I have something to be relived about this week: I don’t have a posh kitchen, no granite countertops, so this story doesn’t ratchet up my mom-anxiety.

This week, CBS reported on a story that granite kitchen countertops are releasing radon gas into homes, and may pose a serious health hazard. Granite naturally contains low levels of radioactivity, which gradually releases radon gas over time. Radon is a radioactive gas and a carcinogen, and causes an estimated 20,000 lung cancer deaths every year in the USA. Granite countertop manufactures say the risk is totally negligible, and the amount of radon that could be released by a countertop is minuscule.

The Environmental Protection Agency says that the sealing process tends to keep radon gas in, and consumers should be more worried about testing their whole home for radon from other sources, like from rocks in the earth.

So to put the risk from granite countertops in perspective, If there is radon in your house, the vast majority of it is coming from the rock underneath your home. The bedrock – all those millions of tons of it that your home is built on – is often granite or other rocks that also release radon.

And eating food that has been prepared on a granite countertop, is very unlikely to be dangerous

Many states’ health departments sell subsidized radon test kits, usually by mail order. (Google <your state> health department, then search for “radon test” on their website, or use the search feature on the EPA website.)

I live in Minnesota, and the Minnesota Department of Health sells radon test kits for under $10. You would hang up the test in your home for a couple of days, then mail it into a laboratory to be analyzed. You’ll receive a result in a couple of weeks.

Here’s the EPA’s advice on testing, and what to do if you do have elevated radon levels in your house.

So I’m not currently panicking about my mom’s or my friend’s granite countertops, but I think I might get one of those radon test kits.

And who thinks the next health scare will be about fake granite countertops?

Since the 1970s food additives have been under the radar of toxicologists, psychiatrists, nutritionists and environmental/public health watchdog groups. In the last decade however, with what seems to be a growing set of diagnoses of hyperactivity and other childhood behavioral and diet-related disorders, interest in food additives has increased. So has the research.

Among the latest and most controversial studies, was a 2007 Southampton University done with a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with three-year olds and eight- to nine-year-olds to test for indications of hyperactivity associated with specific food additives and food colorings. The additives and colorings tested were tetrazine (FD&C yellow no. 5/European food code E102); sunset yellow (FD&C yellow no. 6/E110); quinoline yellow (FD&C Yellow No. 10/E104); carmoisine (Food Red 3/E122); and ponceau 4R (Food Red 7/E124).

Researchers recruited 153 local three-year-olds and 144 children aged eight or nine for a six-week trial and assigned them to either of two groups. One group was given regular fruit juice without additives and the second group was given a similar looking and tasting drink that contained the above-mentioned additives. The drinks were assigned anonymously and in un-marked, sealed bottles.

The drinks with the additives were further split into two groups: Mix A and Mix B. Mix A contained the same amount of artificial colorings found in a two-ounce bag of candy or two small bags of commercial ?fruit snacks.? Mix B contained the equivalent of twice that amount. Both mixes contained the same levels sodium benzoate.

The children were assessed prior to the trial for evidence of hyperactivity. The first week of the trial all of the children followed their typical diets. The following weeks, parents were asked to remove from their children?s diets all sweets and drinks with additives were and to start using the trial drink in amounts equal to that of the foods/beverages removed from their usual diets. On the even numbered weeks Mix A, Mix B, and placebo were administered in a random sequence and was blinded to the child, the parents, the teachers and the researchers. On the odd-numbered weeks all children received the placebo. At the end of the study, the children were assessed again for hyperactivity.

According to a 2007 report by the Agence France-Presse, ?Mix A had a ?significantly adverse? effect on the three-year-olds, although Mix B made no difference on this group. In the older children, both Mix A and Mix B had a strong effect.

?Overall, children who took the mix moved about 10 percent closer to the definition of being hyperactive,? lead author Jim Stevenson, a professor of psychology at the university. ?We now have clear evidence that mixtures of certain food colours and [sodium] benzoate preservative can adversely influence the behaviour of children. However, parents should not think that simply taking these additives out of food will prevent all hyperactive disorders. We know that many other influences are at work, but this at least is one a child can avoid.??

This study was similar to a 2004 study presented in the June issue of the Archives of Diseases in Childhood, but seems to have produced more conclusive evidence for a correlation between artificial additives in food and childhood behavioral problems, leading researchers to conclude that artificial colors or a sodium benzoate preservative (or both) in the diet result in increased hyperactivity in three-year-old and eight- to nine-year-olds in the general population.

In part two, each of the food additives studied will be discussed.

For more information:

• Abstract of the 2007 Study
• 2004 Study