First UK death where air pollution is named at inquest.
Discussion
I'm surprised it has taken this long for air pollution to be actually attributed to a death in the UK.. Is a very sad story and won't be the last...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-55330...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-55330...
Saw this too.
Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
Ian Geary said:
Saw this too.
Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
It is clear that high levels of pollution can harm. The fact that the child had asthma is irrelevent. If you punch an hydrocephalic and fracture his skull, it's still GBH, regardless of the fact that it would have merely bruised someone of normally thickness of skull. Lead in petrol was a killer. It was known to be a killer, but no one really minded. The bloke who designed/invented leaded petrol, Thomas Midgley, also invented Freon, a CFC. Two entries in the top 50 worst inventions.Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
rjfp1962 said:
I'm surprised it has taken this long for air pollution to be actually attributed to a death in the UK.
The London Smog of December 1952, caused by coal burning for homes and power stations, is reckoned to have killed 12,000 people and put around 100,000 in hospital.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London...
Derek Smith said:
Ian Geary said:
Saw this too.
Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
It is clear that high levels of pollution can harm. The fact that the child had asthma is irrelevent. If you punch an hydrocephalic and fracture his skull, it's still GBH, regardless of the fact that it would have merely bruised someone of normally thickness of skull. Lead in petrol was a killer. It was known to be a killer, but no one really minded. The bloke who designed/invented leaded petrol, Thomas Midgley, also invented Freon, a CFC. Two entries in the top 50 worst inventions.Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
Derek Smith said:
It is clear that high levels of pollution can harm. The fact that the child had asthma is irrelevent. If you punch an hydrocephalic and fracture his skull, it's still GBH, regardless of the fact that it would have merely bruised someone of normally thickness of skull. Lead in petrol was a killer. It was known to be a killer, but no one really minded. The bloke who designed/invented leaded petrol, Thomas Midgley, also invented Freon, a CFC. Two entries in the top 50 worst inventions.
Your illuminating but pointless musings on leaded petrol aside, If her asthma is irrelevant why is it named as THE cause of death ? Willy Nilly said:
Derek Smith said:
Ian Geary said:
Saw this too.
Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
It is clear that high levels of pollution can harm. The fact that the child had asthma is irrelevent. If you punch an hydrocephalic and fracture his skull, it's still GBH, regardless of the fact that it would have merely bruised someone of normally thickness of skull. Lead in petrol was a killer. It was known to be a killer, but no one really minded. The bloke who designed/invented leaded petrol, Thomas Midgley, also invented Freon, a CFC. Two entries in the top 50 worst inventions.Any death of a child is sad.
It does seem a case that the child's accute asthma reacted very badly to the family's proximity to the South circular, which regularly broke legal limits for pollution.
But without the asthma, would the pollution have killed?
Sad thing is: it seems not much could be done about it anyway.... bring the clean air targets forward from 20 years to 10 years maybe? Won't bring the young girl back of course.
Hopefully the finding helps brings some closure for the parents.
This poor girl would have spent something like 90% of her life indoors. How do we know where the pollutants concerned have come from? For instance, I understand that a child in a car is exposed to pollutants approx 9x above a child outside of a car. It is known that indoor air quality can be considerably worse than outdoor.
Regarding London, it's a fact that the very highest degrees of longevity are in boroughs of London, whether that be for male or female, newborns or 65 yr-olds. As alluded to above, lifestyle is far, far more significant in terms of longevity and years of healthy living.
I read about the case but never seem any the wiser. I do recognise that, whilst the air is said to be at its cleanest, our understanding of the effects of air pollution on us has changed considerably in just very recent years. Then again, air pollution is said to cost all of us about 3 days of life on average. These figures of X0,000 of lives lost per annum are mathematical constructs.
heebeegeetee said:
Hi all. I'm struggling with this case too. For all the rhetoric about air quality, according to govt and defra figures, essentially air quality is at the cleanest it's ever been measured at, and the levels off all pollutants concerned are at the lowest levels. The worst that can be said is the the decline has tailed slightly in recent years, but significant changes have been made recently which should accelerate the decline even further.
This poor girl would have spent something like 90% of her life indoors. How do we know where the pollutants concerned have come from? For instance, I understand that a child in a car is exposed to pollutants approx 9x above a child outside of a car. It is known that indoor air quality can be considerably worse than outdoor.
Regarding London, it's a fact that the very highest degrees of longevity are in boroughs of London, whether that be for male or female, newborns or 65 yr-olds. As alluded to above, lifestyle is far, far more significant in terms of longevity and years of healthy living.
I read about the case but never seem any the wiser. I do recognise that, whilst the air is said to be at its cleanest, our understanding of the effects of air pollution on us has changed considerably in just very recent years. Then again, air pollution is said to cost all of us about 3 days of life on average. These figures of X0,000 of lives lost per annum are mathematical constructs.
