Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 21 2017, @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

 
This discussion has been archived.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 2017, @07:18PM (13 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21 2017, @07:18PM (#585745)

    It's a negative feedback loop.

    • (Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Saturday October 21 2017, @07:31PM (3 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21 2017, @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?

      --
      #eatyourliver #WalkAway #CTRLLeft
      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday October 21 2017, @07:41PM (1 child)

        by takyon (881) Subscriber Badge <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @08:04PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @07:45PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @07:44PM (1 child)

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @07:57PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @09:16PM (5 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21 2017, @09:16PM (#585780) Homepage

      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 2017, @11:14PM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21 2017, @11:14PM (#585814)

        Again with the stupidity. Boring.

        • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @03:04AM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @03:42AM (2 children)

            by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 22 2017, @03:42AM (#585858) Homepage

            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 2017, @05:49AM

              by captain normal (2205) on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @04:09PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @11:41AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @08:02PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @08:14PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @08:39PM (1 child)

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @09:48PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 21 2017, @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 2017, @08:41PM (6 children)

    by Whoever (4524) on Saturday October 21 2017, @08:41PM (#585774) Journal

    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 2017, @09:43PM (2 children)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 21 2017, @09:43PM (#585786) Homepage

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

      • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @02:34AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @06:32AM

        by cubancigar11 (330) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @05:01AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @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 2017, @05:50AM (1 child)

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 22 2017, @05:50AM (#585878) Homepage

        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 2017, @08:11PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 22 2017, @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)