Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 196 to 210 of 210
  1. #196
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    25,314

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Quote Originally Posted by Al Gerhart View Post
    I know I am going to have to reconsider selling granite after these two recent cases that might possibly be related to heavy metal poisoning.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kent Potter View Post
    Isn't this the whole purpose of your crusade? You are a fabricator of Solid Surface and don't even fabricate granite counter tops.

    Kent,

    Al DOES sell granite, that's why he is in "panic mode" over this.

    He now has to re-think his business of selling granite, does he continue to sell granite, does he only carry the types of granite which emit radon at acceptable levels, does he test and certify his granite (and to what protocol), does he stop selling granite and do something else?

    That is why Al is in panic mode right now.

    OREP Home Inspector E&O Insurance 2
    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  2. #197
    Al Gerhart's Avatar
    Al Gerhart Guest

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Quote Originally Posted by Kent Potter View Post
    Isn't this the whole purpose of your crusade? You are a fabricator of Solid Surface and don't even fabricate granite counter tops.
    Well, then Mr. Potter, you are either a liar or ignorant. Surface Fabrication magazine did a story on our shop in May of 2007 that documented the fact that we do fabricate granite, as well as another major wood magazine that did a "Point-Counter Point" article on bringing in hard surface fabrication into a cabinet shop operation. I was one of three interviewees on that one, Wood & Wood Products was the name of the magazine if I recall correctly. Fabnet has an article on our first granite job as well, providing info on tools and equipment needed to get into fabrication of stone.

    Plus one can vist my website, thecarpentershop.net, and see past jobs we have fabricated in granite.

    Now, this is one of the difficulties when discussing this subject on a forum, the stone only fabricators will do and say anything in crude attempts to discredit anyone that dares bring the subject up. The fact that they will lie about something so easily proven is beyond my comprehension, but thank god for retarded enemies.
    I am continually amazed at the amount of time and effort you put forth to tear down an industry that you only sell "some" products from and only because customers demand granite. It is no secret that Natural and Engineered Stones have all but destroyed the Solid Suface market.
    More ignorance or outright lies. According to the Freedonia Report last spring, Laminate had the most market share, followed by solid surface at around 33% market share, then quartz (around 17%) followed by granite (at 16% market share,for the first time it was behind quartz).

    I imagine this to be quite a heavy hit to your Cabinet Shop's bottom line.

    Actually, we sell more solid surface since we started fabrication of granite. We can show the consumers granite samples, show the radiation present in almost all colors in varying degrees, show the UV damage to the black stones, stain samples (even after sealing), and give them a chunk of mesh back stone that can be broken apart with the hands alone. Then our top polished seams, which are razor blade tight, the best in OKC hands down, but compared to 99% invisible solid surface seams, well, you get the picture.

    Then show them quartz seams, that can have some lippage at times, cause you can't top polish quartz very well. Add our samples of various granite tops that are stained, and not that many people will buy granite once they have been educated.

    This is why I advocate all solid surface shops to start fabrication of granite. It is very low skilll level work, far easier than solid surface, takes a few thousand dollars in tools to get started (heck, your first job will pay for the tools), and the quality expected is very, very, low compared to solid surface work. So sell everything, educate the consumer before the sale, and make some very, very, good money on those too blinded to avoid granite.

    Through this entire thread, you have discounted and subsequently attacked the opinions of experts who have presented factual data contrary to yours. B.S., none of these guys are trained on Radon AND radiation, some are Radon guys and I would listen to them on the testing and mitigation of Radon, but none of them were aware of the granite Radon/radiation issues. I have seen little factual data if any, that opposed the position held by me, the EPA, AARST, and now the MIA and the CRCDP (did i get those initials in the right secquece!). And Mr. Potter, don't forget that the SFA has adopted my radiation stance. We both know that, so how can you possibly argue that I am wrong when your own leaders at the SFA had to drag you guys kicking and screaming into admitting that I was right? Remember the "granite so hot it needs boxing up and burying"?

    These guy's have been in the feild for a hell of alot longer than you have been attacking granite, when are you going to get a clue? I agree that these guys are experts at inspecting homes, and you aren't going to find me argueing with them on any issue but the safety of some granite countertops.


