Vehicle fumes stunt lung growth.
Traffic Pollution Responsible For Health Problems
28th December 2006
The American Journal of Epidemiology on the 16th December published a new Swiss research into the effects of traffic pollution on health. The findings pull gaping holes into anti-smoking claims that most respiratory health problems are caused by smoking....
The research found that living within 20 metres of a main street increased wheezing with breathing problems by 34% in never smokers.
The risk of attacks of breathlessness increased for all subjects by up to 13% for every 500 metres length of road near to the home and of these cases in never smokers the effects decreased by 12% per 100 metres for homes further from such roads.
The research concludes that 'These findings among a general population provide strong confirmation that living near busy streets leads to adverse respiratory health effects.'
Perhaps the most interesting finding from the study showed that the effects of traffic on respiratory health were worse for people who had never smoked.
Since Richard Doll's claims in the 50's that environmental pollution doesn't cause adverse respiratory health effects but smoking does, little research has been carried out in this area. Scientific studies such as this one coupled with the recent revelations of Doll's receipts of huge payments from chemical companies are helping to forge a better understanding of all of the causes of respiratory health problems, many of which have been overlooked for 50 years due to the mis-representations of the anti smoking movement.
Living near Main Streets and Respiratory Symptoms in Adults: The Swiss Cohort Study on Air Pollution and Lung Diseases in Adults.
Bayer-Oglesby, Lucy et al.
American Journal of Epidemiology. 164(12):1190-1198, December 15, 2006
Read
Director of Research for the Smokers' Club, David W. Kuneman added "It's no wonder antismokers have claimed lung cancer and heart disease rates are higher in hospitality workers. Most hospitality establishments are located along busy highways because that's where they are most likely to attract customers."
"Working near a busy highway is the same as living near one." he went on to say. "These workers are breathing traffic fumes which have infiltrated into the bars, restaurants and bowling alleys more than most people. So they will develop more disease related to traffic fumes."
Indeed, according to a recent report in the British Medical Journal, truck drivers have an approximately 50% higher adjusted risk of developing lung cancer:
Results: Operators of heavy construction equipment experienced no increased risk of lung cancer compared to risk among the carpenter/electrician referents (61 cases v 70.1 expected). However, a significant inverse trend risk with increasing use of cabins was apparent. Truck drivers had increased risks of cancer of the lung (61 cases v 47.3 expected) and prostate (124 cases v 99.7 expected), although only mortality for lung cancer was significantly increased. Comparisons with the general population showed similar results.MORE http://oem.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/60/7/516
"What should be noted in that study, is that the increased lung cancer effect was not observed in heavy equipment operators but was observed in over-the-road truck drivers" Kuneman said. " This shows us that the increased lung cancer is not due to the emissions of the machine the driver is operating, but rather is due to general pollution conditions near roadways."
The effect of spending a considerable amount of time near a busy roadway is not limited to lung cancer either. According to a recent study in the European Heart Journal, the closer one lives to a major highway, the more likely they are to develop heart disease, after controlling for other factors.
Methods and results We used baseline data from the German Heinz Nixdorf RECALL study, a population-based, prospective cohort study. For 3399 participants from two cities, we assessed the long-term personal traffic exposure and background air pollution, comparing residents living within 150 m of major roads with those living further away. The principal outcome variable was clinically manifest CHD. We evaluated the association with multivariable logistic regression, controlling for background air pollution and individual level risk factors. Of 3399 participants, 242 (7.1%) had CHD. The crude odds ratio (OR) for prevalence of CHD at high traffic exposure was significantly elevated (1.62, 95%CI 1.12-2.34) and rose to 1.85 (95%CI 1.21-2.84) after adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors and background air pollution. Subgroup analysis showed stronger effects for men (OR 2.33, 95%CI 1.44-3.78), participants younger than 60 years (OR 2.67, 95%CI 1.24-5.74) and never-smokers (OR 2.72, 95%CI 1.40-5.29 MORE http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/22/2696
"These are the same elevated incidence levels of lung cancer and heart disease that the antismokers attribute to hospitality workers' secondhand smoke exposure", Kuneman said. A recent article in the journal Epidemiology found lung cancer and heart disease rates increased with proximity to expressway exposure.
