Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Saturday October 21, @07:02PM   Printer-friendly
from the I'm-gonna-stay-in-my-basement dept.

A Lancet Commission report has found that pollution is now the leading cause of disease and death worldwide:

Exposure to polluted air, water and soil caused nine million premature deaths in 2015, according to a report published Thursday in The Lancet.

The causes of death vary — cancer, lung disease, heart disease. The report links them to pollution, drawing upon previous studies that show how pollution is tied to a wider range of diseases than previously thought.

Those studies observed populations exposed to pollutants and compared them to people not exposed. The studies have shown that pollution can be an important cause of diseases — many of them potentially fatal — including asthma, cancer, neurodevelopmental disorders, birth defects in children, heart disease, stroke and lung disease.

The nine million figure adds up to 16 percent of all deaths worldwide, killing three times more people than AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined. Pollution is responsible for 15 times more deaths than wars and all other forms of violence. "No country is unaffected," the report notes. But 92 percent of those deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries.

Air pollution deaths in Southeast Asia are expected to double by 2050.

The Lancet Commission on pollution and health (DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32345-0) (DX)

Also at The Guardian and Human Rights Watch.

Related: Pollution responsible for quarter of deaths of young children, says WHO


Original Submission

Related Stories

UNICEF Says 17 Million Babies Worldwide Breathe Air Pollution Six Times Worse Than Recommended Limit 12 comments

Toxic air puts 17 million babies' brains and lungs at risk: UNICEF

About 17 million babies worldwide live in areas where outdoor air pollution is six times the recommended limit, and their brain development is at risk, the U.N. children's agency (UNICEF) said on Wednesday.

The majority of these babies – more than 12 million – are in South Asia, it said, in a study of children under one-year-old, using satellite imagery to identify worst-affected regions.

"Not only do pollutants harm babies' developing lungs – they can permanently damage their developing brains – and, thus, their futures," said UNICEF executive director Anthony Lake.

The links between air pollution and dain bramage are not yet conclusive, according to the report's author.

UNICEF press release. Danger in the air (PDF).

Related: Air Quality Unsafe for 90% of People In Urban Centres
80 Percent of World's City Dwellers Breathing Bad Air: UN
Study Links Pregnant Women's Exposure to Air Pollution to Shorter Telomeres in Babies
Lancet Report Says Pollution Caused 9 Million Premature Deaths in 2015
Air Pollution Linked to Osteoporosis and Bone Fractures


Original Submission

Air Pollution Linked to Osteoporosis and Bone Fractures 8 comments

Air pollution has been linked to weakening of bones:

Poor air quality may be a modifiable risk factor for osteoporosis and bone fractures, especially among people living in low-income communities, according to a newly published analysis of data from two independent studies.

In one study researchers documented higher rates of hospital admissions for bone fractures in communities exposed to elevated levels of ambient particulate matter (PM2·5) air pollution in an analysis of data on more than nine million Medicare enrollees.

In another 8-year follow-up of approximately 700 middle-age, low-income adults participating in a bone health study, participants living in areas with relatively high levels of PM2·5 and black carbon vehicle emissions had lower levels of a key calcium and bone-related hormone and greater decreases in bone mineral density than participants exposed to lower levels of these air pollutants.

All associations were linear and observed -- at least for part of the PM2·5 distribution -- at PM2·5 concentrations below the annual average limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (12 μg/m3) and most other industrialized nations.

[...] The researchers acknowledged multiple limitations in both studies, which limit the ability to establish causality. But in an editorial [open, DOI: 10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30143-2] [DX] published with the studies, Tuan Nguyen, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in New South Wales, Australia, wrote that the studies are just the latest in a growing body of research linking air pollution exposure to osteoporosis: "Osteoporosis and its consequence of fragility fracture represent one of the most important public health problems worldwide because fracture is associated with increased mortality."

