New Harvard Study - Stricter Air Quality Needed to Prevent Deaths

Stand up to the 1%ers. It's time to see through the the rhetoric

At a time when the Trump administration is moving to delay and dismantle air quality regulations, a new study suggests that air pollution continues to cut Americans’ lives short, even at levels well below the legal limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-air-pollution-death-20170628-story.html

Harvard University scientists who conducted the study calculated that reducing fine particle pollution by 1 microgram per cubic meter nationwide would save about 12,000 lives each year. Another 1,900 lives would be saved annually by lowering ozone pollution by 1 part per billion, they found.

 

To believe it or to not believe it? Are the Trump hating "progressives" at Harvard just creating propaganda, or is this real research? Odd that the "study" comes out now.

I know, you will say its an academic institution and they are so smart they cannot be questioned. But when you play politics (and Harvard certainly plays politics) you taint your reputation.

<>

On the more scientific front, the EPA claimed in 2015 the following about reductions in ozone:
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1104851/
We estimated that annual numbers of avoided ozone-related premature deaths would have ranged from 1,410 to 2,480 at 75 ppb to 2,450 to 4,130 at 70 ppb, and 5,210 to 7,990 at 60 ppb.

The EPA said reducing ozone 5 ppb (from 75 to 70 ppb) saves 1000-2000 lives. Your link says reducing ozone 1 ppb (from 75 to 74 ppb) saves 1900 lives. Looks like the USA is at the point of diminishing returns if a reduction of 1 ppb equals a reduction of 5 ppb.

Time to declare victory, the air is as clean and safe as it can be made. The EPA mission has been completed.

 

If you read the link, you would find that the Harvard study analyzed populations from the 2 extremes - worst air to best air. Harvard pioneered this research years ago, and continues to follow-up with results. The other point to make, with both ozone an particulate pollutants is that it's not all about deaths. Again, the link talks about the reductions in asthma cases, and other respiratory disorders.

The wreckless actions of Trump and Pruitt, do nothing to help this country, but instead, move us backwards as a nation.

 

You avoid the point of my post.

The benefit measured in reductions in deaths is the same (a small number) whether the ozone is reduced 1 ppb or 5 ppb. That strongly implies that ozone levels are at the point at which further reduction provides no real medical benefit. Typically the cost to achieve that final 1% is astronomical.

In fact, if you google the subject of ozone and health benefits, there are studies that conclude there is no significant benefit to further reductions.

 

Yeah, and Harvard claims Elizabeth Warren is Native American. So much for Harvard's integrity.

 

Complete horse manure. And the anti-growth liberal progressives by into this stuff without question.

https://junkscience.com/2017/06/swamp-fights-back-on-pm2-5/#more-92057

 

Gee, let's see - who to believe? - Harvard University or JUNKSCIENCE.COM???

 

Of course ^^ - attack the source without understanding the Harvard paper or the Milloy paper.

First - read Milloy's paper.

Name one person who has died from breathing 2.5 micron particulate at the concentrations specified by the Harvard study and the EPA.

And read the Harvard paper. It's all speculation based on epidemiologic assumptions.

 

The Junk Science paper is pretty empty, other than to bash the EPA. Like many studies, the Harvard Study is analyzing populations. The Junk Science paper wants proof that Mr X died from particulate pollution, and this cannot be proved. The Harvard study has this to say:

The high-resolution data allowed scientists to estimate the health effects of air pollution at levels far below the federal limits. For fine particulate matter, which has a legal limit of 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air, they found that seniors faced an increased risk of premature death when exposed to as little as 5 micrograms per cubic meter, the lowest amount they measured. For ozone, which has an EPA limit of 70 parts per billion, they detected increased mortality at levels as low as 30 ppb, also the smallest concentration they measured.

So I think it's reasonable to say that people have died from breathing particulate pollutants or ozone. I mentioned earlier, that death is not the only issue. Asthma, nervous system disorders, bronchitis, pulmonary effusions, and other afflictions are also caused by exposure to these pollutants.

If you don't believe that particulate pollution causes issues, perhaps you should read about "The Hazards of Working in a Garage".

https://electrocorpairpurification.wordpress.com/2010/06/07/the-hazards-if-working-in-a-garage/

Mechanics are also at an increased risk for organic brain damage. Inhaling diesel exhaust fumes can cause serious health issues in workers. While there are non-cancer related illness to chronic exposure to diesel fumes (asthma, airway restriction, immunological and allergenic reactions), the majority of long-term effects reported after exposure to diesel exhaust fumes is an increased risk of lung cancer and mutations in the body.

Small particles in diesel exhaust are easily inhaled and deposited into the lungs. Short-term health effects are often misdiagnosed or seen as symptoms from another illness, not diesel exhaust fumes. However, they should not be ignored or dismissed by auto body repair shop workers: vomiting, feeling lightheaded, headache, irritation of the eyes, nose and throat, numbness, tightness of the chest, wheezing.

 

Science depends on truth. A correlation does not prove anything. Again name one person who has died from breathing 2.5 micron particulate at the levels discussed in the Harvard paper or the EPA criteria ?? The Harvard researchers found no causation - none. It's all speculation based on epidemiologic assumptions. Certain groups of people in China breath air with many times the EPA regulation on 2.5 micron particles and have a longer life expectancy. The paper by Milloy shows that there is no causation between 2.5 micron particulate at the EPA concentrations and mortality.

What are the levels of 2.5 micron particles in those garages ??

 

You can ignore the science and the truth if you'd like. Here's another article that discusses this, and states without a doubt, that these particles, in the lungs, can cause "increased mortality".

https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/indoors/air/pmq_a.htm

How can PM2.5 affect my health?
Particles in the PM2.5 size range are able to travel deeply into the respiratory tract, reaching the lungs. Exposure to fine particles can cause short-term health effects such as eye, nose, throat and lung irritation, coughing, sneezing, runny nose and shortness of breath. Exposure to fine particles can also affect lung function and worsen medical conditions such as asthma and heart disease. Scientific studies have linked increases in daily PM2.5 exposure with increased respiratory and cardiovascular hospital admissions, emergency department visits and deaths. Studies also suggest that long term exposure to fine particulate matter may be associated with increased rates of chronic bronchitis, reduced lung function and increased mortality from lung cancer and heart disease. People with breathing and heart problems, children and the elderly may be particularly sensitive to PM2.5.

 

Name one person who has died or suffered health consequences from breathing the 2.5 micron particulates at those levels. There are none. Look at the wording in your source - there is no proof of any ill effects or quantification of any levels of exposure.

Lisa Jackson stated that reducing the levels of 2.5 micron particulate to the EPA levels would be the same as finding a cure from cancer. What an absurd statement. And yet the global warming alarmists swallow this swill with no effort at fact checking in order to promote the global warming alarmist meme.

 

Do I have to translate the following to another language? Maybe Pig-Latin?

Studies also suggest that long term exposure to fine particulate matter may be associated with increased rates of chronic bronchitis, reduced lung function and increased mortality from lung cancer and heart disease. People with breathing and heart problems, children and the elderly may be particularly sensitive to PM2.5.

 

Read my post above. The statement above is meaningless without quantification. There is not even a claim of causality in the statement above.