Results: After controlling for 44 individual covariates, all-cause mortality had a relative risk (RR) of 1.17 (95% confidence interval = 1.05-1.30) for an increase of 10 [mu]g/m3 PM2.5 and a RR of 1.11 (0.99-1.25) with maximal control for both individual and contextual confounders. The RRs for mortality resulting from ischemic heart disease and lung cancer deaths were elevated, in the range of 1.24-1.6, depending on the model used. These PM results were robust to adjustments for O3 and expressway exposure. MORE www.epidem.com/pt/re/epidemiology/abstract.00001648-200511000-00004.htm
Nor are the effects limited to these diseases. According to the journal Epidemiology, persistent cough is more likely to occur if a person lives near a busy highway.
Results: Adjusting for cigarette smoking, age, and occupational exposure to dust, men living within 50 m of a major roadway were more likely to report persistent wheeze (odds ratio [OR] = 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0-1.7) compared with those living more than 400 m away. The risk was observed only for those living within 50 m of heavily trafficked roads (>=10,000 vehicles/24 h): OR = 1.7; CI = 1.2-2.4). The risk of patients experiencing chronic phlegm while living on heavily trafficked roads also increased (OR = 1.4; CI = 1.0-2.0), although there was little evidence for an association with chronic cough. This association was not dependent on preexisting doctor-diagnosed chronic respiratory or heart disease
MORE http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/27/22/2696
"These are all the same health effects which have, in the past been attributed to secondhand smoke in hospitality establishments." explained Kuneman. "Of even greater concern, is that these effects may be additive and recent research suggests that they are. An Environmental Health Perspectives article MORE http://www.ehponline.org/members/2003/6334/6334.html reviews all the evidence. The authors concluded that lowering of socioeconomic status may worsen the health effects of highway pollution. When smoking bans cause income to drop, they increase the health risk these hospitality workers face from the pollution inhaled when working near a highway. Overall, it becomes likely smoking bans cause more health risk than they intend to prevent."
To sum it all up, it is highly likely the claim secondhand smoke causes lung cancer, heart disease, and chronic cough in hospitality workers is actually due to their work locations being next to busy highways. "None of the studies claiming secondhand smoke causes these diseases in hospitality workers controlled for exposure to highway pollution...and secondhand smoke researchers can't conclude the secondhand smoke caused the elevated disease rates in these workers unless they subtract the risk of working near a busy road" , according to Kuneman " If they do subtract the risk of working near a busy road, from the overall risk they have found, they get zero" Kuneman concluded.Carbon monoxide: Poison gas or the body’s natural anti-inflammatory drug?
Inhaling CO prevents transplant rejection in mice, say U-M scientists. Could become part of future treatment regimen for organ transplant patients.
July 28, 2005
http://www.med.umich.edu/opm/newspage/2005/carbonmonoxide.htm
Smoking Vs Carbon Monoxide
It would be very interesting to see some stats as to how many proponents of anti-smoking bans own more than one family vehicle and/or drive gas-guzzling, air-polluting SUV's and vans.
It would also be interesting for someone to interview these concerned folks and ask them how many hours they think it would take them to die were they locked in a closed garage filled with carbon monoxide fumes as opposed to one filled with second hand cigarette smoke ( or even really cheap cigar fumes), and then give them the opportunity to justify an attitude that appears to epitomize hypocrisy.
As for Mark Lubosch, if he were to quit hiding behind this smokescreen (yes, pun intended), he might have to bother with some of the real work he, as a city councillor, was elected to actually do. But it seems that's asking just a tad too much from politicians of today's calibre.
L. Harris
Non-smoker
Winnipeg
Carbon Monoxide spews out the back end of every car in the world. It takes only a few hours of inhaling the fumes in an enclosed space (a car for example) to die. There are thousands of documented cases every year.
