s/stunned/pleased/
Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
31–40 of 426 posts
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#32Anecdata I was living very close to a busy highway, and my young daughter was wheazing when she had a cold, we had to give her medicine via a nebulizer. When we moved out to the country more, far away from any major roads, these issues all disappeared within a couple months.
A friend of mine does research on air pollution from cars - the TL;DR is you should not live within a third of a mile of a highway. The falloff is pretty sharp, but you don't want to be in that zone.
What about the vicinity of large or uphill streets inside a city? I am curious how the data compares with highways.
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#33Using scientists being "stunned" should take the same amount of relevance as someone being "slammed" in article titles.
It's a direct quote from one of the scientists: '"I was absolutely stunned when I first saw the results," Prof Chris Griffiths, a senior author on the study, at Queen Mary University of London, told the BBC."'
I know, generally it is not a direct quote, hence "should."
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#34I've needed my inhaler way less since the ULEZ came in. Visiting London used to mean blowing your nose to black snot for a week afterwards, these days living in London it's pretty good.
I've not lived in London for more than a decade. I always thought the black snot was from the Tube. Is it not?
I lived on Upper Street in Angel, London by some traffic lights and there was always a layer of black dust inside. I assumed it was brake particulate.
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#35Using scientists being "stunned" should take the same amount of relevance as someone being "slammed" in article titles.
Smokers don't magically undo the damage they did to their lungs after they stop smoking. Stunned might be hyperbole, but it is at least a little bit surprising.
> “ Smokers don't magically undo the damage they did to their lungs after they stop smoking”
Except that they do undo the damage.
“ After 15 years, your chances of getting lung cancer are almost the same as someone who has never smoked.”
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#36I've needed my inhaler way less since the ULEZ came in. Visiting London used to mean blowing your nose to black snot for a week afterwards, these days living in London it's pretty good.
Pretty sure that's due to the tube.
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#37Anecdata I was living very close to a busy highway, and my young daughter was wheazing when she had a cold, we had to give her medicine via a nebulizer. When we moved out to the country more, far away from any major roads, these issues all disappeared within a couple months.
Doctors used to prescribe a "change of air" in the 18-19th centuries. Maybe they still should.
Sanitariums
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanatorium
I guess the modern descendants are the health retreat, the rural airbnb, and the day spa that offers oxygen therapy.
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#38Short-term gains are likely to produce long-term negative effects.
Hormesis and natural selection have been driving factor of evolution for a long time.
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#39Anecdata I was living very close to a busy highway, and my young daughter was wheazing when she had a cold, we had to give her medicine via a nebulizer. When we moved out to the country more, far away from any major roads, these issues all disappeared within a couple months.
Doctors used to prescribe a "change of air" in the 18-19th centuries. Maybe they still should.
Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone
#40So punchline, probably a good idea to electrify all the cars yeah?
That doesn’t solve brake and tire particles. Although…rail might solve those?
EVs use regenerative braking. So they hardly produce any brake particulates. And the tire particulates are heavy so they don't stay airborn for nearly as long. At low speeds, tires don't wear out as quickly.
Europe has quite a few cities where traffic is increasingly discouraged from going to the inner cities. Cities like Paris and London are much transformed from what they used to be and it shows in the health statistics.
It's not just the particulates but also nitrous oxides (nox) produced by combustion engines. Nox is correlated with lots of health issues. Take it away and you see lower rates of chronic lung issues, cancer, development issues with kids, etc.
But yes, tires are also an issue. But a fairly minor one to anything coming out of a combustion engine.
Mass transit indeed is nice in big cities. Removes the need for taking the car.