Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 111 | NUMBER 1 | January 2003 

### 45 

# Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in a City with Low Levels of Pollution

Sverre Vedal, 1 

### Michael Brauer,2,3 

### Richard White, 4 

### and John Petkau 4

**1 Department of Medicine, National Jewish Medical and Research Center, Denver, Colorado, USA;**  **2 Department of Medicine,** 
**3 School of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, and**  **4 Department of Statistics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver,**  **British Columbia, Canada**



### An association between short-term changes in ambient pollutant concentrations, especially particle concentrations, and daily mortality has been observed in many settings ( 1,2 ). These settings have included a range of mean particle concentrations and of particle emission sources and different types and concentrations of other ambient pollutants. When concentration–response relationships between particle concentration and daily mortality have been evaluated, most studies have observed that the relationship is reasonably linear, even down to the lowest concentrations observed in any given study ( 3–5 ). One implication of suchobservations is that no clear threshold concentration can be identified below which no effects of particle pollution are observed. Conclusions about the linearity of the concentration–response relationship extending down to the lowest observed concentrations should be tempered by the relative scarcity ofobservations at the lowest, as well as the highest, particle concentrations in most studies.This is reflected in the larger confidence intervals around the fitted relationship typically observed at both low and high concentration extremes ( 6). Further, error in measuring individual particle exposures due to the use ofonly a few pollution monitors to reflect individual exposures would be expected to blur any threshold concentration, if one exists. This occurs because some individuals will have true exposures above their “thresholds” when measured exposures are below these thresholds, and some will have true exposures below their “thresholds” when measured exposures are above these thresholds ( 7 ). The observed linearity of the concentration– response relationships may therefore partly be a result of measurement error. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, is alarge urban area that has low levels of air pollution relative to other large urban areas ( 2,8 ). For example, the mean daily PM 10 

### (particulate

matter ≤ 10 μm in diameter) concentration in Vancouver during 1994–1996 was lower than that reported for any of the 90 cities studied in the National Morbidity and Mortality Air Pollution Study (NMMAPS) (2). A large number of observations are therefore available at very low concentrations of ambient particles and other pollutants, which should enhance the ability to assess effects at the low end of theconcentration–response relationship. The presence of an association at these low concentrations would argue in favor of the linearity of the concentration–response relationship extending down to very low concentrations. Conversely, the absence of an association would argue that a threshold concentration is present.



### Methods Mortality data. Vancouver is a metropolitan area with a population of approximately 1.8 million located on the southwest coast of British Columbia. Daily mortality data for the lower mainland of British Columbia, including Vancouver, for the 3-year period January 1994–December 1996 were obtained from the Centre for Health Services and Policy Research at the University of British Columbia, with approval from the British Columbia Vital Statistics Agency, Ministry of Health Services, and included date of death, underlying cause of death according to the International Classification of Diseases , NinthRevision (ICD-9), local health area of residence and of death, and date of birth. Total deaths were defined as all deaths except those with an underlying cause of trauma or suicide (ICD-9 codes 800–999). Respiratory deaths were defined as all deaths coded with ICD-9 codes of 460–519, and cardiovascular deaths were defined as deaths with ICD-9 codes of 390–459. Pollution and meteorology data . Meanhourly pollutant concentration data [inhalable particulate matter (PM 10 

### ), ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and carbon monoxide] were obtained from the Greater Vancouver Regional District for the same 3- year period for which mortality data were available. The pollutant monitoring network spanned the entire region extending from Vancouver proper eastward to Chilliwack, 90km east of Vancouver. The network for continuous pollutant monitoring included 10 monitoring sites for PM 10 

### [using tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) monitors], 19 O 3 

### monitoring sites, 12 SO 2 

### sites, 19 NO 2 

### sites, and 16 CO sites. Mean hourly meteorologic data on temperature (16 sites), relative humidity (7 sites), barometric pressure (7 sites), and rainfall (8 sites) were obtained from Environment Canada and the Greater Vancouver Regional District. Analysis . We filled in missing hourly datavalues for each pollutant and each meteorologic variable (except rainfall) separately using the EM algorithm, after preprocessing to remove systematic patterns in the data. Specifically, temporal patterns were first removed from the observed data at each ofthe available sites using sine and cosine functions with periods of 1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/6, 1/12 and 1/24 of a year, as well as indicators for the hour of the day as predictors. We

Address correspondence to S. Vedal, Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, National Jewish Medical and Research Center, 1400 Jackson Street, Denver, CO 80206 USA. Telephone: (303) 398-1520. Fax: (303) 398-1452. E-mail: vedals@njc.org

We thank the British Columbia Vital Statistics Agency, Ministry of Health Services, for providing the vital statistics data for Vancouver.

This work was supported by a grant from the British Columbia Lung Association.