    In the Natural Stone Industry, you my freind are known as what is referred to as a "Hack"! Someone who professes to know the business but yet has no clue. I would say that the stone industry is full of hacks if they didn't know that granite was radioactive, emitted Radon, or had heavy metal content that could leach out with ordinary cleaning products, or even plain old water. Or maybe they did know, Mr. Potter, and prefered to lie about it?

    The Natural Stone industry is in the process of setting standards for certifying granite as safe on numerous fronts. This will take some time as there is "Real Research" to be performed. This of course would rule you out Mr. Gerhart.

    "process of setting standards for certifying granite as safe on numerous fronts."
    See, there is the problem, Mr. Potter, you are telling us out loud that the standards will be set to prove that granite is safe. You guys don't have any intention of doing some actual science to find out if it is safe or not.

    As to ruling me out, you are unaware that I run an email group with the leaders in this research field contributing to the discussion. Do you really think these guys will trust the MIA? One of the leaders of the CRCDP effort on granite radiation is Dr. Steck, who the MIA claimed was helping them back in June. Steck quit the MIA effort, but he is on our email group.

    Face it, Mr. Potter, no one that is sane would trust any of the members of the MIA or the SFA to guide the setting of any standards. You guys lied about this issue for too many years.

    BTW, I wouldn't make any trips to Brazil soon, you never can tell what that Portegese mafia has planned!
    Well, this certainly isn't the first time I have been threatened, but I will add yours to the long list.

    And, Jerry, you are close to right. By now I understand the nuances of testing and measuring and I'll be the first to say that above a very low level, no one has a clue on the real level of a granite until it is ran through a Gamma Spectrometer and a Radon emission test on the entire slab. We thought that low radiation granite was safe (below 25 uR/hr), but the highest Radon emitter Brodhead found was Four Seasons which measured 25 uR/hr.

    That changes everything. I'm not panicked yet, cause we have sold nothing over 14 uR/hr, but Brodhead's finding will impact future sales.


  3. #198
    Curtis Marburger's Avatar
    Curtis Marburger Guest

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    the Sky still falling ?


  4. #199

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Good morning, Mr. Caliendo:

    The issue of half-life and “replenishment” are a bit misunderstood by a lot of people.

    The gas we call radon is merely one of many transitional elements in a longer chain of events, wherein one element is changed into another element, which is then changed into another … and so on. Each change is marked by a loss (emission) of an atomic particle and the atom is then re-arranged into a new element.

    The rate at which this change occurs is probabilistic for any one atom. Since there are billions of available atoms, the overall probability is given as the half life – meaning that if one has a finite number of millions of radon atoms the probability that one half of them will undergo a change in 3.8 days is very high. The probability that one half of the remaining millions will undergo a change in 3.8 days is also very high. This probability chain continues on theoretically until there are just two atoms left, however, the probability that one will decay in the next 3.8 days is actually very low. The reason is that if we look back at the entire original mass of radon, we realize that many millions of those radon atoms have now been around unaltered for many, many half-lives. Yet, their probability of a change has not changed.

    So it is rather like thinking about a frog, hopping along a length of a log; with each hop, the frog traverses one-half of the log’s length. And with each leap the frog closes the distance to the end of the log. However, the frog never can make it to the end of the log, since there always remains a half distance to go – no matter how small that distance is. This is known as an asymptotic decay curve.

    Radon, by the way is a biologically inert gas, meaning that one could harmlessly breathe some 80% radon (billions and billions of pCi/l) – provided that the balance was O2 and a smattering of CO2 thrown in to maintain blood pH. The radon kooks, don’t get this, and would rather hang on to, and ferociously promote junk science and myth, and they do it by repeating the same myths over and over and over and over, without understanding the technical aspects which underpin the rationale of the statement.

