11–20 of 93 posts
I'm a big proponent of "you probably shouldn't be inhaling more than you need to of any sort of particle" but I wouldn't be surprised if the small amounts of extra stress of day to day life in a more densely populated area isn't good for you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someday people may also look back at the television and the smartphone and compare the garbage we call mass media that we put into our minds to the lead in Roman water pipes.
If they did, I would hope people around them recognized that their conflation of neurotoxins in water and largely benign electronics makes very little sense. I think I understand the sentiment, but I don't think the three are the same. And if they had similar results, hypothetically, they would be for entirely different reasons. edit: I'm interested to know more about peoples' concerns about smartphones and other dev…
dopamine addiction coming from and through the benign electronics may count for something.
I wouldn't be surprised if some future historians are able to look back at modern cities the same way that we look at granny pictures of a soot-streaked city of the industrial revolution. "Yes, some of them thought that it was bad to have all that stuff around, but most thought it wasn't too serious compared to the immediate economic benefit it brought."
Someday people may also look back at the television and the smartphone and compare the garbage we call mass media that we put into our minds to the lead in Roman water pipes.
I wouldn't be surprised if some future historians are able to look back at modern cities the same way that we look at granny pictures of a soot-streaked city of the industrial revolution. "Yes, some of them thought that it was bad to have all that stuff around, but most thought it wasn't too serious compared to the immediate economic benefit it brought."
I wouldn't be surprised if some future historians are able to look back at modern cities the same way that we look at granny pictures of a soot-streaked city of the industrial revolution. "Yes, some of them thought that it was bad to have all that stuff around, but most thought it wasn't too serious compared to the immediate economic benefit it brought."
And the question is "were they wrong?" Soot-streaked cities of the industrial revolution had to be soot-streaked. They didn't have any other technology. They had to use what they could to make better things. It provided better economic benefit, and ultimately better life for us all (such as antibiotics). We're at a point where we have better things, but choose to not use them. It's intrinsically different than the in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someday people may also look back at the television and the smartphone and compare the garbage we call mass media that we put into our minds to the lead in Roman water pipes.
Are you referring to non-ionizing radiation? Is there anything yet to show negative effects? My understanding is that there hadn't been conclusive study, but from what we know of thermal radiation there aren't known mechanisms for damage to occur within the FCC(think it's their rules?) guidelines.
I wouldn't be surprised if some future historians are able to look back at modern cities the same way that we look at granny pictures of a soot-streaked city of the industrial revolution. "Yes, some of them thought that it was bad to have all that stuff around, but most thought it wasn't too serious compared to the immediate economic benefit it brought."
And the question is "were they wrong?" Soot-streaked cities of the industrial revolution had to be soot-streaked. They didn't have any other technology. They had to use what they could to make better things. It provided better economic benefit, and ultimately better life for us all (such as antibiotics). We're at a point where we have better things, but choose to not use them. It's intrinsically different than the in…
Yes. A number of generations had a good life. But what about the coming generations. What does the "progress at any cost", have in store for them?
All things considered, what does the future look right now?
I wouldn't be surprised if some future historians are able to look back at modern cities the same way that we look at granny pictures of a soot-streaked city of the industrial revolution. "Yes, some of them thought that it was bad to have all that stuff around, but most thought it wasn't too serious compared to the immediate economic benefit it brought."
We should really ban big diesel rigs from areas with population density above a certain threshold. Especially considering how little the regulations around diesel emissions are actually complied with.
They didn't mention whether the effect remained constant regardless of population density. I'm a big proponent of "you probably shouldn't be inhaling more than you need to of any sort of particle" but I wouldn't be surprised if the small amounts of extra stress of day to day life in a more densely populated area isn't good for you.
Extra psychological stress is always detrimental. They did mention other variables, including noise and other gasses, were not controlled for.
However, the mouse study removed those variables:
> He exposed mice to high levels of fine particulate air pollution five times a week, eight hours a day, to mimic the exposure a human commuter might receive if he or she lived in the suburbs and worked in a smoggy city (Molecular Psychiatry, 2011). After 10 months, they found that the mice that had been exposed to polluted air took longer to learn a maze task and made more mistakes than mice that had not breathed in the pollution. > > Nelson also found that the pollutant-exposed mice showed signs of the rodent equivalent of depression. Mice said to express depressive-like symptoms give up swimming more quickly in a forced swim test and stop sipping sugar water that they normally find attractive. Both behaviors can be reversed with antidepressants. Nelson found that mice exposed to the polluted air scored higher on tests of depressive-like responses.
I suggest reading the article. There were other disturbing changes that strongly suggest pollution may be the modern analogue to the Roman Empire's lead paint. It's definitely worth significant and rapid research investment.
I wouldn't be surprised if some future historians are able to look back at modern cities the same way that we look at granny pictures of a soot-streaked city of the industrial revolution. "Yes, some of them thought that it was bad to have all that stuff around, but most thought it wasn't too serious compared to the immediate economic benefit it brought."
"Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders." http://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995