Received 5 October 2001; accepted 7 October 2002. Articles

The concentration–response relationship between daily ambient inhalable particle (particulate

matter ≤ 10 μm; PM 10 ) concentrations and daily mortality typically shows no evidence of a threshold concentration below which no relationship is observed. However, the power to assess a relationship at very low concentrations of PM 10 has been limited in studies to date. The concentrations of PM 10 and other air pollutants in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, from January 1994 through December 1996 were very low: the 50th and 90th percentiles of daily average PM 10 concentrations were 13 and 23 μg/m3 , respectively, and 27 and 39 ppb, respectively, for 1-hr maximum ozone. Analyses of 3 years of daily pollution (PM 10 , ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide,and carbon monoxide) concentrations and mortality counts showed that the dominant associations were between ozone and total mortality and respiratory and cardiovascular mortality in thesummer, and between nitrogen dioxide and total mortality in the winter, although some association with PM 10 may also have been present. We conclude that increases in low concentrations of air pollution are associated with increased daily mortality. These findings may support the notion that no threshold pollutant concentrations are present, but they also raise concern that these effects may not be effects of the measured pollutants themselves, but rather of some other factor(s) present in the air pollution–meteorology mix. Key words: air pollution, mortality, nitrogen dioxide,

doi:10.1289/ehp.5276 available via http://dx.doi.org/ ozone, particulate matter. Environ Health Perspect 111:45–51 (2003). [Online 14 November 2002]

### removed any autoregressive (AR) structure in the residuals from this initial fit by fitting anAR model; the AR order was chosen to adequately minimize residual autocorrelation, with fourth-order AR models being adequate for all variables. We then applied the EM algorithm to these residuals from all sitessimultaneously to take advantage of any spatial autocorrelation that might be present in the variables. This yields an imputed residual for each missing hourly value, which, when added to the predictions from the temporal and AR fits, provides the filled-in value. The available rainfall data were converted to an indicator (present or absent) for each hour at each site. The estimated probability of rainfall was imputed for missing hourly values of the indicator using a logistic regression separately at each site, incorporating temporal patterns as described above for the other variables. The estimation procedure for missing datawas carried out on the log scale for the pollution variables because their distributions were skewed. To overcome the minor complication of some sites reporting zero readings for some variables, we added a small positive constant(one-half the smallest nonzero hourly measurement of that variable in the entire data set) to all the observations before the data were log transformed. After exponentiating totransform back to the original scale, we subtracted this same constant from each of the filled-in hourly values. Because the mortality data were available on a daily basis, all analyses were carried outwith daily data. We obtained overall daily values of the pollutants (except O 3 

### ) and the meteorologic variables by first averaging the filled-in hourly values across the day at each site and then averaging these site-specific daily average values across the available sites. For O 3 

### , the maximum hourly value over the day was first determined at each site, and these site-specific maxima were then averaged across the available sites. For rainfall, the overall daily value is the proportion of hours for which rain was recorded. Because of the marked seasonality of someof the pollutants, we stratified analyses by season. Only two “seasons” were chosen given the relatively moderate marine climate in Vancouver: summer ranging from May through September, and winter from Octoberthrough April. We used both Poisson regression and generalized additive models for count data ( 9) to estimate the effects of the air pollutants on daily mortality. A systematic batteryof preliminary analyses were carried out separately on the total, respiratory, and cardiovascular mortality counts in summer and winter to identify appropriate forms to adjust for temporal trends and meteorologic effects. Theprimary approach taken to removing the temporal trends was to fit a loess smooth. Initially, we explored a wide range of window widths using total mortality, with more detailed exploration subsequently of window widths ranging from 90 to 180 days for all mortalityoutcomes. Examination of the partial autocorrelation functions suggested a window width of 120 days sufficed to remove almost all of the autocorrelation in the residuals and was therefore used for all subsequent loess-basedtemporal adjustments. We then explored various combinations of loess smooths of the Articles • Vedal et al.



### 46 VOLUME 111 | NUMBER 1 | January 2003 • Environmental Health Perspectives Figure 1. The time series of daily total, respiratory, and cardiovascular deaths from January 1994 through December 1996 show an annual c yclical pattern that is most pronounced for respiratory deaths [dotted lines separate summer (S) from winter (W)]. The corresponding residual time seri es plots after use of loess smoothing of long-term temporal trends show that no meaningful cyclical patterns persist. WS W S W SW

WS W S W SW

WS W S W SW WS W S W SW

WS W S W SW

WS W S W SW 1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996

1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996

1994 1995 1996 1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study Year of study

Y

ear of study Year of study

Y

ear of study Year of study 60

50

40

30

20

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

25

20

15

10

5 2

0

–2

3

2

1

0

–1

–2

–3

3

2

1

0

–1

–2

–3Cardiovascular deaths Respiratory deaths Total deathsResidualsResidualsResiduals Ti me series Time series after loess smoothing

