Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The cognitive costs of air pollution

patrickcollison.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 300 posts

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#291

Post by Kaiyou »

bryanmgreen wrote: post #34

I wish the argument against pollution would be the simplest one. Go to a massively unpopulated area and just breath. Feel the difference? Isn't it intoxicating? Who gives a crap if umpires make worse calls? Just fight pollution because it's obvious pollution is bad for humans and the planet. Normally I'm all for extra evidence, but in a situation like this come on. It's basically like immaterial evidence against geno…

You are right that there's a massive difference between populated and unpopulated areas. One is better because it doesn't have as many people. Just by breathing people create Co2. Just by existing people create waste. Not sure how that could be fixed.

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#292

Post by seanmcdirmid »

blakes wrote: post #283
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you live in Beijing? We got an expensive swedish air purifier but it still sucked hard (noisy, made the air smell very stale). You might be able to mitigate some of the effects, but not all of them. And if young kids are involved (or you are expecting), screw the career, move.

Did you get an IQAir? I bought the GCmultiGas and I get the kind of stale air, I think it is just hyper sanitized or something. That filter cleared up my sinus issues in like two days.

It’s called BlueAir I think? That life is behind me now. I love living in china, but the air pollution is a deal breaker.

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#293

Post by gmas »

Youden wrote: post #287
gmas wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sensor available at Adafruit uses the same algorithm for calculating PM levels, it's literally the same chip. Maybe using 2 of them yields more accurate results though. The specs for particulate matter are identical: https://www2.purpleair.com/collections/air-quality-sensors/p... https://cdn-shop.adafruit.com/product-files/3686/plantower-p...

The Adafruit sensor is just the sensor, the PurpleAir II is two sensors plus extra logic that processes the readings to give extra accuracy. You can't expect one sensor to give the same performance as two sensors plus correction logic. If it was that easy, PurpleAir could just put a case on a PMS sensor and be done with it.

If that was true, then why are the specs for the PurpleAir II identical with the Adafruit sensor ?

You provide absolutely no data to back up your claims that there is extra logic on the PAII or that 2 sensors are better than one.

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#294

Post by jjeaff »

ajross wrote: post #176
jjeaff wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not like companies provide daily sales performance data to trade on. Markets move on speculation. They aren't actually pegged to company performance. How would lower cognitive ability make markets move lower on a daily basis? All I can think is higher pollution creating greater pessimism among traders.

Markets aren't perfectly efficient. Some trades are dumb. People with lower cognitive ability are more likely to place an order and forget to check fundamentals first, forget to check competitor data, or quiet frankly make whopper mistakes like confusing a ticker symbol. Think of the loons you see on /r/wallstreetbets and other spots. They live on a spectrum, and all of us have bad days. People with impaired cognitiv…

Yes, but for most dumb trades, there is someone on the other end making a deal. So the 'dumb' trades would have to lean more towards selling rather than buying.

Perhaps pollution just makes one more pessimistic and therefore bearish.

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#295

Post by lstodd »

pjc50 wrote: post #267
lstodd wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mold is only an issue in hot climate. When it's never above 25C / 75F _and_ humidity is controlled, there is never any mold.

Cold climate, surely? Mold as a result of internal condensation?

I was talking about internal temperature.

Cold climate results in low humidity. If you're mostly heating your home (as opposed to running aircon 24/7), air inside tends to be of lower humidity than outside. So low that it becomes uncomfortable and one has to use humidifiers.

The only place mold has any chance in those conditions are the leak spots on the fridge door seal.

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#296

Post by lstodd »

saiya-jin wrote: post #259
lstodd wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mold is only an issue in hot climate. When it's never above 25C / 75F _and_ humidity is controlled, there is never any mold.

Never above 25C... so Iceland, Greenland and Svalbard? Actually not even those, they are pretty humid above 0 celzius

If we relax "never" to "not more than 60 days a year", that would be most of Canada, northern US, most of Europe and Russia. No idea what's going on in southern hemisphere, but I guess Argentina/Chile and southern Australia are the same.

This obsession with mold looks to me as an exclusively US thing. I have no first-hand data but I guess it's due to insufficient air flow combined with air conditioners pushing humidity all the way up.

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#297

Post by qkls »

lstodd wrote: post #296
saiya-jin wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never above 25C... so Iceland, Greenland and Svalbard? Actually not even those, they are pretty humid above 0 celzius

If we relax "never" to "not more than 60 days a year", that would be most of Canada, northern US, most of Europe and Russia. No idea what's going on in southern hemisphere, but I guess Argentina/Chile and southern Australia are the same. This obsession with mold looks to me as an exclusively US thing. I have no first-hand data but I guess it's due to insufficient air flow combined with air conditioners pushing humidi…

Mold is an issue in Finland, mostly for insulated houses with poor ventilation. Many schools and public buildings have mold and other air issues due to saving on heating.

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#298

Post by vixen99 »

WalterBright wrote: post #149

> "Exposure to CO2 and VOCs at levels found in conventional office buildings was associated with lower cognitive scores than those associated with levels of these compounds found in a Green building." – Allen et al 2016. The effect seems to kick in at around 1,000 ppm of CO2. The last time this came up I bought a CO2 meter for my office. I was quite surprised how often it went over 1,000. Outside air runs around 450.…

On the other hand, a paper on 'Effects of Exposure to Carbon Dioxide and Human Bioeffluents on Cognitive Performance' (2015) concludes that 'only exposures to bioeffluents when CO2 reached 3,000 ppm significantly affected performance of some cognitive tasks. Increased arousal level at this exposure can be used to explain the observed results.'.

https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/125818556...

Re: The cognitive costs of air pollution

#299

Post by lensopra »

rahuldottech wrote: post #17

This really bothers me. I live in a VERY polluted place, and unfortunately moving away won't be an option for me for at least half a decade. What can I do to minimise the health effects of such an atmosphere? I'm planning on getting an indoor air filter for my home.

https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/07/why-not-a-d...
Post reply on HN