[Waterluvian]

That’s exactly the kind of information I was seeking! If your results come back at some ridiculous level, it could make complete sense.

But if your results come back much closer to normal background levels, there’s not much you can do. Even the EPA says it’s difficult to get it below 2.

Meanwhile, lots of websites out there try to scare you into buying remediation for low values (see comment below).

It’s the perfect bogeyman. Radon. Cancer. Invisible silent killer. And I think it’s demonstrated by the vibe-based “seems like a good idea” conclusions in these comments.

[ImPostingOnHN]

I think that if you start from the belief that radon mitigation is sold based on fear, and doesn't have value, then it's easy to cling to that belief and try to dismiss or explain away or minimize information that contradicts it, and to dismiss people who see value in it as 'fear buyers' who believe in a 'bogeyman' and say 'good idea' to things which, in your opinion, might not be good ideas.

A perspective perhaps different from yours: Avoidable cancer risk isn't great, and smart people* properly weighing the facts have repeatedly judged the value of radon mitigation to exceed the costs.

* - Probabilistically speaking, this includes many who are smarter than you and me

[menaerus]

I never heard of the radon cancer impact before and it took me 10 minutes to find couple of representative studies done for my local region which in fact did find the positive correlation between the areas with elevated radon measurements and people living in those areas getting the lung cancer. So, not that "it could make complete sense" but it certainly makes sense. I suggest you do the same research before calling out something as important as this a scam.