### meteorologic variables as additional adjustments. The impact of these adjustments was much more modest than that for the temporal trends in the winter, but comparable in the summer. In each case, there was little to choose among many of the different possible adjustments. Results reported here are for models in which the meteorologic adjustmentis a sum of separate loess smooths of temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, and rainfall on the same day, each based on the default window width of one-half.To allow for easy interpretation and significance testing, we then entered linear terms for each pollutant in separate models for day lags ranging from no lag (same day) to 2 days. We examined the simultaneous effects on mortality of two pollutants by fitting models with linear terms for each of the two pollutants together. We performed sensitivity analyses to assess the influence on the results of using a different approach to accounting for temporal trends. For these analyses, a linear trend and sine and cosine terms with periods of 1 year, and 6, 4, and 3 months were included in the models instead of a loess smooth to capture the temporal trends. Exploration of various loess smooths of the meteorologic variables indicated that the same sum of separate loess smooths of temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, and rainfall on the same day provided adequate adjustment for the meteorologic variables. We used S-Plus (Insightful Corp., Seattle, WA, USA) for all analyses. Model fits using loess smooths were based on stringent convergence criteria (10 –9 

### for both the local scoring and backfitting algorithms) to eliminate recently identified difficulties with the use of the default convergence criteria in the S-Plus generalized additive models (GAM) module ( 10 ). Standard errors for the pollutant effects in these model fits were determined by aMonte Carlo approach (based on 1,000 simulated Poisson data sets for each model fit) to avoid reliance on the potentially inaccurateapproximation used to evaluate these standard errors in the S-Plus implementation of GAM ( 10,11).



### Results Mortality, pollution, and meteorology. Totaldaily deaths showed an annual cyclical pattern with peaks occurring in the winter (Figure 1). Numbers of daily deaths ranged largely from 30 to 40 per day. Respiratory deaths showed an even more pronounced cyclical pattern, with peaks again occurring in the winter. Cardiovascular deaths also showed an annual cyclical pattern, but this was much less pronounced than for respiratory deaths. After removal of long-term temporal trends using a loess smooth (with a window width of 120 days) separately for summer and winter, residual plots showed that the annual patterns seemed to be adequately removed (Figure 1). Each of the monitored pollutants andmeteorologic variables had some data missing. For PM 10 

### , 8.9% of the monitor-hours had missing concentration data. For O 3 

### , SO 2 

### , NO 2 

### , and CO, 4.7%, 6.4%, 6.5%, and 5.0%of the monitor-hours, respectively, were missing. For temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, and rainfall, 5.3%, 12.9%, 14.7%, and 2.7% of the hourly measurements, respectively, were missing. We estimated the missing hourly data using an EM algorithm as detailed in “Methods,” with the overalldaily values based on the complete set of pollution and meteorologic data, both measured and estimated, used in the analyses.The overall daily air pollution concentrations and the meteorologic measures exhibited various temporal patterns (Figure 2). Of the pollutants, O 3 

### , with higher concentrations insummer, and CO, with higher concentrations in winter, exhibited the most seasonal variability. Air pollution concentrations wereuniformly low (Table 1). The pollution variables, apart from O 3 

### , were highly correlated (Table 2). Correlations between pollutants were generally similar for the summer and winter seasons, with the exception of O 3 

### , for which correlations with other pollutants were negative in winter but positive in summer. Single-pollutant models. Linear terms for the pollution variables were added singly to the regression models in which separate loess smooths were used to remove the long-term Articles • Low levels of air pollution and mortality

Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 111 | NUMBER 1 | January 2003 

### 47 WS W S W

W

1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study 20

10

0

–10Temperature (C)Humidity (%)Pressure (kPas) S W

1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study

1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study 1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study

1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study 1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study

1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study 1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study

1994 1995 1996 Y

ear of study W S W S W SW

W S W S W SW

W S W S W SW

W S W S W SW W S W S W SW W S W S W SW W S W S W SW W S W S W SWRain (% hr/day) 100

80

60

40

104

103

102

101

100

99

98

100

80

60

40

20

0 30

20

10PM10(μg/m3)

35

30

25

20

15

10

5 60

40

20Max O3(ppb)NO2(ppb)SO2(ppb) 15

10

5

0

1.5

1.0

0.5CO (ppm) Figure 2. The time series of the overall daily values of the five air pollutants and the four meteorologic measures [dotted lines separate summer (S) from winter (W)] show varying degrees of an annual cyclical pattern. kPas, kiloPascals. Concentrations of the air pollutants were uniformly low.

