Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

PeanutButter

Vehicle pollution 'results in 4m child asthma cases a year'

Recommended Posts

Start a new business: Child size pollution masks!

But sure, let's keep piling more humans and more cars onto the planet ;) That'll fix everything. (And don't forget to riot if the diesel bill goes up). 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/10/vehicle-pollution-results-in-4m-child-asthma-cases-a-year 

 

Quote

 

Four million children develop asthma every year as a result of air pollution from cars and trucks, equivalent to 11,000 new cases a day, a landmark study has found.

Most of the new cases occur in places where pollution levels are already below the World Health Organization limit, suggesting toxic air is even more harmful than thought.

The damage to children’s health is not limited to China and India, where pollution levels are particularly high. In UK and Australian cities, the researchers blame traffic pollution for three-quarters of all new childhood asthma cases.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet air quality has been an upward trend for years. As much as I'm all for fewer people and fewer cars this really does sound like the latest drum to bang and little more. Most of the cases are occurring in places with lower pollution levels than the limits? No, that doesn't suggest that it's more harmful than previously thought otherwise the places with higher levels of pollution would have even more. It suggests something else is going on. The quoted text at any rate reads very, very much that someone's decided what their conclusion is going to be in advance and is damned well going to stick with it no matter what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Riedquat said:

And yet air quality has been an upward trend for years. As much as I'm all for fewer people and fewer cars this really does sound like the latest drum to bang and little more. Most of the cases are occurring in places with lower pollution levels than the limits? No, that doesn't suggest that it's more harmful than previously thought otherwise the places with higher levels of pollution would have even more. It suggests something else is going on. The quoted text at any rate reads very, very much that someone's decided what their conclusion is going to be in advance and is damned well going to stick with it no matter what.

Please can you add links to the studies showing either that there is no problem (and it's all made up/faked) or to alternative reasons for stunted lungs and childhood asthma increases. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, reality doesn't work like that. Questions raised about a study or report are not invalid unless supported by one that says something to the contrary. No-one's under some strange obligation to accept anything at face value just because it's the only thing someone's said. You're hunting for weak excuses to ignore doubts there (as well as asking to prove a negative).

Questioning the reasoning behind the conclusion "most of the new cases occur in places where pollution levels are already below the World Health Organization limit, suggesting toxic air is even more harmful than thought," does not require contrary evidence because (unless it's far better explained in the detail not quoted) the problem is with the flawed logic of that statement. That statement is explicitly stating that there is not a good correlation between pollution levels and new cases yet then goes on to claim the cause is pollution. Of course correlation and causation do not have to be linked but the lack of a link is even less evidence.

Your request for evidence to the contrary is thus irrelevant because there's no valid evidence and conclusions to contradict. Your requests are also for claims that I've not made, and are thus a strawman. It is the reasoning that's at fault.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't "They" usually put all these scare stories out just before raising the Tax?  As if stealing more money from people to carry on regardless will make things all of a sudden better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably the same old garbage. The UK 'studies' I've seen were typically based on self-reported asthma cases and not cases those verified by a doctor, and the rise in supposed asthma was primarily in areas with little air pollution.

So if Little Bobby in rural Cheshire has a cough and Mommy decides he has asthma, it goes in the study data.

That said, China has appalling air pollution and I'm sure it is contributing to asthma there, but I don't think much of it is from vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/04/2019 at 22:38, MarkG said:

Probably the same old garbage. The UK 'studies' I've seen were typically based on self-reported asthma cases and not cases those verified by a doctor, and the rise in supposed asthma was primarily in areas with little air pollution.

Which according to the originally posted snippet demonstrates that it's even more of a problem than thought :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/05/2019 at 08:22, Saving For a Space Ship said:

'Location, location, lung disease': pollution ads target property market

Citizen-funded campaign to flag up illegal levels of toxic air to London buyers and renters

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/01/location-location-lung-disease-pollution-ads-target-property-market?CMP=share_btn_tw

Well this would certainly impact prices!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/04/2019 at 09:47, chronyx said:

Oh good it's another one of these threads

Oh good it's another one of these comments that extends the life of the thread :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/04/2019 at 22:38, MarkG said:

Probably the same old garbage. The UK 'studies' I've seen were typically based on self-reported asthma cases and not cases those verified by a doctor, and the rise in supposed asthma was primarily in areas with little air pollution.

So if Little Bobby in rural Cheshire has a cough and Mommy decides he has asthma, it goes in the study data.

That said, China has appalling air pollution and I'm sure it is contributing to asthma there, but I don't think much of it is from vehicles.

What's it from then Prof?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://statistics.blf.org.uk/asthma

Too much to quote, as i'll end up copying the whole page but a couple of interesting quotes

Our data also confirm that the number of people who have had a diagnosis of asthma is plateauing. There has only been a small increase of under 3% in recent years. However, asthma is still the most common lung condition by a considerable margin.

Around 160,000 people a year receive an asthma diagnosis. This is more than are diagnosed with any other lung condition. However, incidence rates went down by around 10% between 2008 and 2012.

We need further research to understand why. Possible reasons include:

  • Asthma is becoming less common.
  • Conditions like COPD are becoming less likely to be misdiagnosed as asthma.
  • Better diagnosis has reduced the backlog of cases that failed to be diagnosed in the past. Consequently, only new cases are being diagnosed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 294 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.