More than a hundred of the lungs specialists doubt the health Benefits of the current limit values for fine dust and nitrogen oxides (NOx). You can see there is currently no scientific rationale to justify the limits, as it is said on Wednesday, in a published opinion.
So many studies to show hazards due to air pollution would have significant weaknesses. In addition, data had been in the past, one-sided interpretation. The lung experts therefore demand that the relevant investigations be re-evaluated. First of all, the North German radio and the “world report” about the topic.
Pulmonary medicine Dieter Köhler, former President of the German society for pneumology, and one of four authors of the opinion, to comply with the limits laid down by EU regulation, for “completely nonsensical”. “If you compare the exposure that is exposed to a cigarette smoker, with the alleged pollution caused by fine dust, would actually drop every smoker within a few weeks dead,” said Koehler of the “world”.
The experts, including against a position paper of the German society for pneumology and respiratory medicine (DGP), which had been published by the end of 2018. It stated: “studies show that fine particulate pollution by agriculture, industry and transport is harmful to health.” In addition, regulations and incentives for pollution avoidance are required.
daily mirror tomorrow location
Free
order Now it is said on the part of the DGP, the current opinion will be considered “as the impetus for the necessary research activities and critical Review of the impact of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter”.
More about
air pollution study: More deaths due to fine dust than previously thought
Federal transport Minister Andreas Scheuer welcomed the Initiative of the Doctors. “The scientific approach has the weight to overcome the approach of Forbidding, Restricting, and Verärgerns,” said the CSU politician of the Newspapers of the Funke media group. The Initiative of the 107 lung doctors is an important and overdue step. He’ll give you a hand, “to bring objectivity and facts into the Diesel debate”. (dpa/Reuters/DPA)