Association of air particulate pollution with bone loss over time and bone fracture risk: analysis of data from two independent studies (open, DOI: 10.1016/S2542-5196(17)30136-5) (DX)

Related: 80 Percent of World's City Dwellers Breathing Bad Air: UN
Study Links Pregnant Women's Exposure to Air Pollution to Shorter Telomeres in Babies
Lancet Report Says Pollution Caused 9 Million Premature Deaths in 2015


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough

Mark All as Read

Mark All as Unread

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @07:18PM (13 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @07:18PM (#585745)

    It's a negative feedback loop.

    • (Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Saturday October 21, @07:31PM (3 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21, @07:31PM (#585747) Journal

      Premature deaths. When is a death not premature? Old dude in a nearby village died at 95, and his eulogy said that he died prematurely. Who is in charge of deciding that a death is premature? Is there some premature death official in every county? Maybe he shares offices with the coroner?

      --
      #Hillarygropedme
      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday October 21, @07:41PM (1 child)

        by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday October 21, @07:41PM (#585748) Journal

        If only there were a branch of mathematics that could help answer these questions...

        inb4 pee-value anon comes in and takes a big shit on the study
        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 0, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:04PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:04PM (#585758)

          It's not a study, its a review article. Its kind of funny they don't define "premature death" anywhere (what populations were used to determine the average age, etc), so it isn't even clear what they are talking about.

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @07:45PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @07:45PM (#585750)

        There was a link in TFS:

        Death that occurs before the average age of death in a certain population. In the United States, the average age of death is about 75 years.

        https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms?cdrid=748385 [cancer.gov]

        So that village must have an average age of death greater than 95 years.

        Seriously though, this is yet another poorly thought out medical term that leads to severe problems. Using this definition, the only way to stop the epidemic of premature death is for everyone to die at the exact same age. At that point I'm sure they would change it to "before or at the average age".

    • (Score: 1, Troll) by frojack on Saturday October 21, @07:44PM (1 child)

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21, @07:44PM (#585749) Journal

      But Correlation is not causation.

      Those studies observed populations exposed to pollutants and compared them to people not exposed. The studies have shown that pollution can be an important cause of diseases

      There is hardly any person in the world that is not exposed to some degree to one or more forms of pollution. Probably never was, as primitive people sat around camp fires since dirt.

      To me this study seems like a SWAG, essentially deciding how many of the 55.3 million people who die each year can be tied (however tenuously) to Pollution.
      Its not at all the same as the 1.25 million road traffic deaths world wide each year, where you count bodies from accidents.

      If it was "contributed to" or similar language it would be believable, but "Caused" is a huge leap.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @07:57PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @07:57PM (#586032)

        It is really annoying how badly pro-pollution propaganda has messed with the minds of you keebler elves. Stick to making cookies, the lame "many sides" crap is getting tiresome.

        The TL:DR of your comment is "there is no absolute way to tell anything, therefore who cares about this study on pollution, no one do anything."

    • (Score: 0, Redundant) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday October 21, @09:16PM (5 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21, @09:16PM (#585780) Homepage Journal

      And gee, which races and cultures are the ones which breed the most irresponsibly?

      And gee, which political affiliation is always trying to wag their environmentalist fingers at everybody except the races and cultures which are breeding the most irresponsibly?

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @11:14PM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @11:14PM (#585814)

        Again with the stupidity. Boring.

        • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @03:04AM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @03:04AM (#585853)

          I like to imagine that EF is asking questions and recording the answers of people who seriously try and answer. "What do you say when dumbshits say blah blah shit blah blah puke?" The incompetent way of gathering better responses.

          • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 22, @03:42AM (2 children)

            by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 22, @03:42AM (#585858) Homepage Journal

            I am not trying to gather data.

            What I am trying to do is see how others gather data.

