com/). surement points.

3
Y.Y. Celen et al.
environments between 24.04.2023 and 12.07.2023. The measurement
points and radon concentration measurement results coded in Table 1
and Fig. 3 are as follows:
Hospital Ground Floor; Internal Medicine Polyclinic (HZ-1), Radi­
ology Unit Secretariat (HZ-2), Radiology Unit Corridor (HZ-3), Gyne­
cology Unit Polyclinic (HZ-4), Gynecology Unit Corridor (HZ-5),
Administrative unit (HZ-6), Hemodialysis Unit Waiting Area (HZ-7),
Conference Hall (HZ-8), Emergency Service Unit (HZ-9), Emergency
Service Waiting Area (HZ-10), Andrology Unit Waiting Area (HZ-11),
consists of Blood Center Unit (HZ-12) units (Table-1). The lowest
measured radon concentration measurement value is 6 Bq/m3, the
highest radon concentration measurement value is 30 ± 4 Bq/m3. The
average Radon concentration measurement value is 15.1 ± 2.4 Bq/m3.
Hospital Basement Floor; Audiology Unit Testing Room (HB-1),
Audiology Unit Corridor (HB-2), Pharmacy Storage Room (HB-3),
Technical Unit Room-1 (HB-4), Technical Unit Room-2 (HB-5), The
Technical Unit consists of Management Room (HB-6), Electrical Room1
(HB-7), Electrical Room-2 (HB-8) units (Table 2, Fig. 4). The lowest
measured radon concentration measurement value is 14 ± 2 Bq/m3,
and the highest radon concentration measurement value is 34 ± 5 Bq/
m3. The average Radon concentration measurement value is 23.1 ± 3.4
Bq/m3 (see Fig. 5).
Faculty of Medicine Education Building Ground Floor; Security Unit
(TFZ-1), Classroom (TFZ-2), Staff Rest Room (TFZ-3), Conference Hall
(TFZ-4), Canteen (TFZ-5), Education Building Basement Floor (TFZ-6),
Technical It consists of Unit-1 (TFZ-7) and Technical Unit-2 (TFZ-8)
units (Table 3, Fig. 5). The lowest radon concentration measurement
value measured is 11 ± 2 Bq/m3, and the highest radon concentration
measurement value is 60 ± 8 Bq/m3. The average Radon concentration
measurement value is 27.7 ± 3.7Bq/m3.
The lowest measurement value measured in Balikesir University
Health Education and Research Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Edu­
cation building is 6 Bq/m3, and the highest Radon concentration value is
60 ± 8 Bq/m3. The average Radon concentration measurement value is
21.96 ± 3.16 Bq/m3. In Article 37 of the Radiation Safety Directive, it is
stated that “Permitted concentration levels for radon cannot exceed 400
Bq/m3 in homes and 1000 Bq/m3 in workplaces on average annually.”
The measurement results were determined to be lower than the allowed
radon activity concentration value in the “Radiation Safety Directive”.
Measurement uncertainty was calculated for a 95% confidence interval
with a coverage factor of k = 2.
Indeed, indoor radon exposure has been identified by the World
Health Organization as a significant public health concern and the sec­
ond leading cause of lung cancer, following closely behind tobacco
consumption. Consequently, the assessment of radon exposure risk is of
paramount importance, particularly in communities where it is
Fig. 4. Radon concentration values according to measurement points in the
Hospital Basement Floor.
4
Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 16 (2023) 100716
Fig. 5. Radon concentration values according to measurement points on the
Ground Floor of the Faculty of Medicine Education Building.
recognized to have substantial and adverse health effects. Over the past
decade, various methodologies have been employed to quantify the risk
associated with radon-induced lung cancer. Many of these methodolo­
gies, as evident in existing studies, focus on radon measurements and
involve the analysis of the number of lung cancer cases within a sample
population, with subsequent deduction of a probability or percentage of
cases attributable to radon exposure.