### temporal patterns and adjust for the same day temperature, relative humidity, barometric pressure, and rainfall. Estimated effects for total, respiratory, and cardiovascular deaths byseason for a standard deviation change in concentration for each pollutant at lags of 0, 1, and 2 days are presented in Figure 3. In the summer, we observed a statistically significant effect on total deaths only for O 3 

### at lag 0, and a nearly significant effect ( p < 0.10) for SO 2 

### atlag 0. Statistically significant effects on respiratory deaths in the summer were observed for PM 10 

### , O 3 

### , and SO 2 

### , but effects of NO 2 

### and CO were also nearly significant. Effects on cardiovascular deaths were seen only for O 3 

### , and then only for lag 0 ( p < 0.10). In the winter, we observed significant effects on total deaths for PM 10 

### (lag 2), NO 2 

### (lag 2), and SO 2 

### (lag 1). No significant deleterious effects on respiratory deaths were observed. Effects on cardiovascular deaths were observed for NO 2 

### (lags 1 and 2) and SO 2 

### (lag 1). Two-pollutant models. Because pollutant concentrations are often highly correlated, findings from single-pollutant models may be difficult to interpret. We fit models including linear terms for all pollutant lag pairs (lags 0,1, 2) to attempt to identify independent pollutant effects. We focused attention on those models in which both pollutant effects were observed in the single-pollutant models. In the summer, of the significant effects detected in the single-pollutant models, only the effects of O 3 

### on total mortality at lag 0 andon respiratory mortality at lag 2 remained statistically significant in all two-pollutant models (Figure 4 shows the estimates of effectfrom the most relevant two-pollutant models). In the winter, only the effect for NO 2 

### on total mortality at lag 2 was largely unchanged after the addition of other pollutants (Figure 4). Other effects that were significant in the single-pollutant models were substantially diminished after addition of some of the other pollutants in the two-pollutant models: for example, the greatly diminished effect of PM 10 

### at lag 1 on respiratory mortality in the summer after the addition of O 3 

### , and the greatly diminished effect of SO 2 

### at lag 1 on total mortality in the winter after the addition of NO 2 

### (Figure 4). Sensitivity analyses. As detailed in the“Methods,” another approach taken to removing the long-term temporal trends was to fit a linear trend and sine and cosine functions with frequencies ranging from 1 year to 3 months to the mortality series. Residuals from these fits showed that the annual pattern for total, respiratory, and cardiovascular deaths was removed (data not shown). Although, in general, there was little difference in estimates of pollution effect between the two approaches to removing the long-term temporal trends, there were exceptions. For example, Figure 5 illustrates the smaller effect estimates obtained for total mortality in the summer with the sine–cosine function approach. If differences were observed, loess smooth models almost always resulted in larger estimates of pollution effect. However, no qualitative differences in the study findings resulted from the use of the trigonometric function approach rather than loess smoothing for the removal of long-term temporal trends.



### Discussion
In Vancouver, where ambient concentrations of all major air pollutants are low relative to other large urban areas ( 2,8 ), the principal finding of this 3-year study was that increases in the concentrations of some of the gaseous air pollutants, particularly O 3 

### in the summer,were associated with increases in daily mortality. For PM 10 

### , the only relatively robust effect was for increased respiratory mortality in the summer at lag 1, but even that was sensitive to inclusion of O 3 

### (at lag 2) in the two-pollutant model. Estimated effects of ambient particulate matter have been less consistently observed insome more recently reported time-series studies, whereas gaseous pollutant effects have been observed more consistently ( 12–16 ). It is not known whether these effects reflect those of the gaseous pollutants themselves, or whether the gaseous pollutants are acting as surrogate markers of pollutant sources that contain more toxic compounds. In Vancouver, given the low concentrations of these pollutants, it seems unlikely that the observed effects are due to the measured pollutants themselves. The mean concentrations of both PM 10 

### and O 3 

### (mean 24-hr average was 13.7 ppb) during the 3-year period of the study (1994–1996) were lower than those in any of the 90 cities studied in NMMAPS (2 ). Further, only one of the cities in NMMAPS in which data on carbon monoxide were available had a lower mean concentration of carbon monoxide than Vancouver. Mean concentrations of NO 2 

### and SO 2 

### in Vancouver were lower than 72% and 76% of the cities in NMMAPS, respectively. Because the mean concentrations reported in NMMAPS were trimmed means in which the upper and lower 10th percentiles wereexcluded, and because the distribution of concentration data is typically skewed to the right, it would be expected that the trimmed means would be lower than those calculated from the complete set of data. If trimmed values hadbeen calculated for Vancouver, mean concentrations relative to the cities included in NMMAPS would have been even lower. In Vancouver, the most notable effects on mortality were those associated with increases in O 3 

### concentrations. It is noteworthy that, of the pollutants, O 3 

### was least strongly correlated with the other pollutants. Two-pollutant models with O 3 

### also typically had the lowest correlations between pollutant effect estimates; effect estimate correlations may be more relevant because they reflect pollutant correlations after long-term temporal trends and effects of meteorology have been removed. The weaker correlations associated with O 3 

### may have contributed to the ability Articles • Vedal et al.



### 48 VOLUME 111 | NUMBER 1 | January 2003 • Environmental Health Perspectives Table 1. Distribution of daily mortality counts and overall daily pollutant and meteorologic measures.
Min 10% 50% 90% Max Mean (SD)
Total mortality 16 27 35 43 60 35.0 (6.6) Respiratory mortality 0 1 4 7 13 3.8 (2.2) Cardiovascular mortality 4 9 14 19 28 14.0 (4.0) PM 10 (μg/m 3 ) 4 .1 7.8 13.1 22.8 37.2 14.4 (5.9) O 3 [ppb (1-hr max)] 3.1 14.6 27.3 39.4 75.1 27.4 (10.2) NO 2 (ppb) 4.3 11.8 16.1 22.9 33.9 16.9 (4.5) SO 2 (ppb) 0.3 1.2 2.4 4.9 15.4 2.8 (1.7) CO (ppm) 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.9 0.6 (0.2) Temperature (°C) –8.8 2.7 10.1 17.8 24.2 10.2 (6.0) Relative humidity (%) 24.2 65.4 79.9 91.3 97.3 78.6 (11.1) Barometric pressure (kPas) 97.4 100.7 101.7 102.4 103.9 101.6 (0.7) Rainfall (% hours/day) 0 0 2.6 48.1 97.9 14.7 (20.9)

Abbreviations: Max, maximum; Min, minimum; kPas, kiloPascals.

Table 2. Pearson correlations among the overall daily pollutant and meteorologic measures by season. a

PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 CO Temperature Humidity Pressure Rainfall

PM 10 0.48 0.76 0.84 0.71 0.61 –0.35 0.01 –0.47 O 3 –0.32 0.44 0.45 0.12 0.41 –0.59 –0.02 –0.33 SO 2 0.78 –0.41 0.80 0.67 0.59 –0.36 0.13 –0.47 NO 2 0.73 –0.38 0.68 0.81 0.45 –0.24 –0.01 –0.31 CO 0.76 –0.65 0.83 0.78 0.28 0.12 –0.01 –0.19 Temperature –0.11 0.28 –0.13 –0.34 –0.29 –0.42 0.00 –0.41 Humidity –0.38 –0.38 –0.21 –0.21 –0.05 0.21 –0.20 0.55 Pressure 0.40 –0.25 0.35 0.24 0.28 –0.04 –0.21 –0.40 Rainfall –0.55 –0.02 –0.40 –0.31 –0.31 0.13 0.56 –0.40

aSummer (May–September) above diagonal; winter (October–April) below diagonal.

### to detect effects of O 3 

### that were relatively insensitive to effects of other pollutants. The difficulty of disentangling the effects of the other pollutants is not surprising in view of the high correlations among them. Because ofconcerns regarding the interpretability of estimated effects in models containing several strongly correlated variables, we did not attempt to estimate effects from models that included any more than two pollutant terms.Findings from a study of the acute mortality effect of short-term increases in PM 10 

### concentrations in the 88 largest cities in the United States have recently been reported (2,10 ) (in only 88 of the 90 cities was an effect for PM 10 

### estimated). Because these cities were selected only on the basis of population size and availability of pollution concentration data, and a standardized approach was taken tothe analysis, these data provide the most comprehensive picture to date of the consistency of acute PM 10 

### effects on mortality. An overall effect of a 0.21% increase in total mortality (at a lag of 1 day) for each 10 μg/m 3 

### increase in PM 10 

### concentration was estimated. However, a substantial degree of heterogeneity of effect across cities was observed, with the estimated effect being zero or negative (that is, a decrease in mortality effect associated with an increase in PM 10 

### concentration) in 32 of the 88 cities (36%) in the single-pollutant models. The presence of a positive effect in any given city was not clearly related to the average PM 10 

### concentration in that city, although there was a trend for stronger effects to be present in cities with lower PM 10 

### concentrations, suggesting that the inability to observe a PM 10 

### effect in the 33% of cities was not due to the PM 10 

### concentrations being below a certain threshold concentration below which effects
were not present. Based on our single-pollutant models, an effect of PM 10 

### was present for respiratorymortality in the summer and for total mortality in the winter. However, these effects were sensitive to the addition of other pollutants in the two-pollutant models. The effects of PM 10 

### were present even though the average daily PM 10 

### concentration in Vancouver from 1994 to 1996 (14.4 μg/m 3 

### ) was lower than that of any of the 88 American cities during 1987–1994, where average daily PM 10 

### concentrations ranged from a low of 15.3 μg/m 3 

### to a high of 53.2 μg/m 3 

### ( 2). In a recent analysis of the concentration–response relationship in the 20 largest of these U.S. cities ( 4 ), the investigators argued that no evidence for a threshold for PM 10 

### could be found, at least above a concentration of 15 μg/m 3 

### . Similar findings were reported for an analysis of all 88 cities ( 5 ). The effects of PM 10 

### in this study are consistent with the contention that there is no threshold concentration for PM 10 

### , nor for some of the other pollutants. Because the absence of a concentration– response threshold for most air pollutants seems biologically implausible, considerationshould be given to possible reasons that timeseries studies seem to be unable to detect such thresholds. First, a “blurring” of a thresholdmight be expected if the use of ambient pollutant concentrations measured with a few Articles • Low levels of air pollution and mortality

Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 111 | NUMBER 1 | January 2003 

### 49 Figure 3. Estimated increases (and 95% confidence intervals) in daily mortality (total, respiratory, and cardiovascular) corresponding to a standard deviation increase in each pollutant from single-pollutant models for three lag periods for summer (May–September) and winter (October–Ap ril) periods. Lag To tal mortality (summer) 8

6

4

2

0

–2

–4

–6

Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2

PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 CO

Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2

To tal mortality (winter) 4

2

0

–2

–4

Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2
Respiratory mortality (summer) Respiratory mortality (winter)

Cardiovascular mortality (summer) Cardiovascular mortality (winter) Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 30

20

10

0

–10 10

5

0

–5

–10Percent change/SD change 10

5

0

–5

–10 6

4

2

0

–2

–4

–6 PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 CO

PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 CO PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 CO

PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 CO PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 COPercent change/SD changePercent change/SD changePercent change/SD changePercent change/SD changePercent change/SD change

### pollution monitors results in error in the measurement of exposure. Such measurement error must be present to some extent. Recent findings of a simulation study based on actualambient and personal monitoring data suggest that measurement error can have a substantial effect on the ability to detect a threshold ( 7 ). Others have not found that measurement error causes any difficulty in identifying a threshold within a meta-analysis context using a collection of cities ( 3). Thedetection of effects in Vancouver, where concentrations of all of these pollutants are low, suggests that measurement error may not be solely responsible for the inability to detect threshold concentrations in settings with higher pollutant concentrations.Second, ambient concentrations of air pollutants may be acting as surrogate measures ofexposure to other agents or to specific pollution sources that are in fact responsible for the observed effects. For example, there is no known mechanism whereby exposure to ambient O 3 

### might produce adverse cardiac effects, although some have been suggested ( 17 ), yet O 3 

### was associated with cardiac mortality in Vancouver. One could postulate that ambient O 3 

### concentrations in this setting maybe reflecting other pollutants in the photochemical smog mix that might potentially have adverse cardiac effects, although the identity of these agents is not known. No apparent threshold O 3 

### concentration might therefore be observed if O 3 

### were acting as such a surrogate measure. Similarly, if PM 10

### concentrations or concentrations of other pollutants are acting as surrogate measures ofanother unmeasured toxic pollutant or pollutants, or of specific sources, absence of an apparent threshold for these pollutants could also be observed. It has recently been suggested ( 18 ) that in some settings concentrations of gaseous pollutants may be better measures of exposure to particle pollution than the particlemass concentrations, in which case the apparent gaseous effects merely reflect unmeasured effects of particles. For example, others have also reported an inverse association between O 3 

### concentrations and mortality in the winter ( 19 ) (see Figure 3). It has been proposed thatthis effect is an example of negative confounding due to the negative correlation between wintertime O 3 

### and fine PM (20 ). This seems unlikely in our data given the winter correlation between O 3 

### and PM 10 

### of –0.32 (Table 2), although the negative correlation with PM 2.5 

### could have been stronger. There was little change in the estimate of effect of O 3 

### on respiratory mortality in the winter in the two-pollutant models (data not shown). We had no data on PM 2.5 

### during the 3 years of the study to allow us to specifically address this hypothesis. Additional monitoring in multiple settings is needed to determine whether this is likely. Third, because meteorology is a strong determinant of air pollutant concentrations in an urban setting, with variation in pollutantemissions being relatively minor, ambient pollutant concentrations might conceivably alsobe acting as surrogate measures of meteorologic factors. If some of the observed effects of the pollutants are due to meteorology rather than to the pollutants themselves, again, a threshold for the pollutants might not be observable. The addition of daily meteorologic variables to the regression models in this studywas aimed at controlling for effects of meteorology in the estimation of air pollutant effects. Alternative approaches to controllingfor the effects of meteorology have not significantly affected estimates of pollution effects in other studies (21), suggesting that significant, uncontrolled confounding by meteorology is unlikely. However, when effects of pollutants are detected at low concentrations at which no adverse effects would be expected (that is, no threshold concentrations are detected), andthe primary determinant of pollutant concentrations is meteorology, then a case can be made that the pollutant concentrations are Articles 

## | Vedal et al.



### 50 VOLUME 111 | NUMBER 1 | January 2003 • Environmental Health Perspectives Figure 4. Estimated increases (and 95% confidence intervals) in daily mortality (total, respiratory, and cardiovascular) for a standard deviation increase in each pollutant from selected two-pollutant models. Corr, correlation between the pollutant effect estimates. Corr –0.32 20

10

0

–10Percent change/SD change O 3 lag 2 To tal (summer)

8

6

4

2

0

–2 Corr –0.67

Cardiovascular (winter) Respiratory (summer)

Corr –0.58Percent change/SD change Corr –0.13 Corr –0.22 PM 10 lag 1 PM 10 lag 1 SO 2 lag 1 O 3 lag 2 SO 2 lag 1 O 3 lag 0 SO 2 lag 0

6

4

2

0

–2

–4 Corr –0.76 Corr –0.47 SO 2 lag 1 PM 10 lag 2 NO 2 lag 2 PM 10 lag 2 NO 2 lag 2 SO 2 lag 1 SO 2 lag 1 NO 2 lag 1
6

4

2

0

–2 Corr –0.69 Tota l (winter)

Figure 5. Estimated increases (and 95% confidence intervals) in daily total mortality for a standard deviation increase in pollutant conce ntration estimated from the single-pollutant models for the summer using ( A ) loess smoothing or ( B) a trigonometric function approach to removing long-term temporal trends. Estimates of effect using the trigonometric functions resulted in smaller estimates of pollution effect in this case. Lag 5

0

–5

–10Percent change/SD change

Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2

PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2 CO

Lag Lag Lag Lag Lag 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 01 2 CO

5

0

–5

–10 A BPercent change/SD change PM 10 O 3 SO 2 NO 2

### serving as better measures of the meteorologicfactors influencing mortality than the meteorologic measures themselves (in this case daily temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, and rainfall). Exposure measurement error of the relevant meteorologic factors as measuredby pollutant concentrations would also presumably be less than that of the ambient pollutants. Given the multitude of adverse health effects attributed to changes in meteorology ( 22,23), confounding by meteorology still seems plausible. Confidence in the study findings can be enhanced by demonstrating that the method of data analysis did not substantially influence the findings. The findings did not exhibit much sensitivity to the approach taken to removing the long-term temporal trends from the data. Findings may have been influenced, however, by the decision to use a seasonally stratified analysis. The decision to stratify theanalysis by season was prompted by the obvious annual cycles in much of the time seriesdata (Figures 1 and 2). Rather than attempting to incorporate this seasonal complexity in a single model, an approach that may notsucceed in adequately removing all of the seasonal correlations between the time-varying measures ( 24 ), it seems justified to stratify byseason. A potential disadvantage of stratification is the loss of statistical power and the associated instability of the estimates of effect, but this concern seems relatively unimportant in the current study. For loess smoothing of the long-term temporal trend, our Monte Carlo estimates of the standard errors of the pollutant effects were typically about 10% larger than those reported by the S-Plus GAM module, though for a few models they were as much as 30% larger. A number of additional pollutanteffects would have been judged to be statistically significant based on the smaller standard errors reported by the S-Plus GAM module. The latter should not be used for model fits involving loess smoothing ( 10,11 ). For the present context of overdispersed Poisson regression models, the only currently available alternative for evaluating accurate standard errors is a Monte Carlo approach. This iscomputationally intensive and time-consuming. This fundamental limitation of the S-Plus GAM module may encourage the use of parametric approaches to smoothing (e.g., natural splines) for which explicit evaluation of exact standard errors of pollutant effects is straightforward even for this context. In conclusion, assuming that the findings from Vancouver are generalizable to other cities with low pollutant concentrations, increases in air pollutant concentrations, even when concentrations are low, are associated with adverse effects on daily mortality. Although this observation may support theargument that there are no threshold concentrations of air pollution below which adverseeffects cannot be detected, it also raises concern that the associations are not reflecting the effects of the measured pollutants, but rather some factor or combination of factors, such as, for example, unmeasured air pollutants or uncontrolled features of meteorology that are correlated with the measured pollutants.

R EFERENCES AND 

### N OTES

1. Bascom R, Bromberg PA, Costa DA, Devlin R, Dockery DW, Frampton MW, Lambert W, Samet JM, Speizer FE, Utell M. Health effects of outdoor air pollution. Part 1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med153:5–50 (1996).
2. Samet JM, Zeger SL, Dominici F, Curriero F, Coursac I,Dockery DW, Schwartz J, Zanobetti A. Morbidity and mortality from air pollution in the United States. The National Morbidity, Mortality and Air Pollution Study (NMMAPS). Health Effects Institute Research Report No. 94, part II. Cambridge, MA:Health Effects Institute, 2000.
3. Schwartz J, Zanobetti A. Using meta-smoothing to estimate dose-response trends across multiple studies, with application to air pollution and daily death. Epidemiology 11:666–672 (2000).
4. Daniels MJ, Dominici F, Samet JM, Zeger SL. Estimating particulate matter-mortality dose-response curves and threshold levels: an analysis of daily time-series for the 20 largest US cities. Am J Epidemiol 152:397–406 (2000).
5. Dominici F, Daniels M, Zeger SL, Samet JM. Air pollutionand mortality: estimating regional and national doseresponse relationships. J Am Stat Assoc 97:100–111 (2002).
6. Samet JM, Zeger SL, Berhane K. Particulate air pollution and daily mortality: replication and validation of selected studies. The Phase I Report of the Particle Epidemiology Evaluation Project. Cambridge, MA:Health Effects Institute, 1995.
7. Brauer M, Brumm J, Vedal S, Petkau AJ. Exposure misclassification and threshold concentrations in time series analyses of air pollution health effects. Risk Anal 22:1183–1193 (2002). 8. Brook J, Dann T, Burnett R. The relationship among TSP, PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and inorganic constituents of atmospheric particulate matter at multiple Canadian locations. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 47:2–19 (1997).
9. Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ. Generalized Additive Models. London:Chapman and Hall, 1990. 10. Dominici F, McDermott A, Zeger SL, Samet JM. On the use of generalized additive models in time-series studies of air pollution and health. Am J Epidemiol 156:193–203 (2002). 11. Ramsay T, Burnett R, Krewski D. The effect of concurvityin generalized additive models linking mortality and ambient air pollution. Epidemiology (in press).
12. Mar TF, Norris GA, Koenig JQ, Larson TV. Associations between air pollution and mortality in Phoenix, 1995–1997. Environ Health Perspect 108:347–353 (2000).
13. Burnett RT, Cakmak S, Raizenne ME, Stieb D, Vincent R,Krewski D, Brook JR, Philips O, Ozkaynak H. The association between ambient carbon monoxide levels and daily mortality in Toronto, Canada. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 48:689–700 (1998).
14. Burnett RT, Cakmak S, Brook JR. The effect of the urban ambient air pollution mix on daily mortality rates in 11 Canadian cities. Can J Public Health 89:152–156 (1998).
15. Moolgavkaar SH. Air pollution and mortality in three U.S. counties. Environ Health Perspect 108:777–784 (2000). 16. Touloumi G, Katsouyanni K, Zmirou D, Schwartz J, Spix C, Ponce deLeon A, Tobias A, Quennel P, Rabczenko D, Bacharova L, et al. Short-term effects of ambient oxidant exposure on mortality: combined analysis within the APHEA project. Am J Epidemiol 146:177–185 (1997).
17. Gong H, Wong R, Sarma RJ, Linn WS, Sullivan ED, Shamoo DA, Anderson KR, Prasad SB. Cardiovascular effects of ozone exposure in human volunteers. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 158:538–546 (1998). 18. Sarnat JA, Koutrakis P, Suh H. Assessing the relationship between personal particulate and gaseous exposures of senior citizens living in Baltimore, MD. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 50:1184–1198 (2000).
19. Samet JM, Dominici F, Curriero FC, Coursac I, Zeger SL. Fine particulate air pollution and mortality in 20 U.S. cities. N Engl J Med 343:1742–1749 (2000).20. Sarnat JA, Schwartz J, Suh HH. Fine particulate air pollution and mortality in 20 U.S. cities [Letter]. N Engl J Med 344:1253–1254 (2000).
21. Pope CA, Kalkstein LS. Synoptic weather modeling and estimates of the exposure-response relationship between daily mortality and particulate air pollution. Environ Health Perspect 104:414–420 (1996).
22. Rogot E, Padgett SJ. Associations of coronary and stroke mortality with temperature and snowfall in selected areas of the United States, 1962–1966. Am J Epidemiol 103:565–575 (1976).
23. Kunst AE, Looman CWN, Mackenbach JP. Outdoor airtemperature and mortality in the Netherlands: a timeseries analysis. Am J Epidemiol 137:331–341 (1993). 24. Chock DP, Winkler SL, Chen C. A study of the associationbetween daily mortality and ambient air pollutant concentrations in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 50:1481–1500 (2000). Articles • Low levels of air pollution and mortality

Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 111 | NUMBER 1 | January 2003 

### 51