Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Diesel fumes cause cancer, says WHO

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Diesel fumes cause cancer, says WHO


www.guardian.co.uk

Diesel exhaust causes cancer, the World Health Organisation has declared, a ruling it said could make exhaust as important a public health threat as passive smoke.

The risk of getting cancer from diesel fumes is small, but since so many people breathe in the fumes in some way, the WHO's science panel said raising the status of diesel exhaust to carcinogen from "probable carcinogen" was an important shift.

"It's on the same order of magnitude as passive smoking," said Kurt Straif, director of the IARC department that evaluates cancer risks, on Tuesday. "This could be another big pu
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   
so the story is not that diesel fumes are now any more dangerous than they ever were, but that someone has decided that so many people are exposed to them that the "small chance" means that the absolute number is high enough to worry about.


But Donaldson said lung cancer was caused by multiple factors and that other things like smoking were far more deadly. He said the people most at risk were those whose jobs exposed them to high levels of diesel exhaust, like truck drivers, mechanics, or miners.

"For the man on the street, nothing has changed," he said. "It's a known risk but a low one for the average person, so people should go about their business as normal ... you could wear a mask if you want to, but who wants to walk around all the time with a mask on?"


Some questions -

1/ This is the WHO reporting through the MSM - can it be trusted in the first place??

2/ What are the downstream effects likely to be?? Who is really going to benefit from this?

3/ The US has not changed its classification in line with the WHO change - it still lists diesel fumes as a "likely carcinogen" rather than probable - what is the significance of that?

4/ What about other chemical exhaust products such as petrol??? there's plenty of carcinogens in petrol too!

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 12-6-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Doesn't basically everything give you cancer nowadays?
I see this as basically another one on the list.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
This is going to cost people a LOT of money.

The insurance company actuarial tables will be changed, city living will be considered more 'high-risk' and health care will adjust it's respiratory-related illness income by 50%. (just wildly guessing there) People who work in the transportation industry will use every means to validate that the illnesses common to them are due to this 'hitherto undeclared' health hazard.... there will be consequences...

Now; having engaged in that little bluster of supposition consider this: The World Health Organization has no NEW data upon which to declare this as a 'recent' threat... they know full well that this will spawn litigation...

So what are they up to?

As far as the media's part in this... meh... they just print what they are told.

Let's see if this "news" sinks to the bottom... or becomes a new battle cry for social unrest.... especially in the mega-metropolises of the world in say..., China, the US, Europe, and every other heavily industrialized nation....



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Falls right in line with Agenda 21 and the Carbon Tax garbage doesn't it?



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
ya and if u wrap a plastic bag around your head and Diesel fumes cause death too !
THE WHO spent how much?
all they needed too do was ask,, a mechanic,,
Diesel fumes
Gas fumes
all toxic ,,yup,,and every mechanic has cancer,,,
cause u made a study,,,??? are they all nuts????

i want my money back as a contributing tax payer from CANADA.
who,,,there all nuts.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
So is this the reason diesel trucks and buses in Pennsylvania don't have to be emission tested? Cars are cleaner burning and more efficient than ever, and they keep lowering the baseline for the emissions.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Falls right in line with Agenda 21 and the Carbon Tax garbage doesn't it?


no.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Ive always thought since i was a wee lad, that all those fumes coming out of trucks has to be super bad for health and environment.

Its just common sense. Glad to see that as a kid, i was right



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jetman44
So is this the reason diesel trucks and buses in Pennsylvania don't have to be emission tested? Cars are cleaner burning and more efficient than ever, and they keep lowering the baseline for the emissions.


According to teh article diesels are also cleaner burning and more efficient than ever too.

but that doesn't stop the fumes that do get generated from being able to cause cancer.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
It's about bloody time!!!

I've been waiting years for someone in the media to actually print the truth about the crap that comes out from exhausts, whether it's diesel or petrol.

"It's on the same order of magnitude as passive smoking," said Kurt Straif, director of the IARC department that evaluates cancer risks..." Bull!!! It far outweighs passive smoking.

What I've always said is " you'll get more crap on your lungs, standing at a bus stop for 10 minutes, than you will standing next to a smoker."
Stand in an enclosed space with a smoker and you'll stink of smoke, you may well get a bad cough but you won't die - stand in an enclosed space with a car running and you'll be dead within, what? half an hour? It's a flickin' no brainer!!!

Did people really think that long-term, every day of your lives exposure to vehicle fumes didn't cause fatal illness?

Look at it this way - in the UK there are apparently less people smoking than ever BUT childhood asthma rates have doubled and lung cancer rates have been increasing, yet they still blame smoking for those illnesses.
There's one thing that's been on the increase for the last 20-30 years and doesn't seem as if it's ever going to decrease and that's vehicles on the road.

Re: childhood asthma rates increasing - doesn't anyone see the connection between car exhausts and push-chairs? Think of the old-style prams that were well above pavement level and then look at modern push-chairs - riding low on the ground, with the poor kiddie at eye level with car exhaust pipes!! No wonder there's so many kids with so-called Attention Deficit disorders, autism, leukemia, cancer...!!!!

What about Alzheimers? It used to be called the old-timers disease but it's on the increase in ever younger people.

Governments over the years, hand-in-hand with oil companies, have always known the disastrous effects of traffic fumes and the miniscule particles that are pumped out with them.

They may well use it as an excuse to hike up taxes - but they've just held back on letting the truth out until they've made sure that 99% of the population has got to the point where they can't and won't do without cars.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by aBeneGesserit
 


"It's on the same order of magnitude as passive smoking," said Kurt Straif, director of the IARC department that evaluates cancer risks..." Bull!!! It far outweighs passive smoking.
he meant as a far too passive a building up off the human immune system,,
from todays increased,, radiationization of the world wide nation.
sorry,,
but ya,, smoking is bad,,, just like drinking,,, only the strong survive.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Breathing in and out is bad for you what next
I can't hold my breath for ever
The WHO has spent a ton of cash on this when everyone knows that
inhaleing toxic fumes is bad for you




,, smoking is bad,,, just like drinking,,,


Yet i have learned to multitask and even use a computer at the same time
And drive but with coffee as a drink

Cran



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by BobAthome
 

I do see/hear what you mean - but I honestly believe that the short-term and long-term effects of traffic fumes and particles, is 10, 100, 1000 times worse than passive smoking. Plus you can always walk away from a smoker, you can't get away from traffic fumes that easily, if at all.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by aBeneGesserit
 


Yes, the article is kind of like a "no duh" moment!


However, it depends on where you live, I suppose.

I'm in the US, and very few cars are on diesel now. It's mostly transport semi-trucks here, I don't know, actually I have a hard time remembering diesel autos in the US.

It is much worse when I travel overseas, and especially to certain countries.

I can definitely smell and choke on the fumes, and at times. perhaps dizzy enough from them, see them.


You are so right that it is so much worse than cigarette passive smoking!



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   
I think I just lost a K point (kharma?) in the bio section. Is that because I swore?

Or am I so full of traffic fume poison that I only imagined I had 9 before my first reply?

Apologies for the swearing - cars just get me so riled up.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Ooh thankyou. I'm 9 again. Glad to know I'm not totally loop de loop yet.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
whenever somebody pulls a face at my smoking, i remind them of my 'acid test' for it's lethality, when compared with the love of our lives, the automobile.

- subjects (A) and (B) are locked in identical garages (with windows shut), seated in identical automobiles.
- subject (A) starts the engine, subject (B) starts chain-smoking.
- subject (A) dies while subject (B) just smokes him/herself sick. but feels better later.
- yet i see no demonisation of drivers, but endless attacks on smokers.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


From personal experience I remember working at Peach Bottom Nuclear Power Plant in Southern PA when one day we were taking scaffolding pipes/knuckles and plank out of the containment building for work. We had an HP there scanning each piece as it left the building to make sure that it was not contaminated. It was a beautiful day when one of the emergency diesel generators was started. These engines are 12 cylinder inline about 25 feet long. You need to pre-heat the fuel but sometimes they don't do it long enough and when it stared there was the thick black cloud of smoke came down around us. The Geiger counter went wild and jumped to about 80-100 MHR. I believe that the exhaust has alpha particles in it. This would not be an issue if it were not for internal contamination.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
It's on the same magnitude as cig smoking? If you suck on a tail pipe you die.....so when are they going to persecute the drivers like they do to the smokers.....I bet the volume of vehicle exhaust is much higher than cig smoke...but they can keep driving?

How about no driving in public areas, or near schools or parks and everywhere else where you can't smoke either?






top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join