A noteworthy example of such a study is the work conducted by Chen
et al., which relied on radon measurement surveys conducted in the late
1970s across 19 cities in Canada, as referenced (Chen et al., 2012). This
extensive survey encompassed radon concentration assessments in 14,
000 residences, yielding results that conformed to a log-normal distri­
bution, with a geometric mean of 11.2 Bq⋅m− 3 and a standard deviation
of 3.9. Based on their findings, the authors estimated that approximately
10% of lung cancer cases in Canada could be attributed to indoor radon
exposure.
Subsequently, in a study conducted in 2009, a similar methodology
was employed, but this time long-term radon measurements were per­
formed in 14,000 homes located in various regions across Canada. Once
again, the results followed an anticipated log-normal distribution, with a
geometric mean of 41.9 Bq⋅m− 3 and a standard deviation of 2.8.
Theoretical calculations based on these results suggested that approxi­
mately 16% of lung cancer deaths among the Canadian population could
be attributed to indoor radon exposure. The authors of this study
emphasized the imperative need for implementing measures to mitigate
lung cancer deaths stemming from indoor radon exposure, based on the
evidence they had gathered.
Indeed, despite variations in methodologies employed, the funda­
mental conclusions drawn by numerous studies regarding indoor radon
exposure and its association with lung cancer risk tend to align, as
exemplified by Peterson et al. (Peterson et al., 2013). This consistency in
findings is underscored by a study conducted in the province of Ontario,
Canada, which delved into various metrics for assessing population
attributable risk due to radon exposure. The authors of this study
considered percentage attributable risk, excess lifetime risk ratio, years
of life lost, the number of radon-related lung cancer deaths, and the
effectiveness of implementing different cut-off points for reducing in­
door radon levels to below background concentrations. They calculated
the potential number of preventable deaths through radon mitigation
efforts. The results of this investigation estimated that 13.6% of lung
cancer deaths in the study area could be attributed to radon exposure,
equivalent to 847 lung cancer deaths annually. Notably, 84% of these
deaths occurred among individuals who had smoked throughout their
lives. The study further revealed that implementing corrective measures
to reduce radon levels in homes below 200 Bq⋅m− 3 (a threshold
Y.Y. Celen et al.
consistent with Canadian guidelines at the time of the study) could
prevent 91 lung cancer deaths annually and reducing levels to below
100 Bq⋅m− 3 could potentially prevent 233 deaths each year. The authors
emphasized the importance of risk assessment as a pivotal tool to guide
public policy decisions and resource allocation for the implementation
of preventive measures.
The accumulation of significant radon gas concentrations indoors
poses an evident risk of exposure to occupants, especially elevating their
susceptibility to lung cancer, as observed in previous studies. Therefore,
it becomes increasingly crucial to identify permanent and effective
strategies to mitigate indoor radon exposure. In already existing struc­
tures, methodologies can be employed to first evaluate the indoor radon
concentration levels, facilitating informed decisions regarding the
necessary remedial actions. Subsequently, these methods allow for the
ongoing monitoring of the effectiveness of the implemented measures.
For instance, Lopes et al. have utilized methods developed as part of the
RnMonitor project, incorporating IoT edge devices to establish an
effective radon risk management approach (Lopes et al., 2019). How­
ever, the most desirable approach is to proactively prevent radon
exposure in new residential areas, achievable through radon potential
assessments during the design phase prior to construction. Silva et al.
have proposed the use of a preliminary diagnostic model to predict
radon potential in such cases, emphasizing the need for further studies to
validate the model’s predictions and ensure the safety of occupants
(Silva et al., 2021). The correction of indoor radon concentrations
emerges as a promising means to reduce the public health impact
stemming from the natural occurrence of this radioactive gas, both from
a corrective and preventive perspective.
As our understanding of radon science has evolved over time, the
focus has shifted from a mixture of basic and applied research to pri­
marily addressing the safety of individuals and the health effects asso­
ciated with radon exposure. The central concern now is how to mitigate
these negative effects effectively. Radon has the potential to accumulate
to significant levels within indoor environments. The concentration of
indoor radon is primarily influenced by the building’s construction and
the radon content in the underlying soil. Additionally, the composition
of the soil beneath and surrounding a dwelling plays a pivotal role in
influencing radon levels and the ease with which radon can infiltrate a
building. Nevertheless, the primary route of human exposure to radon is
through inhalation and ingestion, with radon dissolved in water serving
as a potential source of exposure. Radon present in groundwater or
building materials represents sources through which individuals can be
exposed.