            • (Score: 2) by captain normal on Sunday October 22, @05:49AM

              by captain normal (2205) on Sunday October 22, @05:49AM (#585877)

              Ah ha...so you are another Russian bot out to fuck with us.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @04:09PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @04:09PM (#585976)

              Nope. You're just being stupid. There will always be dumb people doing/saying dumb things but we should all call them out on it.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @11:41AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @11:41AM (#585933)

      It's not that straightforward.

      More people -> more research -> greater industrial efficiency -> less pollution.

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:02PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:02PM (#585757)

    This is the Lancet we're talking about. According to them, we killed more people in Iraq than actually live there.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:14PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @08:14PM (#585761)

    If 9 million deaths is 16 percent of all deaths worldwide, that would be 56.250.000 deaths annually, and since there are approximately 7.6 billion people on the planet, those would, on average, live to be just over 135 years. Something's funky here.

    Also, the number of deaths they claim for various causes add up to 10.5 million. A study that can't add up a few numbers correctly doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

    Also, I'm guessing people who live in areas with high degrees of pollution would, on average, be poor (relatively), which means other socioeconomic factors (like a lack of healthcare and education) would contribute to lower life expectancy. I'm not saying some or even many of those deaths might be partially or wholly caused by pollution, but it is very difficult to exclude other variables that are probably strongly correlated with there regions (mostly developing countries).

    • (Score: 2, Disagree) by frojack on Saturday October 21, @08:39PM (1 child)

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21, @08:39PM (#585773) Journal

      56.250.000 deaths annually is about right, as even a cursory google search would have revealed.

      We have an excess of births over deaths. http://www.worldometers.info/ [worldometers.info]

      Since you didn't show your work I have no ides where you came up with 135 years.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @09:48PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21, @09:48PM (#585787)

        Different AC, but obviously they did: 7.6e9/56250000 = 135.111

        It has units of people*years/deaths. I guess since there is one death per person those cancel and you are left with years?

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by Whoever on Saturday October 21, @08:41PM (6 children)

    by Whoever (4524) on Saturday October 21, @08:41PM (#585774)

    A bunch of blowhard Soylentnews posters declare that the know more than experts on the topic, and declare ever-loving support to the current administration in its attempts to dismantle protection from pollution.

    • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday October 21, @09:43PM (2 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21, @09:43PM (#585786) Homepage Journal

      Save the gay whales and trans baby seals! For Jesus Christ!

      • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @02:34AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @02:34AM (#585850)

        Yes, Jesus Christ would say such things in this day and age. Even a Judas like you would be given loving treatment.

      • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Sunday October 22, @06:32AM

        by cubancigar11 (330) on Sunday October 22, @06:32AM (#585890) Homepage Journal

        Save the gay whales

        They are called lesbians, you insensitive clod! Always with the appropriation of the oppressed class!

    • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @05:01AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @05:01AM (#585873)

      Experts on topic like economists, psychologists, astrologers, medical researchers. You are a boot-licking, authority ass-kissing sheep.

      • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 22, @05:50AM (1 child)

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 22, @05:50AM (#585878) Homepage Journal

        They will do everything they can to place the burden of proof upon everybody they can except for themselves.

        They preach diversity, but hire 75% Whites and 25% Asians and the vast majority of those combined are males. But that's a risk they are willing to take, because if they actually practiced what the preached (hiring more Black engineers, for example,) , their narrative would fall apart like a house of cards, as Hollywood's did when they were exposed for being nothing but a bunch of two-bit hypocrites with endemic rape culture.

        It's called "being a house of cards." And all of those self-righteous windbags, whether they be Silicon Valley Executives or the Democratic Party, are all built upon a house of cards which will collapse with a gust of breath.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @08:11PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22, @08:11PM (#586036)

          Oh come on, is affirmative action destroying meritocracy or is it just a vast conspiracy that doesn't matter to upstanding white folks?

          Come on asshole, try to at least be consistent. Of all the people on here you are the last to be making house of cards accusations.

(1)