Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday December 07, @07:16AM   Printer-friendly
from the parents-also-breathe-that-air dept.

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

 
This discussion has been archived.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: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @07:20AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @07:20AM (#606689)

    The world is already overcrowded anyway, with demise of children come the demise of entire populations and the associated demand for goods.
    It is what environmentalist want right? Right?

    • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @07:34AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @07:34AM (#606699)

      Kill yourself.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 08, @12:10AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 08, @12:10AM (#607051)

        Tolerant Liberals hate being mocked more than they do terrorists, murderers or illegals. Why else would they wish every white fundamentalist misogynistic Christian would die, while demanding we import millions more brown fundamentalism misogynistic Muslims?

    • (Score: 2) by julian on Thursday December 07, @05:36PM

      by julian (6003) on Thursday December 07, @05:36PM (#606886)

      It is what environmentalist want right? Right?

      No. Happy to clear that up for you.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Thursday December 07, @07:42AM (4 children)

    by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Thursday December 07, @07:42AM (#606702) Homepage
    ... adults.

    A *billion* adults breath highly poisonous air every day - air containing known carcinogens and other poisons - that's way more concentrated and toxic than what these babies are breathing. And they *chose* to do so, even though the packs sometimes have horrible medical pictures on the boxes as a warning. A *billion* adults. And the world still keeps turning.
    --
    I was worried about my command. I was the scientist of the Holy Ghost.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @09:15AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @09:15AM (#606726)

      I can't tell whether you're seriously trying to minimize the issue of children's health.
      Just in case: the adults *choose* to smoke.

      The kids don't choose where they are born, and they have no control over their environment.
      Their parents generally have no control over said environment either.
      In fact, by growing stupid children, the respective societies are ensuring that stupid adults who reproduce in poor environments (because they're stupid and have unprotected sex) will exist in the future.
      I personally find that wrong (and apparently UNICEF thinks it's wrong as well).

      • (Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @12:05PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @12:05PM (#606774)

        The kids don't choose where they are born, and they have no control over their environment.
        Their parents generally have no control over said environment either.

        Their parents do have control over their own penis and vagina. Whose problem it is when they choose not to use protection?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @09:34AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @09:34AM (#606735)

      A *billion* adults breath highly poisonous air every day
      And they *chose* to do so

      And I see whole nations drowning into their own fat Phil. But you don't seem to think of them at all!!1!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @12:00PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @12:00PM (#606772)

      Very few of those adults have their cigarettes in their mouth every few seconds around the clock. Even the chainsmokers stop when they're sleeping. But air quality in, for example, some major Chinese cities will attack your lungs without pause. That's considerably worse.

      This has always been the driver for my care for environmental concerns. Global warming doesn't matter to me. But I have two siblings and two kids that are asthmatic, and three of the four have been hospitalized for asthma attacks at least once. I'd like to see more switches to solar, wind, tidal, and (yes) nuclear power for their sake.

  • (Score: 1, Troll) by Scrutinizer on Thursday December 07, @11:15AM

    by Scrutinizer (6534) on Thursday December 07, @11:15AM (#606758)

    Sounds like it's time for zero-emission, inexpensive, gravity-powered fail safe, nuclear reactors! Oak Ridge techs are back from their 1969 smoke break [wikipedia.org] and have H1B-ed themselves to Canada [world-nuclear-news.org] to start working on that groundbreaking 1960s tech.

    In the case that China gets the job done first [adamsmith.org], we're pretty sure we can license back the technology at reasonable rates our proud USian workers can afford.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aiwarrior on Thursday December 07, @11:16AM

    by aiwarrior (1812) on Thursday December 07, @11:16AM (#606759)

    Even if one was to look at the air pollution as an economic problem, the costs are huge, just not accounted correctly.

    What is the cost of a chronic pulmonary disease in terms of lost productivity of an individual?
    What is the cost of a chronic pulmonary disease in terms of facilities and personnel needed to cure or make it asymptomatic?
    What is the cost of child's potential as a human resource, being squandered because he/she was not able to go to school because he/she was always sick?

    Pollution management will take a very serious thought in the part of health and environmental agencies throughout the world. I hope for the best.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @06:27PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 07, @06:27PM (#606921)

    these poor babies are probably dangerously low on their depleted uranium supplements. don't worry, US tax payers will have the liberators air drop some in soon. :)

(1)