When radon is inhaled into the lungs, it can be readily eliminated
through the pulmonary circulation. However, the interaction of radon
gas with biological tissues within the lungs can lead to DNA damage, a
critical step in the carcinogenic process. Studies in the United States
have demonstrated that radon in homes is responsible for approximately
21,100 lung cancer deaths annually, ranking as the second leading cause
of lung cancer-related fatalities (Nunes et al., 2022). In the United
Kingdom, the average radon concentration in homes is around 21 bec­
querels per cubic meter (Bq/m3), and it is estimated that approximately
1,100 lung cancer deaths each year can be attributed to radon exposure
in residential settings (Al et al., 2012).
Numerous studies conducted in various regions around the world
have consistently highlighted the presence of radon in residential
buildings at higher concentrations compared to other types of structures.
For instance, research conducted in Canada has revealed that radon
concentrations in residential buildings are 4.7 times higher than those in
school buildings, 12 times higher than in outdoor environments, and 4.7
times higher than in public buildings and indoor workplaces. Alarm­
ingly, residential radon exposure accounts for approximately 90% of the
overall risk associated with radon-induced lung cancer (Gray et al.,
2009).
Indeed, studies conducted in various geographical regions have
provided valuable insights into radon concentrations and the associated
5
Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 16 (2023) 100716
health risks. Here are some noteworthy findings from different locations:
Sudan - Gezira State: Radon concentrations in residences were found
to range from 57 ± 8 Bq/m3 to 41 ± 9 Bq/m3, with an average of 49 ±
10 Bq/m3. The minimum and maximum annual effective dose rates in
this region were 1.05 mSv per year and 1.43 mSv per year, respectively.
The relative risk of lung cancer from residential radon exposure in this
area was estimated to be 1.044% (Chen, 2018). Morocco: Choukri et al.
reported volumetric radon activities in homes ranging from 31 to 136
Bq/m3, equivalent to 0.55–2.39 mSv/year, with an average value of 80
Bq/m3 (1.41 mSv/year) (Elzain, 2014). Alexandria, Egypt: Radon con­
centrations and annual effective doses in houses were found to range
from (38.62–120.39) Bq.m− 3 and (0.96–3.06) mSv y− 1, respectively
(Choukri et al.). Naples, Italy: In the province of Naples, the annual
average radon concentration in residences varied widely, between 21
and 722 Bq m− 3, with an average value of 107 ± 75 Bq m− 3 (Abd
El-et al., 2008, pp. 15–19). Aleshtar, Iran: A study conducted by Has­
sanvand et al., in 2019 reported indoor radon concentrations ranging
from 1.01 to 206.53 Bq/m3, with an average of 55.19 Bq/m3. This
resulted in an average annual effective dose of 1.39 mSv/y to the pop­
ulation (Quarto et al., 2016). Afyonkarahisar Province, Turkey: H.A.
Yalim et al. found radon concentrations in workplaces that varied be­
tween 13 Bq.m− 3 and 1,932 Bq.m− 3, with calculated average values
ranging from 21.75 Bq.m− 3 to 1,032.50 Bq.m− 3 (Bambara Telado et al.,
2021; Hassanvand et al., 2019; Yalım et al., 2018).
Existing studies on radon in residential buildings pose a significant
public health problem that requires more information about radon
concentrations. The aim of our study is to measure the radon concen­
tration in residential buildings, evaluate the health risks for employees
and students and take the necessary precautions. The lowest limit of
measurement (LLD) in Balikesir University Health Practice and Research
Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Education building is 6 Bq/m3, and the
highest Radon concentration value is 60 ± 8 Bq/m3. The average Radon
concentration is 21.96 ± 3.16 Bq/m3.
As per Article 37 of the Radiation Safety Directive, permissible
concentration levels for radon should not exceed 400 Bq/m3 in homes
and 1000 Bq/m3 in workplaces on an annual average basis. The mea­
surement results were determined to be lower than the allowed radon
activity concentration value in the “Radiation Safety Directive”. Mea­
surement uncertainty was calculated for a 95% confidence interval with
a coverage factor of k = 2. The average radon concentration value in the
hospital ground floor is lower than the average radon concentration
value in the hospital basement. This may be an indication that the radon
flow from the soil to the building is quite low.