    The fact remains that the radon issue vis-à-vis granite is a storm in a tea-cup, since there is not one study, yet performed on the face of the planet earth, that has demonstrated, without confounders, that radon exposures as commonly seen in residential houses, raises the risk of cancer by any significant amount. And EVERY legitimate study performed thus far, including the studies used by the US EPA, and as described deep within their literature, has acknowledged that there is an inverse relationship between radon concentrations and observed lung cancer rates – that is – as the radon concentrations in homes goes up, the risk of lung cancer goes DOWN!

    But that is coming from me, a lowly forensic industrial hygienist, who has actually performed epidemiological studies for a living for the last 20 years, and who has taught radiation toxicology at university level, and was a radiation safety officer for 16 years – so what the heck would I know, eh?

    By the way, you may find my discussions on the issue interesting. Just follow the links from my home page given below.

    Cheers!
    Caoimhín P. Connell
    Forensic Industrial Hygienist
    Forensic Industrial Hygiene

    (The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

    AMDG


  5. #200
    Al Gerhart's Avatar
    Al Gerhart Guest

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Once again Cao uses a lot of correct science to support his wingnut idea that radiation and Radon is actually good for you despite what the rest of the science community think.

    In his usual condesending manner, he points out what all of us know, that Radon itself is harmless, but he neglects to point out that the daughter producsts are not. The decay of Radon is easily proven with a clean tissue and a dusty TV set, do a wipe, then watch the resulting dust decay down as a few days roll by.

    However, Cao wants us to believe that the decay of radon is a rare thing, despite it's importance in testing samples for Radon. Let's face it, Bubba, the frog's first hop covers half the distance, little matter than the hops keep getting smaller.

    But that is not enough for Cao, to talk of frogs and logs, he has to mislead the public on what the EPA publically states, that 1.3 pCi/L of Radon kills 21,000 Americans per year. Cao states:

    "And EVERY legitimate study performed thus far, including the studies used by the US EPA, and as described deep within their literature, has acknowledged that there is an inverse relationship between radon concentrations and observed lung cancer rates – that is – as the radon concentrations in homes goes up, the risk of lung cancer goes DOWN!"

    Ahhh! The info is buried deep within the EPA literature, not out where it is easily found by mere homeowners. I wonder what lead the EPA's management to hide this crucial info? Hmmm, perhaps they are selling tin foil hats on the side and don't want to disrupt sales?

    Now, Mr. Cao, perhaps you would link to one of these "legitimate" studies that show Radon increase lowers cancer rates? Randy Evans covered for you last time and dug up a study from Worchester, but alas the study was deeply flawed according to one professor, small cohort, and even I picked out that they had dropped the normal statistical analysis to force the data where the author wanted it to go.


    As for what the heck you know, I suspect it is alot and you use it to foist an agenda on the public for what ever odd reason you might have.

    How about it Cao, how about a couple of these "legitimate" studies that back up your claims?


  6. #201

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Good morning, all –

    I was recently contacted off-list and advised that some participants of this list may suffer from legitimate mental and/or emotional issues and made it clear earlier that I had no intention of increasing the personal burden on anyone. Having said that, I think it is equally important to address specific objective issues, without my usual tongue-in-cheek jabs (however harmless I may mean them to be).

    So, without identifying any person in particular, where, for example, a participant like, Mr. Gerhart, makes a statement or tautology that is objectively incorrect, it benefits all to point out those errors.

    As I have mentioned in the past, it is truly incomprehensible how profoundly incorrect Mr. Gerharts assertions are, and how profoundly incompetent his technical grasp of the subject matter. It is similarly difficult to understand how when one answers Mr. Gerhart, he doesn’t seem to realize that someone has actually provided him with the information he requested, and he seems to carry one with his arguments as if no-one is actually responding. Mr. Gerhart banters around a lot of words and phrases of which he clearly has absolutely no concept of what they mean, how they are used, their limitations, or the concept which underlie they terms and words. Instead, he seems to just keep repeating links, and references to work he has never read, and clearly is incapable of understanding.

    As an example – in an earlier post, Mr. Gerhart stated:

    Dr. Kitto's info was not published because the MIA is trying to get their hands on it before it is finished. His original study is posted in its place, and shows that most granite will raise a homes level under 1 pCi/L but it is possible to raise the Radon levels over 4 pCi/L.

