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

The health benefits of better air

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 471 posts

Re: The health benefits of better air

#361

Post by shlant »

majani wrote: post #359
shlant wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood perspectives akin to "why would I want to add years to my life when I'll just be old anyways?". I think many people don't realize that if you take care of your body (especially eating well and movement) you not only extend your lifespan but your quality of life as well in the later years. Anecdotally, my parents exercise regularly and take decent care of themselves compared to their friends (I even…

What age are your parents? I find it hard to believe that you can live past 80 years with a high quality of life, barring having 1 in 100 age-related genetics

they are almost 70. I think the Blue Zones[1] make a pretty strong case for groups of people living with similarly healthy lifestyles all living longer than the average and with better quality of life. I just think it's pretty reasonable to conclude that there will be a difference between the bodies of people who take care of themselves over their lifetime vs. those who don't.

We have people living longer and longer (I think the last person was 122?!) and it doesn't really make sense that you reach an age like 80 and everybody, no matter their choices, all end up similarly unhealthy and in pain with reduced mobility.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Zone

Re: The health benefits of better air

#362

Post by learnstats2 »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #321
crazygringo wrote: post #130

This article seems to make fantastic jumps from the believable -- mortality from overall air pollution (e.g. in Delhi) to the frankly unbelievable -- your ultrasonic humidifier supposedly reducing your life by nearly an hour each night, or that a daily commute between Newark and NYC takes half a year off your life. According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier? Which…

a bit off topic, but i can logically guarantee you that smoking takes at least 5 minutes off your life. It takes that long to smoke a cigarette... You have to put things into perspective, why should you care less about living now then in 40 years in the future? Chances are your quality of life will only get worse etc.

> Chances are your quality of life will only get worse etc.

The quality of your end of life gets (on average) much worse if you smoke.

Not only do you die 5 minutes earlier, but you also spend more additional time with disease impacting your quality of life, such as COPD.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#363

Post by shlant »

batmansmk wrote: post #358

Correlation does not imply causation. Being rich gives you an extra 14.6 years: more money usually correlates to better food, better environment, better healthcare, etc. Owning a Tesla Model Y, indirect marker of wealth would be good for you otherwise.

I think this is a bit handwavy. There is a lot of evidence to show that air quality has an impact on health. How much might be harder to quantify, but I don't think it's unreasonable to think we might be underestimating its impact.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#364

Post by JW_00000 »

crazygringo wrote: post #130

This article seems to make fantastic jumps from the believable -- mortality from overall air pollution (e.g. in Delhi) to the frankly unbelievable -- your ultrasonic humidifier supposedly reducing your life by nearly an hour each night, or that a daily commute between Newark and NYC takes half a year off your life. According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier? Which…

> According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier?

Just two more nuances:

1) The article is measuring loss in "DALYs" = disability-adjusted life years. 10 DALYs lost may not mean dying 10 years earlier, but could also mean suffering from Alzheimer's for 16 years (Alzheimer's has a weight of 0.66 [1]), or any combination thereof (e.g. 10 years of Alzheimer's + dying 3.3 years earlier).

2) The cited number is for the "worst offender" on the NYC metro. The pollution levels on the London underground are less than a 10th of that.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disability-adjusted_life_year

Re: The health benefits of better air

#365

Post by probablypower »

shlant wrote: post #353
xaduha wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you gotta use them with reverse osmosis filtered water. And not one that remineralizes, you can do that later on your own. I have a ultrasonic humidifier, reverse osmosis water filter and air quality sensor, it's all good.

is there a downside to just using an evaporative humidifier?

I literally just have some planting trays with a half-inch of gravel that I pour water into every couple of days.

Works wonders, is cheap, and easy to clean. Evaporation happens for free if you let it.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#366

Post by airhead969 »

xaduha wrote: post #337
airhead969 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't readily buy DI water, but you can buy distilled water. The two are entirely different purity levels.

Reverse osmosis filtered water is mainly what I have in mind, companies sell that. 6-14 PPM is what I measured personally and I think it falls into this category.

That's some crappy RO water. My home system takes 45 ppm water and reduces it to Distilled water is made by steam condensation, and nearly ultra-pure but still contains dissolved gases.

DI water should be made from some distilled water to be the highest possible purity, but it's usually made from RO or simply filtered tap water.

There are some things DI can do that steam distillation can't, and vice-versa. The two processes are entirely different and NOT interchangeable.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#367

Post by lupire »

probablypower wrote: post #365
shlant wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is there a downside to just using an evaporative humidifier?

I literally just have some planting trays with a half-inch of gravel that I pour water into every couple of days. Works wonders, is cheap, and easy to clean. Evaporation happens for free if you let it.

Maybe works for one small location, but that doesn't put nearly enough water in the air for common humidifier use cases of a gallon a day or more.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#368

Post by xaduha »

shlant wrote: post #353
xaduha wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you gotta use them with reverse osmosis filtered water. And not one that remineralizes, you can do that later on your own. I have a ultrasonic humidifier, reverse osmosis water filter and air quality sensor, it's all good.

is there a downside to just using an evaporative humidifier?

Ultrasonic one is my first, only started paying attention to all this stuff because of 2020 and went all in, just trying to make my home a less crummy place.

Watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHeehYYgl28

Optional follow-ups:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TC9-t47tKts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfFAiCMLJ14

Re: The health benefits of better air

#369

Post by MomoXenosaga »

crazygringo wrote: post #130

This article seems to make fantastic jumps from the believable -- mortality from overall air pollution (e.g. in Delhi) to the frankly unbelievable -- your ultrasonic humidifier supposedly reducing your life by nearly an hour each night, or that a daily commute between Newark and NYC takes half a year off your life. According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier? Which…

People are dying from air pollution it's just that we like to ignore it because what are you realistically going to do about it... Move to your villa in the countryside? Thankfully as a human being I'm perfectly able to ignore and suppress inconvenient information.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#370

Post by Mauricebranagh »

airhead969 wrote: post #328
Mauricebranagh wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in NYC and the US in general having better health care especially for poorer workers will have much more of an effect.

Completely untrue. The US spends the most per capita and gets worse outcomes than other countries. This fact was even highlighted in Michael Moore's Where To Invade Next?

I said "Better" not throw more $ at the current omnishambles
Post reply on HN