4. Conclusion
The annual average indoor radon concentration allowed by the
World Health Organization (WHO) is 100 Bqm− 3, and the indoor radon
concentration allowed by the Turkish Atomic Energy Agency is 400
Bqm− 3 in homes and 1000 Bqm− 3 in workplaces. The highest radon
concentration obtained in this study was 60 Bqm− 3. Indoor radon ac­
tivity concentrations in the study area, Balikesir University Health Ed­
ucation and Research Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Education
building, are below the limits allowed by both the World Health Orga­
nization and the Turkish Atomic Energy Agency for each location.
The low amount of radon in the examined rooms may be due to
construction materials, adequate ventilation, or the soil structure in the
area.
References
Abd El-Zaher, M. A. E.-Z., & Fahmi, N. M. (2008). Studying the variation of radon level in
some houses in alexandria city, Egypt. IX radiation Physics & protection conference.
November 2008, Nasr City - Cairo, Egypt.
Al Zabadi, H., Musmar, S., Issa, S., Dwaikat, N., & Saffarini, G. (2012). Exposure
assessment of radon in the drinking water supplies: A descriptive study in Palestine.
BMC Research Notes, 5, 29, 2012.
Y.Y. Celen et al.
Bambara Telado, Luc, Karim, K., Moumouni, D., Cedric, B., Ibrahim Cisse, O., &
Zougmore, F. (2021). Assessment of indoor radon concentration in residential
buildings at ouagadougou and estimation of the annual effective dose. Burkina Faso.
Radiation Science and Technology, 7(2), 41–46. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.
rst.20210702.14
Bozkurt, V., & Ertürk, S. (2018). The first indoor radon gas measurement at historical
places in cappadocia, nigde, Turkey. Sakarya University Journal of Science, 22(6),
1623–1627.
Çelebi, N., Taşdelen, M., Özçınar, B., & Kopuz, G. (2003). YTÜ şevket sabancı
kütüphanesi radon konsantrasyon ölçümleri, VII. Ulusal nükleer bilimler ve
teknolojileri kongresi, 15-17 ekim 2003. Erciyes Üniversitesi, Kayseri, bildiri tam metni.
http://88.255.58.195/internet_tarama/dosyalar/cd/4115/pdf/3 3.pd.
Chen, J. (2018). Risk assessment for radon exposure in various indoor environments.
Radiation Protection Bureau. Health Canada, 775 Brookfield Road, Ottawa, K1A 1C1
Ontario, Canada, December 2018.
Chen, J., Moir, D., & Whyte, J. (2012). Canadian population risk of radon induced lung
cancer: A re-assessment based on the recent cross-Canada radon survey. Radiation
Protection Dosimetry, 152, 9–13 [CrossRef] [PubMed].
Choukri A., O.-K. Hakam, Equivalent doses of indoor 222Rn in some dwellings and
workspaces in Morocco.
Darby, S., Hill, D., Auvinen, A., Barros-Dios, J., Baysson, H., Bochicchio, F., Deo, H.,
Falk, R., Forastiere, F., & Hakama, M. (2005a). Radon in homes and risk of lung
cancer: Collaborative analysis of individual data from 13 European case-control
studies. BMJ, 330, 223 [CrossRef].
Darby, S., Hill, D., Auvinen, A., Barros-Dios, J., Baysson, H., Bochicchio, F., Deo, H.,
Falk, R., Forastiere, F., & Hakama, M. (2005b). Radon in homes and risk of lung
cancer: Collaborative analysis of individual data from 13 European case-control
studies. BMJ, 330, 223 [CrossRef].
Deveci, F., & Oncel, M. S. (2023). Investigation of Gebze-Darıca metro line (Kocaeli
Province/Turkey) in terms of radon and gamma radiation levels. Journalof Radiation
Researchan dApplied Sciences, 16.
Durrani, S. A., & Ilic, R. (1997b). Radon measurements by etched track detectors:
Applications in radiation, earth sciences and enviroment. In Saeed A. Durrani and
radomir ilic (p. 387p). Singapore: World Scientific.
