Some people see conspiracy where none exists. And, some people are gullible. Could I offer you some Radithor<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radithor>? Might help boost your resistance to lung cancer! Or perhaps I could interest you in a scrotal radiendocrinator<https://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/quackcures/radend.htm>?
Now, to get us at least a LITTLE bit back on topic… Not specifically Model T related, but after rebuilding the main and RAM disk wedge battery packs, I now have a fully-functioning Epson PX-8 Geneva. Was there an assembler made available for this machine? From: M100 <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of John Whitton <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: Model 100 Discussion <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 13:01 To: Model 100 Discussion <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [M100] off topic: Radon in houses I dislike going OT on this board, as differences in perspective may escalate into argument. I have followed the Radon question for two decades or so, and find myself undisturbed by it. A common sense question would be, "If it is as dangerous as it is perceived to be, and given the fact that houses in areas of high Radon concentration have existed for generations, why has there not been massive local incidence of lung cancer?" And by "massive", I mean MASSIVE. And yet, nope. Just plain nope. For me, this falls under the heading of, "Who are you going to believe? The 'experts', or your eyes?" But, that's just me. I realize that a common put-on-the-blinders response is, "Why take chances?", but that perspective can also be applied to getting out of bed in the morning. Where I take issue, is with the facts in evidence vs. the hysteria gen'd up by 'experts' and promulgated by naive bureaucrats. The consequence is needless millions of dollars expended in mandated 'abatement' efforts, inconvenience (even psychological burdens) and expense to home owners/buyers. But, that's just me. I have what I am told is a mulish tendency to rely on facts and figures rather than emotion. One thing everyone agrees upon (so far as I know) is that limited exposure to Radon actually reduces the risk of lung cancer: http://www.wpi.edu/news/20078/radonstudy.html Here is a succinct paper, 'Radon Risk and Cancer', on the question, take it or leave it as you choose: http://www.forensic-applications.com/radon/reviews.html As a potentially disruptive parting shot, and I'll say no more on either topic, it's too bad that given the depredations of malaria, and now the Zika virus, that we don't have a safe, proven means of mosquito eradication, like, oh, DDT. John W.
