Diesel fumes cause cancer, says WHO

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


This isnt really new news to most of us who just happen to know this without going about doing tests!!

We are lab rats on this planet for tptb.... most of them dont care about our health!!

If i told you that body sprays can also cause cancers, would you be surprised?

reply to post by aBeneGesserit

Thankyou, I totally agree with you too and will also say that you must've been visiting my area in central England.

I live by a really, really busy crossroads/junction and although I'm well aware that there's cars continually sat at the traffic lights, it wasn't until I paid a rare visit to a nearby park that I realised just how bad it is.
The park is quite big, has a couple of little lakes, and a lot of trees. I spent 2 to 3 hours there and as I was walking towards home and I got closer to the junction I had to cross, I was hit by the smell and fumes of all the cars at the traffic lights and very nearly passed out. What shocked me most was the thought that I'm actually living and still breathing amongst it all.

I have been all over the UK in general, and greater population spots with traffic seem to carry this stench, I will admit!

The worse are the Middle Eastern large cities, why are they going diesel when there is abundance of the pure stuff there. Hmmm. Could it be that a certain "few" prefer to export for profits rather than making the shift to non-diesel vehicles. Yes, follow the money.

You might get a little of this diesel type fumagation in New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles across the pond over here. But I haven't experienced in cities like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, or most Pacific cities in quite the same way. IMO. I wonder why?

For certain, It is my testimony that vehicles that use diesel are toxic from the get-go. I care about the environment, but the non-diesel vehicles are not showing the Overt pollutants that are so easily detected among the diesel, again, IMO.

I have detested diesel for as long as I can remember.. big black clouds of smoke that stink beyond belief must durely have some form of problem associated with it..

I had a habbit of holding my breath everytime a stinking diesel bus/lorry/coach etc xame past me. Started doing that when I was about 10.. still do it ocasionally.

I am not surprised by this finding but am concerned as to why it has taken so long.
Obviously, the petro corps. have had some say in it along the way..

But just where do we go from here? They can't ban smoking in public places and not ban diesel dumes in public places. Surely, they have to do something really major in order to bring a balance.

IMO, diesel should be kicked off the forecourt.

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


I know body sprays cause cancer but it is a secondary effect most times. Deodorants block the action of the sweat glands but also block the tubes of the excretion points of the lymph nodes, trapping the toxic lymph fluid from exiting the body. Any chemical that plumps the cells to smooth the skin does a similar thing trapping toxins. Nobody seems to care, as long as they don't smell like sweat. Taking a shower with water and some safe cleaning methods doesn't hurt. We completely changed things in the last seventy years with little testing. Chemicals from before 1955 are exempt from testing unless proven that they directly cause disease.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
Well well everything we come in contact with seems to cause cancer,so we'll either die from it or we'll become immune(according to vaccine standards)or possibly become mutants.Either way we can't hide anymore,our air,food,water,medicines all poisoned.

reply to post by rickymouse


Thanks for the info...

I'm pretty sure Asthma is another illness bought on by these sprays and toxins we breathe...

reply to post by Extralien


Extralien,

Since 2006 Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel was mandated by the EPA here in the United States. That mandate means that sulfur shall not be greater than 500 ppm. The reduction of sulfur has greatly reduced emissions on diesel engines.

I don’t think diesel autos should be taken off the market place. Most if not all the durable goods we buy in stores are moved by diesel powered ships, rail, and transport trucks. Diesel has more torque and therefore more power than gasoline. Diesel powered vehicles also get greater fuel economy than a comparable gasoline engine of the same size. If gasoline engines were used to transport all the durable goods the higher cost of fuel will be passed down to the consumer.

I drive a 2000 VW Beetle TDI; the TDI signifies that it has a diesel engine. I bought the car in 2002 with 39,000 miles and now have 204,000 miles and still going. I get on the hwy 650 miles to a tank and 10,000 miles between oil changes. I can also burn 100% Bio-diesel with no modifications. However the new diesel engines have greater restrictions on the percentage of Bio-diesel use.

The diesel engines of today are nowhere in the same category of the diesel engines of the past. The technology of today has made them some of the cleanest power plants available for autos and trucks. In fact the 2012 VW Passat TDI clean diesel was voted the winner of the 2012 Earth, Wind & Power Car of the Year of the Most Earth Friendly Vehicle.

I believe that clean diesel technology is part of the solution to increasing fuel economy standards on autos and trucks. If you want to look at some good information on VW TDI cars, please take a look at www.tdiclub.com

Have a good day.

I am going with George Carlins theory.

Cancer is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time.

No one is safe.

reply to post by Extralien


Is there something wrong with me in that I have always liked the exhaust from the city buses. Ever since I was a kid I liked that smell. Its not my favorite or anything like that, I just like it. I also like the smell of gasoline. Again, not as a favorite fragrance but its nice.

reply to post by stanguilles7

Is "I've always said" better than peer-reviewed science these days?

Of course it isn't. That was just a short, space-saving, less rambling version of something along the lines of "when someone says this about passive smoking, then I've always said that about traffic fumes."

Sigh. You think the amount of exhaust you inhale from a care OUTSIDE is comparable to standing in a locked space?

I don't inhale exhaust from A car outside - I inhale exhausts from HUNDREDS of cars outside.

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

Who is saying it doesnt?

Just about every non-smoking car driver I've ever had a conversation with on the subject.

Originally posted by Extralien
I have detested diesel for as long as I can remember.. big black clouds of smoke that stink beyond belief must durely have some form of problem associated with it..