Elzain, A. (2014). A study of indoor radon levels and radon effective dose in dwellings of
some cities of gezira state in Sudan. Nuclear Technology & Radiation Protection:
Yearbook, 29(4), 307–312.
Fazal-ur, R., Jamil, K., Zakaullah, M., AbuJarad, F., & Mujahid, S. A. (2003).
Experimental and Monte Carlo simulation studies of an open cylindrical Radon
monitoring device using CR-39 detector. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 65,
243–254.
Field, R. W., Steck, D. J., Smith, B. J., Brus, C. P., Fisher, E. L., Neuberger, J. S.,
Platz, C. E., Robinson, R. A., Woolson, R. F., & Lynch, C. F. (2000). Residential radon
gas exposure and lung cancer: The Iowa Radon Lung Cancer Study. American Journal
of Epidemiology, 151, 1091–1102 [CrossRef].
Gaskin, J., Coyle, D., Whyte, J., & Krewksi, D. (2018). Global estimate of lung cancer
mortality attributable to residential radon. Environmental Health Perspectives, 126,
Article 057009 [CrossRef].
Gray, A., Read, S., & McGale, P. (2009). Lung cancer deaths from indoor radon and the
cost effectiveness and potential of policies to reduce them. British Medical Journal,
338, a3110, 2009.
Günay, O., Aközcan, S., & Kulali, F. (2018). Determination of indoor radon
concentrations. European Journal of ScienceandTechnolog, 13, 91–97.
Hassanvand, H., Birjandi, M., Amiri, A., Hassanvand, M. S., & Kamarehie, B. (2019).
Investigation of indoor radon concentration in dwellings of Aleshtar (western part of
Iran) and estimation of the annual effective dose from exposure to radon.
International Journal of Radiation Research, 17(No 4). October 2019.
ICRP Publication 65. (1993). Protection against Rn-222 at home and at work. Annals of
the ICRP, 23(2).
Kürkçüoğlu, I., Karakılıç, V., & Kürkçüoğlu, M. E. (2010). Isparta ilinde yüksek florlu su
kaynaklarını kullanan iki bölgede atmosferik radon düzeylerinin incelenmesi.
Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2(1), 49–61.
Lauria, D. C. (2004). Evaluating the occurrence and spatial distribution of the radioactive
isotopes 226Ra, 228Ra, 222Rn and 238U in the groundwaters of região dos lagos-rj
Brazil. Hidrogeologia, 4, 47–55.
Lopes, S. I., Moreira, P. M., Cruz, A. M., Martins, P., Pereira, F., & Curado, A. R. M.
(2019). A WebGIS-based platform for expedite in situ deployment of IoT edge
devices and effective Radon Risk Management. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE
international smart cities conference (ISC2) (pp. 451–457). Casablanca, Morocco,
14–17.
Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences 16 (2023) 100716
Lopes, S. I., Nunes, L. J., & Curado, A. (2021). Designing an indoor radon risk exposure
indicator (IRREI): An evaluation tool for risk management and communication in the
IoT age. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 7907
[CrossRef].
Lorenzo-Gonzalez, M., Ruano-Ravina, A., Torres-Duran, M., Kelsey, K. T., Provencio, M.,
Parente-Lamelas, I., Piñeiro-Lamas, M., Varela-Lema, L., Perez-Rios, M., &
Fernandez-Villar, A. (2020). Lung cancer risk and residential radon exposure: A
pooling of case-control studies in northwestern Spain. Environmental Research, 189,
Article 109968 [CrossRef].
Lowry, S. H., & health. (1989). Indoor air quality. BMJ British Medical Journal, 299, 1388
[CrossRef].
Möhner, M. (2019). Re:“Reanalysis of diesel engine exhaust and lung cancer mortality in
the Diesel Exhaust in Miners Study cohort using alternative exposure estimates and
radon adjustment” and “diesel exhaust and lung cancer—aftermath of becoming an
IARC Group 1 carcinogen”. American Journal of Epidemiology, 188, 484–485
[CrossRef].
Mudd, G. M. (2008). Radon sources and impacts: A review of mining and non-mining
issues. Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, 7, 325–353 [CrossRef].
