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

Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 53 posts

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#21

Post by briefcomment »

deeviant wrote: post #20
briefcomment wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk if you tried looking at any evidence when making your claim, but this clearly supports the gp and contradicts your statement [1] [2]. [1] https://www.ridef2.com/blog-del-direttore-ridef/will-electri... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522...

Idk, if you bothered to read the study that you are pointing to in your coup de grace, you'd would realize your cited sources admit that EV's create no more particulate pollution than ICE engines. Your cited study actually states that EVs do reduce particulate pollution but only by a couple percent, which is opposite of "creating more" for those who prefer evidence based positions. It's almost as if regenerative brea…

The original GP's post had two points:

- most PM 2.5 pollution is produced by brake pad and tire wear

- which [i.e. PM 2.5 pollution produced by brake pad and tire wear] is made worse by EVs due to their weight

These are direct quotes from my links:

- "A large fraction (50-85% and up to 90%) of traffic generated PM10 and PM2,5 is not due to the exhaust emissions by the motor, but rather to non-exhaust emissions (brake wear, road wear, tyre wear and road dust resuspension)"

- "A positive relationship exists between vehicle weight and non-exhaust emissions."... "Electric vehicles are 24% heavier than their conventional counterparts."

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#22

Post by sdflhasjd »

briefcomment wrote: post #16
deeviant wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is made worse by EVs due to their weight? What a ridiculous supposition. First the weight difference is not that huge, second EV's use regenerative breaking for a huge portion of their breaking spectrum bypassing break pads entirely.

Idk if you tried looking at any evidence when making your claim, but this clearly supports the gp and contradicts your statement [1] [2]. [1] https://www.ridef2.com/blog-del-direttore-ridef/will-electri... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522...

Both those sources are the same paper, fyi. Found a PDF here: http://www.soliftec.com/NonExhaust%20PMs.pdf

And the claim is a bit dubious, imo. It looks like they're counting "resuspension" (kicking up existing settled PM2.5 in the wake) as a source.

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#23

Post by briefcomment »

sdflhasjd wrote: post #22
briefcomment wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk if you tried looking at any evidence when making your claim, but this clearly supports the gp and contradicts your statement [1] [2]. [1] https://www.ridef2.com/blog-del-direttore-ridef/will-electri... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522...

Both those sources are the same paper, fyi. Found a PDF here: http://www.soliftec.com/NonExhaust%20PMs.pdf And the claim is a bit dubious, imo. It looks like they're counting "resuspension" (kicking up existing settled PM2.5 in the wake) as a source.

The first link cites multiple papers, including the one in the second link. Looks like the study that mentions "resuspension" is a different study[1] than the one in the second link.

[1]https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522...

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#24

Post by jonnycomputer »

I come from a part of the US with fairly severe air pollution (2cd or 3rd worst in country). And asthma is a huge problem there, much so more than elsewhere. It is fairly obvious that the air pollution is the cause of the problem. Perhaps we should differentiate between the causes of the disease, and the hazards that trigger asthma attacks.

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#25

Post by philjohn »

tejtm wrote: post #11
philjohn wrote: post #3

I certainly noticed this - over the last year I've gone from using reliever inhalers several times a week to not needing them for months. I did also start a new medication, Montelukast, around the time of the first lockdown, so it could conceivably be due to that in my case - but not having a chest infection at all for the last 18 months whereas I used to get one a year or so has been lovely.

PSA: Montelukast (Singlar) can slowly and subtlety "change your mind" [0] https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-r...

That's interesting - another asthma medication I was on as a child made me an absolute horror as well - wonder if there's some relation in the mechanism of action.

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#26

Post by elric »

briefcomment wrote: post #17
elric wrote: post #15

Irceline publishes PM2.5 stats for Belgium. Here's [1] a pretty little chart with the annual mean PM2.5 concentration. If you switch between 2020 and 2019, the difference seems pretty small. Same for PM10 and Black Carbon. If the pandemic had a big impact on air quality, that effect seems to have skipped Belgium at least. It's a shame there's no similar dashboard for viruses and allergens. [1] https://www.irceline.be…

I wonder what the PM1 and under figures would look like. I recall seeing some analysis stating that the bulk of car related PM was smaller than PM1.

That's pretty much what the black carbon component indicates.

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#27

Post by thomasmeeks »

briefcomment wrote: post #21
deeviant wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk, if you bothered to read the study that you are pointing to in your coup de grace, you'd would realize your cited sources admit that EV's create no more particulate pollution than ICE engines. Your cited study actually states that EVs do reduce particulate pollution but only by a couple percent, which is opposite of "creating more" for those who prefer evidence based positions. It's almost as if regenerative brea…

The original GP's post had two points: - most PM 2.5 pollution is produced by brake pad and tire wear - which [i.e. PM 2.5 pollution produced by brake pad and tire wear] is made worse by EVs due to their weight These are direct quotes from my links: - "A large fraction (50-85% and up to 90%) of traffic generated PM10 and PM2,5 is not due to the exhaust emissions by the motor, but rather to non-exhaust emissions (brak…

What’s your point? That we should continue to favor gas cars over EVs? That cars should be taken off the road entirely? Something else?

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#28

Post by throwawayboise »

deeviant wrote: post #20
briefcomment wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Idk if you tried looking at any evidence when making your claim, but this clearly supports the gp and contradicts your statement [1] [2]. [1] https://www.ridef2.com/blog-del-direttore-ridef/will-electri... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13522...

Idk, if you bothered to read the study that you are pointing to in your coup de grace, you'd would realize your cited sources admit that EV's create no more particulate pollution than ICE engines. Your cited study actually states that EVs do reduce particulate pollution but only by a couple percent, which is opposite of "creating more" for those who prefer evidence based positions. It's almost as if regenerative brea…

Brake. The word is brake.

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#29

Post by briefcomment »

thomasmeeks wrote: post #27
briefcomment wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original GP's post had two points: - most PM 2.5 pollution is produced by brake pad and tire wear - which [i.e. PM 2.5 pollution produced by brake pad and tire wear] is made worse by EVs due to their weight These are direct quotes from my links: - "A large fraction (50-85% and up to 90%) of traffic generated PM10 and PM2,5 is not due to the exhaust emissions by the motor, but rather to non-exhaust emissions (brak…

What’s your point? That we should continue to favor gas cars over EVs? That cars should be taken off the road entirely? Something else?

My point was to defend ADSSDA's post against deeviant's claims.

Personally, I would like light EVs.

Re: Doctors Might Have Been Focusing on the Wrong Asthma Triggers

#30

Post by hattmall »

thomasmeeks wrote: post #27
briefcomment wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original GP's post had two points: - most PM 2.5 pollution is produced by brake pad and tire wear - which [i.e. PM 2.5 pollution produced by brake pad and tire wear] is made worse by EVs due to their weight These are direct quotes from my links: - "A large fraction (50-85% and up to 90%) of traffic generated PM10 and PM2,5 is not due to the exhaust emissions by the motor, but rather to non-exhaust emissions (brak…

What’s your point? That we should continue to favor gas cars over EVs? That cars should be taken off the road entirely? Something else?

I think it's just that EVs will not reduce asthma caused by small particle air pollution. They may in fact make it worse.
Post reply on HN