Most residents of New Mexico are not aware that radon is a Class I carcinogen1,2,3 according to both the World Health Organization and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It is also the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States4,5, second only to smoking. Nationally, radon-related mortality is comparable to the national homicide rate6,7, a comparison that underscores the seriousness of an environmental health hazard that is both invisible and preventable when properly addressed. In New Mexico, the picture is equally alarming. Out of roughly 922 average new cases of lung cancer diagnosed annually between 2017 and 20218, at least 116 are estimated, based on established epidemiological models, to be directly attributable to radon exposure9. The economic impact is also significant. Annual medical costs related to radon-induced cancer in the state are estimated at 23 million dollars, while the broader economic toll, including lost wages and productivity, likely exceeds 24 million dollars9. Regardless of how these costs are distributed, they represent a substantial burden for a state already facing persistent health disparities and limited healthcare access in many communities. Another noteworthy statistic is that according to a 2023 report, 31.5% of diagnosed lung cancer cases in New Mexico10 did not receive any form of treatment, which was the highest reported rate in the nation at that time. More recent 2024 data indicate this figure may be as high as 33.5%11. These figures are drawn from publicly available health reports and do not imply causation beyond what is reported in the referenced sources.
Moreover, the recent reports found that New Mexico ranks amongst the worst in the nation for lung cancer screening12,13 . According to these published reports, Indigenous Peoples in New Mexico are disproportionately likely to receive no treatment for lung cancer compared to other groups.
New Mexico’s geology includes uranium-rich formations that naturally release radon14. The geological variety in New Mexico means radon potential can vary dramatically even within a single neighborhood15,16. The outdated radon maps created by EPA in the 1990s17 offer only coarse estimates and are widely recognized as insufficient for guiding modern radon policy or household decision- making. These maps lack the resolution needed to show variations between communities, and they do not capture differences between individual properties.
Still, even using those outdated maps, more than one in four homes in New Mexico tests above the EPA action level of 4 picocuries per liter (pCi/L)17,18. Many homes test above 8 pCi/L, and some exceed 20 pCi/L, levels associated in the scientific literature with increased lifetime cancer risk. Indoor radon levels also tend to peak in winter, when homes are sealed against the cold and ventilation decreases18.
Given these realities, New Mexico would benefit from stronger radon awareness, expanded public education, and consistent statewide testing initiatives that reach every resident, not just those already aware of the risk. Radon exposure affects everyone, but the risks are not evenly distributed 19. Tribal communities, underserved rural communities, border communities, and low-income households often face greater vulnerability 20.
Challenges include:
• Limited access to radon education and testing programs
• Older or poorly ventilated housing stock
• Fewer certified radon mitigation professionals in remote regions
• Financial barriers to purchasing test kits or mitigation systems
• Reduced access to healthcare services and cancer screening January is National Radon Action and Awareness Month21,22 and a reminder that radon risk is tied not only to geology, but also to social and environmental justice. As National Radon Action and Awareness Month, approaches, the message is simple and resonates strongly for all New Mexicans: remain vigilant and test their homes. Reducing radon exposure in underserved communities may require targeted outreach, accessible testing programs, and appropriate public investment, as suggested by various public health sources. New Mexico is not alone in confronting radon, but it appears to lag behind states with more mature radon protection programs. States such as Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Florida, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia have implemented robust efforts that include23:
• Mandatory radon testing or disclosure during real estate transactions
• School testing requirements in public and private facilities
• State-funded radon awareness campaigns reaching rural and tribal areas
• Financial assistance programs for low-income households needing mitigation
• Radon-resistant construction codes for new homes in high-risk areas Iowa and Minnesota, for instance, have some of the strongest radon laws in the nation, with requirements for school testing and mandatory disclosure in real estate transactions. Colorado and New Jersey maintain expansive statewide training and certification programs. Florida and Pennsylvania provide annualized radon data and free or subsidized test kits to thousands of residents each year 23,24.
New Mexico may benefit from considering similar policies, especially those that support transparency, provide protections for homebuyers and renters, and increase testing access25.