Nunes, L. J. R., Curado, A., Graça, L. C. C.d., Soares, S., & Lopes, S. I. (2022). Impacts of
indoor radon on health: A comprehensive review on causes, assessment and
remediation strategies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 19, 3929. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19073929
Peterson, E., Aker, A., Kim, J., Li, Y., Brand, K., & Copes, R. (2013). Lung cancer risk from
radon in Ontario, Canada: How many lung cancers can we prevent? Cancer Causes &
Control, 24, 2013–2020 [CrossRef] [PubMed].
Pressyanov, D. S., Guelev, M. G., & Sharkov, B. G. (1995). Radon and radon progeny
outdoors in a valley of enhanced natural radioactivity. Atmospheric Environment, 29,
3433–3439 [CrossRef].
Quarto, M., Pugliese, M., Loffredo, F., & Roca, V. (2016). Indoor radon concentration and
gamma dose rate in dwellings of the Province of Naples, South Italy, and estimation
of the effective dose to the inhabitants. Radioprotection, 51(1), 31–36, 2016.
Robertson, A., Allen, J., Laney, R., & Curnow, A. (2013). The cellular and molecular
carcinogenic effects of radon exposure: A review. International Journal of Molecular
Sciences, 14, 14024–14063 [CrossRef] [PubMed].
Rodríguez-Martínez, Á., Torres-Duran, M., Barros-Dios, J. M., & Ruano-Ravina, A.
(2018). Residential radon and small cell lung cancer. A systematic review. Cancer
Letters, 426, 57–62 [CrossRef].
Ruano-Ravina, A., Lema, L. V., Talavera, M. G., Gómez, M. G., Muñoz, S. G., Santiago-
Pérez, M. I., Rey-Brandariz, J., Barros-Dios, J., & Pérez-Ríos, M. (2021). Lung cancer
mortality attributable to residential radon exposure in Spain and its regions.
Environmental Research, 199, Article 111372 [CrossRef].
Sakoda, A., Ishimori, Y., Yamaoka, K., Kataoka, T., & Mitsunobu, F. (2013). Absorbed
doses of lungs from radon retained in airway lumens of mice and rats. Radiation and
Environmental Biophysics, 52, 389–395 [CrossRef].
Samet, J. M., Avila-Tang, E., Boffetta, P., Hannan, L. M., Olivo-Marston, S., Thun, M. J., &
Rudin, C. M. (2009). Lung cancer in never smokers: Clinical epidemiology and
environmental risk factors. Clinical Cancer Research, 15, 5626–5645 [CrossRef].
Samet, J. M., & Hornung, R. W. (1990). Review of radon and lung cancer risk. Risk
Analysis, 10, 65–75 [CrossRef].
Sethi, T. K., El-Ghamry, M. N., & Kloecker, G. H. (2012). Radon and lung cancer. Clinical
Advances in Hematology and Oncology, 10, 157–164.
Sextro, R. G. (1994). Radon and the natural environment. Radon Preval. Meas. Health
Risks Control, 15, 9–32.
Silva, J. P., Lopes, N., Curado, A., Nunes, L. J. R., & Lopes, S. I. (2021). Designing a
qualitative pre-diagnosis model for the evaluation of radon potential in indoor
environments. In Proceedings of the ICEER 21—8th international conference on Energy
and environment research. Porto, Portugal, 13–17.
Tollefsen, T., Gruber, V., Bossew, P., & De Cort, M. (2011). Status of the European indoor
radon map. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 145, 110–116 [CrossRef].
Vogeltanz-Holm, N., & Schwartz, G. G. (2018). Radon and lung cancer: What does the
public really know? Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 192, 26–31 [CrossRef].
Wilkening, M. (1990). Radon in the environment. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
World Health Organization. (2009). WHO handbook on indoor radon: A public health
perspective. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
Yalım, H. A., Gümüş, A., & Ünal, R. (2018). Determination of indoor radon concentration
and effective dose equivalent at workplaces of afyonkarahisar province. Süleyman
Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Dergisi, 13(2), 29–35, 2018.
https://earth.google.com/.
www.tenmak.gov.tr.