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

Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 361 posts

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#41

Post by resoluteteeth »

John23832 wrote: post #26
ChrisArchitect wrote: post #24

Related from last year, similar asian women angle for whatever reason: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40161811

Wok cooking is done at really high temp, which releases gases that are not present in moderate/low temp cooking. Woks trends asian, cooking trends towards women.

I don't think most people are actually doing really high temp wok cooking at home regardless of ethnic background. My impression is that, while woks are more common for home cooking in china (not chinese americans, mind you), even there home cooking is usually not done at the high temperatures that restaurants use.

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#42

Post by mschuster91 »

tmountain wrote: post #23
hansonkd wrote: post #18

I used to live by a busy street in a semi-dense part of town. Cars would be going around 45mph. When I moved from that apartment after 4 years. I was shocked by the amount of black dust covering everything. from the walls to the shelves and floors. I think it was all tire pollution so switching to 100% electric won't mitigate. It was pretty shocking and I wondered how much i increased my risk for lung cancer or other…

I was just talking to my wife about playgrounds using shredded tires as the "mulch". I don't know where the rubber comes from, if and how it is cleaned, or what particulate material it carries, but it seems dubious at best.

It's banned for new installs in Europe and existing installations have to be replaced by 2031 [1] - although primarily to get rid of a microplastics emission source. Additionally, shredded tire rubber as infill is investigated for being contaminated with PAH (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) [2].

[1] https://www.hna.de/lokales/kreis-kassel/kreis-kassel-eu-verb...

[2] https://playground-landscape.com/de/article/2033-gesundheits...

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#43

Post by mschuster91 »

resoluteteeth wrote: post #41
John23832 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wok cooking is done at really high temp, which releases gases that are not present in moderate/low temp cooking. Woks trends asian, cooking trends towards women.

I don't think most people are actually doing really high temp wok cooking at home regardless of ethnic background. My impression is that, while woks are more common for home cooking in china (not chinese americans, mind you), even there home cooking is usually not done at the high temperatures that restaurants use.

It's easy, incredibly easy, to overheat cookingware unintentionally. Add oil to a pan/wok that's overheated and it decomposes. Additionally, if the cookingware is coated with Teflon, above 300 °C this degrades into toxic compounds and can lead to "teflon flu" [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_fume_fever

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#44

Post by hulitu »

> Many Lung Cancers Are Now in Nonsmokers. Scientists Want to Know Why

Because hypocrisy does not live long. They blamed cigarettes for lung cancer, ignoring all other causes. "Oh, you have cancer but didn't smoke ? You surely were inhaling cigarettes smoke from somebody else.". We can polute further with no repercursions.

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#45

Post by dv_dt »

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #39
hansonkd wrote: post #18

I used to live by a busy street in a semi-dense part of town. Cars would be going around 45mph. When I moved from that apartment after 4 years. I was shocked by the amount of black dust covering everything. from the walls to the shelves and floors. I think it was all tire pollution so switching to 100% electric won't mitigate. It was pretty shocking and I wondered how much i increased my risk for lung cancer or other…

This might actually be brake dust. In that case, the situation most likely will be improved by electric cars because they use their brakes far less often, decelerating with their motors.

And it could be both tire dust and or brake dust are indicators of proximity to combustion engine exhaust. Any individual or combination of those could be an increased cancer risk. But only the dust is immediately visible and leaves behind a tangible trace

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#46

Post by mschuster91 »

RajT88 wrote: post #15
codyb wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know no one's ever going to change their ways cause of the increasingly evident ravages of climate change but I swear I feel like throwing rocks at the big SUVs rolling by with exactly one person in them during the heat domes here in NYC. Just, so, gross. And it truly is the _vast majority_ of cars going by with exactly one person in them. So wasteful, so much pollution, so hot... frustrating.

I get it. My wife drives a big SUV. She is a small lady, and says the car let's her see the road better and overall feel more safe. Back when SUV's started to get popular, this was a trend they noticed as well. Back then, it was met with a lot of guffaws about yuppie housewives and all that. (This was before the term Karen had been coined)

> She is a small lady

So, yet another case of cars not being designed for women (for those that don't get what I'm going on about - crash test dummies are modeled after men, leading to significantly worse crash outcomes for women [1])... it's infuriating.

Even a "small" BMW i3, a car one might think to be suitable for people of lower height - my wife tried out one at carsharing, and even despite the seat being all up front, she was barely able to drive the thing. The Mercedes Sprinter we rented for our last moves? Once she understood how the dimensions of that thing worked, absolutely easy going.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/nhtsa-female-crash-dummies-vehicl...

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#47

Post by voxic11 »

AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #39
hansonkd wrote: post #18

I used to live by a busy street in a semi-dense part of town. Cars would be going around 45mph. When I moved from that apartment after 4 years. I was shocked by the amount of black dust covering everything. from the walls to the shelves and floors. I think it was all tire pollution so switching to 100% electric won't mitigate. It was pretty shocking and I wondered how much i increased my risk for lung cancer or other…

This might actually be brake dust. In that case, the situation most likely will be improved by electric cars because they use their brakes far less often, decelerating with their motors.

Breaks are only part of the problem unfortunately.

> Resuspension of dust already on the road’s surface is the most significant contributor to non-exhaust PM by far, however these particles are difficult to characterize and manage because they could come from anywhere before landing on the road. Brakes are the next most significant source, and may also be particularly hazardous because of their small size and high metal content. Tires contribute the least, but they release large amounts of particles which act as microplastics in ecosystems.

https://www.nrdc.org/bio/john-bailey/beyond-tailpipe

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#48

Post by [deleted] »

dv_dt wrote: post #45
AnonymousPlanet wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might actually be brake dust. In that case, the situation most likely will be improved by electric cars because they use their brakes far less often, decelerating with their motors.

And it could be both tire dust and or brake dust are indicators of proximity to combustion engine exhaust. Any individual or combination of those could be an increased cancer risk. But only the dust is immediately visible and leaves behind a tangible trace

[deleted]

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#49

Post by RajT88 »

potato3732842 wrote: post #40
QuercusMax wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But she's making everyone else less safe by driving in her tank-mobile. Those are much more deadly to pedestrians, cyclists, and those in smaller vehicles.

And for every comment screeching about pedestrians and rollover safety there's another one screeching about occupant safety. You can't really fault people for picking the one that benefits them when confronted with roughly equal screeching in both directions.

Exactly what I was getting at.

There are several ways to view the story.

Another commenter mentioned failing to design cars for women (totally fair! Volvo famously had a botched attempt at this)

What I have come to appreciate is how vulnerable women feel in the world. It is hard to appreciate how that plays into car choice if you are a man. Most men will never be able to understand, imo.

Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers

#50

Post by tbrownaw »

codyb wrote: post #9
jmclnx wrote: post #3

Not being a scientist of any kind, I fully believe it is fossil fuel emissions, mainly from autos. When I was very young, where I lived, a city of 100000, I would say less than 50% of the people there drove plus most worked in the city they lived in. Now, almost every household has at least 2 autos and most drive at least 10+ (16km) miles to work. But , I also wonder if this is tied to the general increase in cancers…

I know no one's ever going to change their ways cause of the increasingly evident ravages of climate change but I swear I feel like throwing rocks at the big SUVs rolling by with exactly one person in them during the heat domes here in NYC. Just, so, gross. And it truly is the _vast majority_ of cars going by with exactly one person in them. So wasteful, so much pollution, so hot... frustrating.

> big SUVs rolling by with exactly one person in them

My mini-suv seems to be getting about double the gas milage my old normal car did.

Post reply on HN