As we all know, there is NOT EVEN ONE documented case of smoking in an enclosed space that has led to death, let alone the numbers of Carbon monoxide deaths.
Point that out to your anti-smoking friends and let them tell you which is worse for them, second hand smoke or their precious gas guzzling cars.
Cigarettes are tiny, and produce tiny amounts of poisonous gasses (including carbon monoxide) and only a portion of the population smokes, whereas virtually everyone drives vehicles, and all of our goods that we buy and use are transported in carbon monoxide creating vehicles and they produce many times as much pollution.
So, you antis out there, why not get a grip on reality, and leave us smokers alone.
And you smokers, point out the obvious in your discussions with people, cars are far more dangerous to all of us, than second hand smoke. Everyone will have heard of a carbon monoxide car suicide death, and no one will have heard of a cigarette car suicide. Sometimes a slap in the face fact works wonders.
Thora
BC, Canada
Fighting for the Freedom that is our birthright
Freedom is for all, not just the politically correct
Protect Your Home From Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless gas that is produced as a result of incomplete burning of carbon-containing fuels. Exposure to CO reduces the blood's ability to carry oxygen.
Carbon monoxide exposures especially affect unborn babies, infants and people with anemia or a history of heart or respiratory disease.
Breathing low levels of CO can cause fatigue and increase chest pain in people with chronic heart disease. Breathing higher levels of carbon monoxide causes flu-like symptoms such as headaches, dizziness, and weakness in healthy people. Carbon monoxide also causes sleepiness, nausea, vomiting, confusion, and disorientation. At very high levels, it causes loss of consciousness and death.
Steps To Prevent Carbon Monoxide Poisoning In Your Home:
Make sure appliances are installed and working according to manufacturers' instructions and local building codes.
Have only a qualified technician install or convert fuel-burning equipment from one type to another.
Have the heating system, chimney and flue inspected and cleaned by a qualified technician every year.
Do not use ovens and gas ranges to heat your home.
Do not burn charcoal inside a home, cabin, recreational vehicle or camper.
Do not operate gasoline-powered engines in confined areas such as garages or basements.
Never leave your car or mower running in a closed garage.
Make sure your furnace has adequate intake of outside air.
Choose vented appliances whenever possible.
Use kerosene space heaters and unvented gas heaters only in well ventilated rooms.
Install a carbon monoxide detector with an audible alarm in your home and garage.
Any fuel-burning appliance that is not adequately vented and maintained can be a potential source of CO, including:
Gas appliances (furnaces, ranges, ovens, water heaters, clothes dryers, etc.).
Fireplaces, wood and coal stoves, space heaters.
Charcoal grills, automobile exhaust fumes, camp stoves, gas-powered lawn mowers, and power tools.
Cigarette smoke can also contain high levels of CO, as well as 200 other known poisons.
Carbon Monoxide Detectors Should:
Meet Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. standards.
Have a long-term warranty.
Be easily self-tested and reset to ensure proper functioning.
Be placed as close to sleeping areas as possible for maximum effectiveness during sleeping hours.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/money/423055/detail.html
Noxious gas floods hockey arena
January 30, 2005
VANCOUVER - Police are investigating after about 100 people, many of them children, were overcome by the fumes at the arena in Pitt Meadows on Saturday.
Some were treated by emergency crews inside the arena, while others were rushed to hospital.
Police suspect the fumes may have come from the exhaust of an ice-cleaning machine.
They are also looking into whether the air circulation system at the arena was tampered with.
General manager Jerry Remak says someone appears to have broken into the facility. He found that a padlock was missing at one of the entrances to the building and the ventilation system had been turned off during the night.
Fraser Valley Health Authority spokesperson Don Bower says four of the victims were transported to Vancouver General Hospital to receive oxygen treatment in a hyperbaric chamber before being released.
He says anyone feeling ill, or any pregnant women who may have been at the rink on Saturday should go to a hospital to be checked.
http://www.cbc.ca/