    This is a good example of how Mr. Gerhart exhibits not only a complete lack of understanding of what a researcher is saying, but even an apparent obsession to take what is being said, and pervert the statement into something that is not being said, but that seems to support his otherwise unsupported argument. So, Let’s see what Dr. Kitto actually said…

    Contrary to what Mr. Gerhart believes, Dr. Kitto did NOT say that “…most granite will raise a homes level under 1 pCi/L but it is possible to raise the Radon levels over 4 pCi/L.” Rather, Dr. Kitto’s paper concluded that: “It is estimated that in most cases, the contribution of decorative stone to the indoor radon concentration will be less than 1 pCi/l, but may exceed 4 pCi/l in rare cases.”

    What this means is precisely what the author states: It is unlikely that the radon contributed into an home by decorative stone will be significant. That’s all. Considering that there is not a single study yet performed to date, that has demonstrated that this kind of contribution (even if it is above 4 pCi/l) results in any known demonstrable risk, it is a moot point.

    It is clear that Mr. Gerhart is incapable of reading, let alone understanding what is written by other people. Even on this forum, Mr. Gerhart entirely ignores or otherwise completely misunderstands or deliberately misconstrues or deliberately mischaracterizes what other people say. There is a very real phenomenon known as “pathological science” and a specific psychological profile is particularly susceptible to the advancement of ideas developed under poor science and an understanding of scientific processes.

    At the heart of the advancement is the repetition of references, and statements to the exclusion of any kind of consideration of what is being said, and the denial of contradictory objective fact. The reality is that it doesn’t matter how many times you answer Mr. Gerhart, or provide him with examples of studies or legitimate references, because he won’t read them, can’t understand them, and will simply continue to deny they exist and continue to ask “Why won’t you back up what you say?”

    It is sad, but it is true.

    Cheers!
    Caoimhín P. Connell
    Forensic Industrial Hygienist
    Forensic Industrial Hygiene

    (The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

    AMDG


  7. #202
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Memphis TN.
    Posts
    4,311

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Caoimhin Here's your Patch.

    Al Here's your Degree. ( Thanks For Stopping By.)
    .

    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images
    It Might have Choked Artie But it ain't gone'a choke Stymie! Our Gang " The Pooch " (1932)
    Billy J. Stephens HI Service Memphis TN.

  8. #203
    Al Gerhart's Avatar
    Al Gerhart Guest

    Smile Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Good morning Cao,

    Geez, now I feel bad. I had no idea of your condition. You are so brave to try to keep going with this burden, but I suppose you have your good days and bad days. Perhaps your attendent will drop by while you are writing one of these posts, might see it as a cry for help, perhaps a medication change is in order here.

    I see that you have regressed to projection, blaming others for you own failings, along with some sort of fixation on repeating the same arguments ad nauseum. I bet it saves a lot of typing though.
    Let's blame all this on "Bob", yeah, that might work. Cao isn't the bad person, it is all "Bob's" fault. Perhaps some progress could happpen.

    Okay, I wrote "shows that most granite will raise a homes level under 1 pCi/L but it is possible to raise the Radon levels over 4 pCi/L."

    Dr. Kitto wrote "It is estimated that in most cases, the contribution of decorative stone to the indoor radon concentration will be less than 1 pCi/l, but may exceed 4 pCi/l in rare cases."

    Hmmm, "Bob" seems to have an issue with these two passages, so let's look closely at both. The first portion of both passages say that most stones will raise the Radon level less than 1 pCi/L. The second half of both passages say that Radon levels may exceed 4 pCi/L. Hmmm, this is difficult, it seems both say the same thing. Perhaps "Bob's" problem centers on the difference between "rare" and "possible". Dear me, we must consult a Dictionary, one moment please..... Here we go, cut and past for "Bob".

    1. Capable of happening, existing, or being true without contradicting proven facts, laws, or circumstances.
    2. Capable of occurring or being done without offense to character, nature, or custom.
    3. Capable of favorable development; potential: a possible site for the new capital.
    4. Of uncertain likelihood.