EPA’s State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG)26 program provides limited but reliable support for state-level radon outreach. These grants help states supply a limited number of free or low-cost radon test kits, conduct public awareness campaigns, train professionals, and support radon measurement and mitigation initiatives. However, SIRG funding alone cannot meet New Mexico’s needs, and some of its intended impact is reported to be slowed by administrative processes. Additional state-level support may be required to match the scale of the radon problem in the state. Although New Mexico received its SIRG award on October 1, 202527, the free test kits supported by the grant are not yet available to the public. There is cautious optimism that a modest number of statesponsored test kits will be released soon, but timely implementation remains essential for protecting residents’ health. These statements reflect information from publicly available grant and program descriptions and do not imply any assessment of governmental performance or responsibility.
In the meantime, residents are encouraged to consider purchasing shortterm test kits or continuous monitors from reputable suppliers. Those needing mitigation should seek National Radon Proficiency Program (NRPP) or National Radon Safety Board (NRSB) certified professionals28,29 to help ensure that any mitigation work aligns with recognized national standards. A few hours of effort and modest investment may help reduce radon exposure risks. The steps often recommended in public health guidance are straightforward: a) Test your home. Testing is generally simple, and short-term radon test results typically take only a few days and can cost less than most household repairs. b) If elevated radon levels are identified above the EPA action level, consider addressing the issue promptly. Certified mitigation technicians may be able to reduce radon levels by up to 99 percent using established longterm solutions.
Live safely and encourage others to test! Radon awareness grows at one household at a time, and neighbors, family members, and coworkers may benefit when someone shares their radon experience.
Radon does not provide a warning. Testing provides the information needed to understand exposure levels.
As we enter January and National Radon Action and Awareness Month, residents are encouraged to consider making radon testing part of their routine home safety practices. Winter brings families indoors, and it also may coincide with higher radon concentrations. Taking steps to understand radon levels in the home begins with access to accurate information and awareness. For more information visit: https://www.epa.gov/rad on/health-risk-radon; https://www.cdc.gov/rad on/index.html; https://www.lung.org/cle an-air/indoor-air/indoorair- pollutants/radon; https://www.hudexchange. info/programs/ra don/; https://www.canc e r . g o v / a b o u t cancer/causes-preventio n/risk/substances/radon/ radon-fact-sheet; https://www.osha.gov/ch emicaldata/883
Have a safe, healthy, and radon-aware holiday season, and a radon-safe New Year.
Disclaimer:
The information presented in this article is intended solely for general public awareness and educational purposes. It is based on publicly available data, scientific literature, and referenced sources current at the time of publication. Although care has been taken to ensure accuracy, no guarantee is made regarding the completeness, precision, or applicability of the information to individual circumstances. All statistics, policy descriptions, and scientific statements are derived from the cited references and do not represent independent verification or professional evaluation by the author.
This article does not provide medical advice, legal advice, regulatory guidance, risk assessments, environmental consulting services, or professional recommendations of any kind. Radon levels, health risks, mitigation outcomes, and related environmental conditions can vary significantly between locations and households. Readers should consult licensed medical providers, certified radon measurement and mitigation professionals, legal counsel, or appropriate government agencies for advice specific to their personal situation.
References to federal, state, Tribal, or local government programs, including but not limited to EPA’s State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG), are informational only and do not imply endorsement, critique, assessment of performance, or determination of responsibility. Any mention of specific policies, laws, or mitigation strategies is descriptive and should not be interpreted as advocating for or against governmental action, regulatory change, or public investment. Comparisons to other states’ radon programs reflect publicly reported information and are not intended to imply deficiencies or obligations on the part of any jurisdiction.
Nothing in this article should be interpreted as creating a professional relationship between the author and the reader. The author makes no warranties, express or implied, regarding the results of radon testing or mitigation, the accuracy of thirdparty data, the performance of any professional, or the effectiveness of any strategy discussed herein. Any actions taken based on this article are strictly at the reader’s own discretion and risk.
About the Author:
Dr. Reynold Silber is a scientist and environmental professional with extensive experience in academia, government, and industry. His work spans environmental monitoring, public health communication, and science-based outreach. For additional assistance, Dr. Silber can be reached at sentinelscg.llc@gmail.com, and more information is available at www.sentinelscientific. com.
Author Disclaimer:
The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent the positions of any employer, agency, institution, or funding entity. The information provided is for general educational and public-awareness purposes only and does not constitute medical, legal, regulatory, or professional advice. Readers should consult qualified professionals for guidance specific to their circumstances. The author makes no warranties regarding completeness or outcomes and assumes no liability for actions taken or decisions made based on this content.