Doctors, Patients Want Tougher Air Standards

[Guest guest]

Doctors, Patients Want Tougher Air Standards

They say EPA's proposed rules fail to protect public

by Liv Osby, HEALTH WRITER, Greenvillenews.com, Mon, Jan 16, 2006

http://www.imakenews.com/pureaircontrols/e_article000516342.cfm?

x=b6BpthW,bvtv58G

A frantic parent cradling an asthmatic child struggling to breathe

is one of the more common emergency room scenes, and for health-care

workers, it's one of the toughest to witness.

" Imagine trying to breathe through a straw for hours on end, " says

Dr. Lutz, medical director of emergency services at

Greenville Hospital System. " These patients are extremely scared. "

Asthma is on the rise, increasing 160 percent over the past 15 years

in children 5 and younger, says Lutz. And one of the culprits behind

the disease is a form of pollution called particulate matter -- tiny

particles in vehicle and industry emissions, smoke, soot and dust

that damage the lungs.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last month proposed tighter

particulate matter standards to protect public health. But a host of

physician, public health and patient groups say the proposal doesn't

go far enough.

" If EPA adopts the standard as proposed, the agency will have failed

the most fundamental task required by the Clean Air Act -- to

protect public health from one of the major air pollutants, "

American Lung Association CEO L. Kirkwood said in a release.

More than 100 air pollution researchers and physicians from Harvard,

s Hopkins, Columbia, NYU Medical School and other institutions

signed a letter to EPA calling for tougher standards. Other groups

also support more protective standards, including the American

Public Health Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the

American Thoracic Society and the American College of Cardiology.

A new report from Environmental Defense says more than 2,000 studies

have examined the effects of particulate pollution and

overwhelmingly linked it to reduced lung function, coughing,

wheezing, irregular heartbeat, strokes, lung cancer and premature

death -- even at levels below current standards.

" They've got all kinds of scientific studies, good peer-reviewed

medicine, that shows how important particulate matter is to causing

morbidity and mortality, " Lutz said. " I have even seen some

scientific evidence that it causes asthma, not just exacerbation of

it. "

Noting that asthma is the leading cause of chronic illness and

school absenteeism in children, Lutz said one study showed a 42

percent drop in ER visits in Atlanta during the Olympic Games, when

traffic was restricted.

And particulate matter doesn't just make breathing tougher for

people with lung conditions, says Greenville allergist Dr. Emmanuel

Sarmiento. It affects everyone.

A good example, he said, is the smoke that permeates a community

when one neighbor burns leaves and other yard waste.

" As a physician specializing in respiratory disorders, anything that

increases particulate matter in the air is bad for anybody, not only

people with asthma, allergies or emphysema, " he said. " The cleaner

the air is, the better it is for all of us. "

Particulate matter magnifies the impact of other pollutants, too, he

said.

Since passage of the Clean Air Act 35 years ago, according to

Environmental Defense, air pollution levels have declined. As a

result, more than 200,000 premature deaths have been prevented,

along with 674,000 cases of chronic bronchitis, 209,000 hospital

admissions and 227 million respiratory ailments, saving the nation

$21.7 billion in health care costs, according to the group.

But many more people could be spared illness and premature death,

and billions more could be saved, if particulate matter standards

were toughened even more than proposed by EPA, the group says.

For instance, if 25 percent of diesel engines were retrofitted, the

country could save $8.7 billion in medical costs and prevent 1,490

heart attacks and more than 21,000 asthma and bronchitis attacks

each year, the group reports.

Calling EPA's proposal disappointing, Kirkwood said it ignores

recommendations from the agency's own scientists and independent

experts.

" Based on the overwhelming evidence of the death and disease

demonstrated in these studies, " he said, " it was clear to the

American Lung Association, to EPA's own staff scientists and to the

independent scientific review panel that much tighter limits were

needed. "

EPA, which last updated the standards in 1997, says it will review

the latest scientific literature and take public comments for 90

days before the standards are finalized.

" There is no excuse to set the new standards at levels that still do

not ... protect the lives and health of the public, " Kirkwood

said. " The EPA proposal will leave millions of Americans unprotected

and will lead to thousands of premature deaths. "

# # #

Pure Air Control Services, Inc.

1-800-422-7873