    Hmm, "Bob's" issues are still unclear. It seems that "possible" is understood to mean some what uncertain or capable of happening, potential even. I suppose "rare" would likely have the same connotation. Excuse me again for a moment..... Here we go. Just for "Bob".

    Hmm, "Rare" has many meanings, but "marked by an uncommon quality" is a good match. Darn, that is pretty close to "Of uncertain likelihood" which is the definition of "possible". I do see the problem though, "Bob" likes the word "unlikely", but unfortunetly Dr. Kitto didn't use "Bob's" word, he used "rare" instead.

    Geez, "Bob", it looks like you are going to get your feelings hurt again. I do hope it doesn't add to your issues.

    Now, what "Bob" doesn't address is Dr. Kitto's additonal info in the presentation, which a quick call to AARST or one of the many CRCPD members present would prove, in where Dr. Kitto provided examples of 24 pCi/L from decorative stone without ventilation figured in, half that (that would be 12, "Bob") with air exchange (ventilation, "Bob").

    Well, hopefully "Bob" will get better and this grevious use of the word "rare" instead of "unlikely" will not add to "Bob's" current circumstances.

    Seriously, Cao, is this how you opperate in court? You demean your opponent or refuse to address the questions from the opposing counsel? How is that working for you? I would think in your imaginary world there would be an imaginary judge providing some rules for ya to follow.....

    Now, I hope we are finished playing around and you will provide two "legitimate" studies that back this claim of Radon being good for you. Once again, I will point out the main EPA web page on this issue

    Radon | Indoor Air Quality | Air | US EPA

    And "Bob", I did a quick search for "Radon hormesis" on the EPA site and found nothing. Perhaps it is too "deep within their literature" for a mere computer to root out.

    Perhaps I should mimic "Bob" and add a disclaimer to my post.

    (The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal ravings and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer (good lord, the boss man would fire me in an instant if he saw me acting like this), agency, peers, other patient/inmates, or professional affiliates nor does it reflect a need to change my medications again. I love my Thorazine, please don't take me off my Thorazine. The above post is for misleading the public only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others. Please don't confront me in a court of law with this drivel, it is written purely for entertainment. Gotta go, the director of the Asylum is coming back soom and I haven't finished cleaning his office. "Bob")

    Last edited by Al Gerhart; 09-23-2008 at 04:56 PM.

  9. #204
    Bruce Thomas's Avatar
    Bruce Thomas Guest

    Wink Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    I haven't read this post, I just don't have time. Here is an article that I wrote on the subject, hope it helps.

    Is My Granite Counter Top Dangerous?

    Recently a trade association for the solid surface counter top manufacturers formed and funded a not for profit association to test and disseminate information about granite as used in homes. They produced videos and press releases stating that granite used in counter tops and floors is radioactive and a radon emitter. As you can imagine it got the attention of thousands of home owners and now they don't know what to do.

    At this point there are no accepted protocols to test and interpret the data. There are several groups and Universities work to prove test methods. The data that I have seen indicates that most of the species of stone contribute very little radon to the indoor and are of no concern. The key word is "most".

    If I just spent thousands of dollars on granite counter top and floors in my home I would want to know for sure if it was dangerous. So what do we as home inspectors do?

    The main concern is radon, so testing may be conducted using a minimum of 3 tests. One in the lowest area of the home, one at least 20 inches above the stone product and one in a completely different room on the same level as the stone product. The test placement and house conditions should follow normal protocols for the device used. As I mentioned above there is no consensus for a method to test so the client must be informed of that fact.

    Interpretation of gathered data is the key to determining the risk. Since there is no consensus, it is essential that a qualified radiation professional interpret the test results. Most states have such individuals in the radiation protection section of the health department or environmental protection department. They should be consulted and quoted in any report to the consumer.



    Bruce Thomas
    9/12/08



  10. #205
    Al Gerhart's Avatar
    Al Gerhart Guest

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Thomas View Post
    I haven't read this post, I just don't have time. Here is an article that I wrote on the subject, hope it helps.


    Is My Granite Counter Top Dangerous?