The air is clean in terms of visible pollution not in terms of particulates and more to the point micro particulates. The concerns now are PM10 and PM2.5 so <10 micron and <2.5 micron particles that are present in what appears to be "clean" air. The very small size of these particles allows them to penetrate deeper into a person's lungs than big clumpy dust/smoke/smog of old.This poor girl would have spent something like 90% of her life indoors. How do we know where the pollutants concerned have come from? For instance, I understand that a child in a car is exposed to pollutants approx 9x above a child outside of a car. It is known that indoor air quality can be considerably worse than outdoor.
Regarding London, it's a fact that the very highest degrees of longevity are in boroughs of London, whether that be for male or female, newborns or 65 yr-olds. As alluded to above, lifestyle is far, far more significant in terms of longevity and years of healthy living.
I read about the case but never seem any the wiser. I do recognise that, whilst the air is said to be at its cleanest, our understanding of the effects of air pollution on us has changed considerably in just very recent years. Then again, air pollution is said to cost all of us about 3 days of life on average. These figures of X0,000 of lives lost per annum are mathematical constructs.
Willy Nilly said:
Wasn't lead removed from petrol about 30 years ago. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but the air is cleaner now than it's been since the start of the industrial revolution. Let's also not forget that it's not poor air that is shortening people's lives in this country, it's poor diet and lack of exercise.
Air quality has been proven to be shortening lives. The fact that 50 years ago it was accepted and considered "part of life" doesn't make much consequence to those who died from it or had their lives significantly shortened. Poor diet and lack of exercise may contribute, but you can't just ignore air pollution and say it's not a factor when the science disagrees with you.
b0rk said:
The air is clean in terms of visible pollution not in terms of particulates and more to the point micro particulates. The concerns now are PM10 and PM2.5 so <10 micron and <2.5 micron particles that are present in what appears to be "clean" air. The very small size of these particles allows them to penetrate deeper into a person's lungs than big clumpy dust/smoke/smog of old.
But they're all at the lowest levels ever measured, acc to govt figures.Condi said:
Willy Nilly said:
Wasn't lead removed from petrol about 30 years ago. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but the air is cleaner now than it's been since the start of the industrial revolution. Let's also not forget that it's not poor air that is shortening people's lives in this country, it's poor diet and lack of exercise.
Air quality has been proven to be shortening lives. The fact that 50 years ago it was accepted and considered "part of life" doesn't make much consequence to those who died from it or had their lives significantly shortened. Poor diet and lack of exercise may contribute, but you can't just ignore air pollution and say it's not a factor when the science disagrees with you.
It's just that I've noticed that in the reports of this poor girl, I've seen no reference to her indoor lifestyle, or what the parents were doing in terms of cooking, cleaning, candles etc etc, yet the girl would have spent 90% of her life (or more) indoors. This seems to be being ignored.
heebeegeetee said:
But they're all at the lowest levels ever measured, acc to govt figures.
It's more complex than the basic measured air quality figures, whilst overall all the metrics are down, fine particulates haven't dropped nearly as fast as larger particulates outside of the home. There are studies into fine and ultrafine particles in terms of airborne distance and time that now seem to suggest reductions in larger particulate matter helps keep ultrafine particles mobilised but these are very much WIP.
Then there is indoor air quality where you have domestic emitters such as cooking, candles and in the urban environment the potential for pooling of external particulates inside properties. There was (and is) a policy document issued by the Mayor of London requiring new build (or refurbishment) properties where the external NOX an PM2.5 levels are above set thresholds to have particulate and NOX filters fitted on the ventilation system. This would include new dwellings where MVH and MVHR systems are now common.
b0rk said:
The concerns now are PM10 and PM2.5 so <10 micron and <2.5 micron particles that are present in what appears to be "clean" air. The very small size of these particles allows them to penetrate deeper into a person's lungs than big clumpy dust/smoke/smog of old.
Ay yes, but this is PH 2020 so "remap and remove DPF, innit".rockin said:
rjfp1962 said:
I'm surprised it has taken this long for air pollution to be actually attributed to a death in the UK.
The London Smog of December 1952, caused by coal burning for homes and power stations, is reckoned to have killed 12,000 people and put around 100,000 in hospital.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London...
Willy Nilly said:
Wasn't lead removed from petrol about 30 years ago. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but the air is cleaner now than it's been since the start of the industrial revolution. Let's also not forget that it's not poor air that is shortening people's lives in this country, it's poor diet and lack of exercise.
On the lead in petrol thing; it's actually still legal to possess and sell leaded petrol as long as it doesn't exceed a certain market share 0.5% or something. There are even products so that you can make your own. I totally agree with your point that bad diet and lack of exercise are far more damaging than the current standard of the air we breathe.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff