Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2001-0017-0989
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2006-03-23T05:00Z

Comments
for
EPA
hearing
on
Particulate
Pollution
Harold
J.
Farber,
MD,
FAAP,
FCCP
Pediatric
Pulmonology
Vallejo,
CA
Author
of
the
book
Control
Your
Child's
Asthma
As
a
Pediatric
Pulmonologist
I
see
the
effects
of
air
pollution
on
children's
health!


Cystic
Fibrosis
is
the
most
common
inherited
lung
disease.


A
10
µ
g/
m3
risk
in
PM2.5
lead
to:

a
21%
increase
in
risk
for
2
or
more
pulmonary
exacerbations
needing
IV
antibiotics.

Decreased
lung
function
(
a
mean
155
ml
loss
of
FEV1).

Goss
CH
et
al,
Am
J
Respir
Crit
Care
Med
2004;
169:
816
As
a
Pediatric
Pulmonologist
I
see
the
effects
of
air
pollution
on
children's
health!


Particulate
pollution
increases
asthma
hospitalizations
 
especially
among
preschool
children!

In
the
Utah
Valley
one
steel
mill
is
the
major
source
of
particulate
pollution

When
it
was
shut
down,
respiratory
illness
hospitalizations
in
preschool
children
DECREASED
by
half.
The
rates
doubled
when
the
mill
went
back
into
operation.

Similar
changes
were
not
seen
in
neighboring
communities.

Pope
CA.
Arch
Environ
Health.
1991
Mar­
Apr;
46(
2):
90­
7.
Many
other
studies
have
similar
findings.

Wordley
J,
Walters
S,
Ayres
JG.
Related
Articles,
Links
Short
term
variations
in
hospital
admissions
and
mortality
and
particulate
air
pollution.

Occup
Environ
Med.
1997
Feb;
54(
2):
108­
16.

Petroeschevsky
A,
Simpson
RW,
Thalib
L,
Rutherford
S.
Related
Articles,
Links
Associations
between
outdoor
air
pollution
and
hospital
admissions
in
Brisbane,

Australia.

Arch
Environ
Health.
2001
Jan­
Feb;
56(
1):
37­
52.

McGowan
JA,
Hider
RN,
Chacko
E,
Town
GI.
Related
Articles,
Links
Particulate
air
pollution
and
hospital
admissions
in
Christchurch,
New
Zealand.

Aust
N
Z
J
Public
Health.
2002
Feb;
26(
1):
23­
9.

Schwartz
J.
Related
Articles,
Links
Air
pollution
and
hospital
admissions
for
respiratory
disease.
Epidemiology.
1996
Jan;
7(
1):
20­
8.

Braga
AL,
Saldiva
PH,
Pereira
LA,
Menezes
JJ,
Conceicao
GM,
Lin
CA,

Zanobetti
A,
Schwartz
J,
Dockery
DW.
Related
Articles,
Links
Health
effects
of
air
pollution
exposure
on
children
and
adolescents
in
Sao
Paulo,
Brazil.
Pediatr
Pulmonol.
2001
Feb;
31(
2):
106­
13.

Wong
TW,
Lau
TS,
Yu
TS,
Neller
A,
Wong
SL,
Tam
W,
Pang
SW.
Related
Articles,
Links
Air
pollution
and
hospital
admissions
for
respiratory
and
cardiovascular
diseases
in
Hong
Kong.
Occup
Environ
Med.
1999
Oct;
56(
10):
679­
83.
The
Science
is
Clear

Fine
particulate
pollution
is
the
nation's
DEADLIEST
air
pollutant.

Fine
particulates
can
lodge
deep
in
the
lungs,
enter
the
blood
stream,
and
cause
severe
problems
for
the
lungs,
heart,
and
circulation.

The
most
vulnerable
among
us
are
most
at
risk

The
very
young

The
very
old

Those
of
us
with
chronic
illness
The
Science
is
Clear

More
than
2000
peer
reviewed
scientific
research
articles
confirm
the
relation
between
particulate
pollution
and
health
problems
 

and
at
levels
well
below
current
air
quality
standards.


Current
air
quality
standards
for
particulate
pollution
DO
NOT
sufficiently
protect
the
public
health.
The
Science
is
Clear
Fine
particulate
air
pollution
causes:

Asthma
flare
ups

Lung
cancer

Heart
attacks

Strokes

Premature
Death

Infant
mortality

Reduced
lung
growth
A
mining
and
agricultural
exception
from
air
pollution
standards
makes
no
sense.

California's
Central
Valley
 
has
high
levels
of
air
pollution
AND
the
highest
level
of
childhood
asthma
in
the
state.

Agriculture
is
the
major
industry

Crop
burning
triggers
asthma.

Diesel
smoke
both
causes
and
triggers
asthma.

Particulate
pollution
created
by
agricultural
activities
harms
children's
breathing.

There
are
cost
effective
methods
to
reduce
this
pollution.
The
EPA
is
taking
a
"
head
in
the
sand"

approach
to
public
health

The
Clean
Air
Scientific
Advisory
Committee
(
CASAC)
concluded
that
standards
for
fine
particulate
pollution
need
to
be
substantially
strengthened.
This
conclusion
is
based
on
well
established,
solid
science.

EPA
Rejection
of
the
CASAC
recommendations
is
unprecedented.

The
determination
that
children
who
live
in
agriculture
and
mining
communities
should
tolerate
higher
pollution
levels
is
outrageous!
"
This
is
a
head
in
the
sand
approach
by
the
administration's
top
leaders
on
a
critical
public
health
issue.

Instead
of
facing
the
facts,
Bush
appointees
have
adopted
weak
rules
that
neglect
a
dangerous
source
of
disease"
Conclusions:

The
EPA
should
follow
the
recommendations
of
the
CASAC,
ALA,
ATS,
AAP,
and
many
other
respected
medical
and
scientific
leaders
and:

Adopt
an
annual
standard
for
fine
particulate
pollution
no
higher
than
12
µ
g/
m3

Adopt
a
daily
standard
no
higher
than
25
µ
g/
m3

A
strong
coarse
particle
standard
and
monitoring
requirement
that
protects
ALL
Americans
 
urban
and
rural.

Adoption
of
these
standards
is
important
for
the
life
and
health
of
hundreds
of
thousands
of
Americans.