    Recently a trade association for the solid surface counter top manufacturers formed and funded a not for profit association to test and disseminate information about granite as used in homes. They produced videos and press releases stating that granite used in counter tops and floors is radioactive and a radon emitter. As you can imagine it got the attention of thousands of home owners and now they don't know what to do.

    At this point there are no accepted protocols to test and interpret the data. There are several groups and Universities work to prove test methods. The data that I have seen indicates that most of the species of stone contribute very little radon to the indoor and are of no concern. The key word is "most".

    If I just spent thousands of dollars on granite counter top and floors in my home I would want to know for sure if it was dangerous. So what do we as home inspectors do?

    The main concern is radon, so testing may be conducted using a minimum of 3 tests. One in the lowest area of the home, one at least 20 inches above the stone product and one in a completely different room on the same level as the stone product. The test placement and house conditions should follow normal protocols for the device used. As I mentioned above there is no consensus for a method to test so the client must be informed of that fact.

    Interpretation of gathered data is the key to determining the risk. Since there is no consensus, it is essential that a qualified radiation professional interpret the test results. Most states have such individuals in the radiation protection section of the health department or environmental protection department. They should be consulted and quoted in any report to the consumer.



    Bruce Thomas
    9/12/08
    Bruce,

    if we aren't completely factual, the opposition will have openings that they will use to discredit the effort to find the truth. As it is, they make up enough, no sense in providing legitmate chinks in the arguments.

    Specifically,

    "Recently a trade association for the solid surface counter top manufacturers formed and funded a not for profit association to test and disseminate information....."

    This is incorrect. Sensa, a company that sells natural stone through Lowes, provided the start up funding for the non profit, Build Clean.

    Cambria, a quartz countertop manufacter joined in months later. Sensa is owned by C & C North America, which also owns Silestone, another Quartz manufacturer.

    But this effort has not recieved a single dime, nor nickle, from any solid surface manufacturers, d*mn their sorry souls. :-)

    It would also be more correct if you would add "quartz materials" to the products tested in addition to granite. In fact, Lowes demanded the Sensa and Silestone lines be tested as part of a rollout of the products in about 1,500 stores. Dr. Kitto's study mentioned this fact, I believe it was 13 quartz samples in the study, all of which were extremely low or no Radon or radiation present.

    Also, Build Clean has not produced any videos, Channel 4 did that, with THEIR expert present and doing 90% of the talking. That would be Dr. Llope of Rice university, a particle physicist who deals with radiation as part of his work for the DOE and Rice University.

    Build Clean did produce an audio "pod cast" with a Radon lab owner that found several hot granite countertops that produced large amounts of Radon in kitchens.

    Those are the only two objections. I love the rest of it and agree 100%.


  11. #206
    Richard Moore's Avatar
    Richard Moore Guest

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Wine ingredient protects against radiation: report (issued today)

    Study: Red Wine Antioxidant May Protect Against Radiation | Occupational Health & Safety

    Well, hell! Along the lines of "don't worry, be happy", I now get to recommend my clients drink more wine(?).


  12. #207
    Bruce Thomas's Avatar
    Bruce Thomas Guest

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Richard,

    That's what we need, more drunk mice.

    These folks at Pitt are brilliant and if there is a radiation antidote, they will find it.

    Bruce


  13. #208
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    25,314

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    So ... we can spill red wine all over the granite countertop and it will protect everyone in the room, right?

    (For us non-wine drinkers, you know.)

    Can I get a $10 million grant to determine 'how long' the red wine must be let stand there before it does any good?

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  14. #209
    Curtis Marburger's Avatar
    Curtis Marburger Guest

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Wine on Countertop"s ?
    Will that help with the Sky is Falling ?


  15. #210
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Memphis TN.
    Posts
    4,311

    Default Re: Stone Countertops & Radon

    Quote Originally Posted by Curtis Marburger View Post
    .
    Will that help with the Sky is Falling ?
    .
    For You & The Pet.
    .

    ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images ***IMPORTANT*** You Need To Register To View Images
    It Might have Choked Artie But it ain't gone'a choke Stymie! Our Gang " The Pooch " (1932)
    Billy J. Stephens HI Service Memphis TN.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •