Air pollution

Should the U.S. learn from China about air pollution? A history professor says yes, and he bases his argument on an epidemiological paper that utilizes deceptive maps and dubious methods.
Air pollution in China has a substantially negative impact on public health. But with the exception of central and southern California and the upper Midwest, the United States has extremely clean air. And in fact, most regions in this country would not benefit from tighter air pollution standards.
Over time, wealth makes people desire a clean environment. That’s why environmentalists, if they are to be successful, must be pro-human at heart.
Recent research has forged a new reason to take B vitamin supplements — protection from the deleterious cardiovascular effects of air pollution. But the data are far from conclusive and much more work will have to support these results before their utility is proven. In the meantime, don't hold your breath.
Our findings indicate that the congestion tax in central Stockholm reduced ambient air pollution by 5 to 10 percent. This policy induced change in pollution has been associated with a significant reduction in the rate of urgent care visits for asthma among children 0 to 5 years
The American Lung Association of California is claiming that a big push in the use of Zero Emission Vehicles would save Americans billions of dollars in health costs each year. What's more, the group adds that it would also save thousands of lives. Unfortunately, those are just wild promises and not much more.
For those unfortunate folks living in China's smog-ridden Beijing, there lies a breath of fresh air -- and it comes in a canister. Vitality Air is selling air from Alberta, Canada to Chinese consumers, and even at a startling $46 per unit, the Canadian company is making a killing.
When it comes to government policies regarding health policy, we've seen pretty much every type: Meaningless, but mostly harmless, anti-science, money driven, and ill-conceived and harmful.
A poll conducted by Pew Research Center last fall highlights the national debate over
A big shoutout to ACSH advisor (and junk science debunker extraordinaire) Dr. Geoffrey Kabat for his recent Forbes op-ed entitled What Is Really At Stake In The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology Subpoena Of EPA Data.
Back in July 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued new air quality standards to tighten ozone and particulate matter (soot) pollution to provide additional protection for children and asthmatics. This regulation, however, is ill directed and a misuse of public health funds.