Scientists stunned by children's lung recovery in ultra low emission zone(www.bbc.com)
48 pointsby dabinat3 hours ago6 comments
  • bilekasa few seconds ago
    > strongest evidence yet that local clean air zones could help reduce some of the harm caused by pollution during childhood.

    It's incredible this is even in debate. It's one of those intuitive things well known since the reduction of coal burning and smog during the industrial revolution in London?

  • ecshaferan hour ago
    Anecdata 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.
    • nathancahill43 minutes ago
      Doctors used to prescribe a "change of air" in the 18-19th centuries. Maybe they still should.
    • roughlyan hour ago
      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.
  • stuaxo2 hours ago
    I'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.

    • glenngillen36 minutes ago
      I've not lived in London for more than a decade. I always thought the black snot was from the Tube. Is it not?
  • satvikpendeman hour ago
    Using scientists being "stunned" should take the same amount of relevance as someone being "slammed" in article titles.
    • Nition2 minutes ago
      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."'
    • bryanlarsen41 minutes ago
      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.
      • zdragnar7 minutes ago
        "Stunned" isn't really a scientific term. It's the sort of editorializing you should expect to come from people who aren't the scientists themselves. More than hyperbole, it is classic click bait.

        Also, quitting smoking definitely eases a number of symptoms, especially if you're not at the point of chronic emphysema. The reduction of inflammation triggers alone after a bit of time is fairly significant. Less coughing, less mucus buildup, etc.

        • Nitiona few seconds ago
          But this isn't that at all. "Stunned" is used here because it's the word one of the study's authors actually used.

          '"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.'

    • powerpcmacan hour ago
      I'd like to imagine the stunned scientist is a scientist from another field, they show some medical findings to a guy who looks at snail butts all day and he's the one "stunned" by the findings
  • XorNotan hour ago
    So punchline, probably a good idea to electrify all the cars yeah?
    • mellosoulsa minute ago
      Probably a much better idea first to have a decent public transport and electric car support network throughout the country first.

      We don't all live in the city.

    • jimbob45an hour ago
      That doesn’t solve brake and tire particles. Although…rail might solve those?
      • cousinbrycean hour ago
        https://www.emissionsanalytics.com/news/pollution-tyre-wear-... Rail, bike, even busses are better. Cars are uniquely bad transportation in urban environments
        • mhandleyan hour ago
          Do the numbers in that article make sense? 5.8g/km for tyre wear? Generally my tyres last maybe 25000 miles. So at that rate they would lose 230kg. Seems high.
      • mhandleyan hour ago
        Tyre, no, but regen braking almost eliminates brake particles at the speeds I drive in London. But mostly I take the train. Unfortunately the highest I measured on my particulate sensor is not near the roads, but in the tube.
  • OutOfHerean hour ago
    I use air purifiers mounted on my windows, running continuously except in the deep summer and deep winter. This makes my air contain 50-100x fewer particulates than the outdoor air. In contrast, the best I can achieve with floor air purifiers as people have them is a 5-10x reduction. The window purifiers also keep excess CO2 and VOCs out.
    • Terr_5 minutes ago
      > The window purifiers also keep excess CO2 and VOCs out.

      Processing incoming air through a CO2 scrubber so that it enters with a lower-than-normal CO2 percentage? That doesn't sound as likely/practical.

      Perhaps you mean that the increased air-exchange (purified or not) helps prevent CO2 that originates inside the house from becoming concentrated?