I had a habbit of holding my breath everytime a stinking diesel bus/lorry/coach etc xame past me. Started doing that when I was about 10.. still do it ocasionally.

I am not surprised by this finding but am concerned as to why it has taken so long.
Obviously, the petro corps. have had some say in it along the way..

But just where do we go from here? They can't ban smoking in public places and not ban diesel dumes in public places. Surely, they have to do something really major in order to bring a balance.

IMO, diesel should be kicked off the forecourt.

Even though the article clearly says that it is no more dangerous than regular petrol smoke?

reply to post by JB1234

This is interesting to read. The area under the M6 motorway around Junction 9 & 10 near Walsall, West Midlands has apparently the highest incidence of breast cancer practically anywhere in the world. That stretch of the motorway which is elevated above the surrounding area is correspondingly one of the busiest roads for traffic anywhere on the planet. The Manor Hospital at Walsall, which serves the populace around the area is a world leading treatment centre for breast cancer apparently. Been saying for years there had to be a connection, maybe WHO just backed this up a little.

Gordon Bennett's Socks!!!!! Well, that's cured my indecision about whether to move to Scotland.

I always knew, deep down, that there was a plus to having bee-sting boobs.

reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist


I have a hard time breathing in crowds where perfumes, aftershaves, and deodorants are being worn. Although I am not allergic to all of them I am allergic to at least half of them. My grandchildren have problems with them too. It gives some kids an unfair advantage in school when they are so abundant. It keeps some kids from being to think right because of low oxygen. It hits girls more than boys because young boys have a much higher tolerance to chemicals till age thirty. Maybe that's why women used to consistently seem less intelligent before. I think women's choices in perfumes are changing though because women want better jobs where creative thinking is desired. Women and men are just as smart but I think guys like perfume on women so the women are be dumbed down and can't challenge them. Sexist control at it's finest. The effects of these chemicals on people have been known for thousands of years.

Certain Pheromones can put people under the control of others. These cologns are very expensive, being used for many centuries by leaders all over the world. If you don't think that a cologne or perfume can control you, you are misguided. Somehow these fragrances suppress peoples ability to challenge you if you wear them. Either by causing weird brain activity or by lessening brain activity. Some of the elite have been using these for so long that they have no effect on them. Smoking cigarettes or a pipe makes it so you cannot smell these chemicals so they temporarily have no effect on you. It doesn't help you when you are in the fumes for a long time though. If the chemicals have no effect than they are forced to use Ad Hominem and other ways to control people.

If it's up there with passive smoking, we have nothing to worry about.

The facts about second hand smoke

Air pollution can cause cancer!??? Who would have thought?

[/sarcasm]

This should only be news to people who know nothing about the world around them.

I say we electrify everything we can and create ultra-clean synthetic fuel for what we cannot. Only 20% of my travel (120 km per day, 80 miles) uses petrol, the rest is electrified rail. Even though the electricity is generated mainly by coal, rail is extremely efficient and the coal is for the most part burned away from where people live.

That being said, internal combustion technology is getting better and has done so. Pretty much all pollution metrics in the west have gotten better over the past few decades. And better pollution control measures that should and will be implemented will improve on that.

reply to post by timetothink


reply to post by RoScoLaz

- yet i see no demonisation of drivers, but endless attacks on smokers.

Stop trying to excuse your addiction which is what smoking is. Nothing more. Driving however, is almost an essential to modern life. Not a pathetic addiction.

You can't tell the difference?


reply to post by plube

I know this was a bit crude(oil) but it is a simple comparison.....but the evidence does exist......

My mother has smoked all her life....and still going at 85.

My dad never smoked...but drove trucks all his life...died of cancer.....you do the maths.

I get the feeling you're trying to excuse smoking because air pollution causes cancer too. Which is a logical fallacy. And you have a sample size of two.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

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)

Please, allow me a second to mop the wee up...I literally wet myself with laughter...

What is the risk-breakdown (by percentage), of all known carcinogenic 'promoters'.

Plot the incidence and location...I posit a guess. There will be no place on habitable ground, anywhere on the globe that does not rate a plotting 'pin'. Furthermore, Most places will have clusters of similar 'promoters'. Furthermore, Some clusters will correlate with certain 'conditions'. Some 'promoter' clusters will revolve around the one thing we all do...and that is breathe...the quality of the air...smoking plays an infinitesimal part compared to the damage done by 'Industry', and it's leech cities, with cars and trucks to drive the smoking (and non-smoking) people...to deliver the cancer-causing food...the meat patties, made from beef as far as the eye can see...that expel the gases that're contributing to compromising the air quality...the stuff we all breathe...coincidentally, anyone can contract cancer...You just need to be in the places with the 'promoter' clusters...everywhere...

akushla

reply to post by karen61057


No, there's nothing wrong with you.
I think it is a body memory from when you were very young..
Perhaps you were pushed around in your pram/puschair and everywhere you whent you caught these smells and your body has just made an association with it..

reply to post by aBeneGesserit


Absolutely nothing wrong with bee-sting boobs.. Love 'em.. can't get enough of 'em.. I've always said and strongly believe that if there's more than a mouthful, it's a waste


reply to post by metal1992


That's kinda fair enough, but it's all those years before the date you've given that have added up to a lot of cases.
Even still, with todays modern engines, it's liet having a 'diet' drink insteadof the full bodied variety.. and even the diet stuff is not good for you due to the rubbish they put in it..

Yes, there will be less stuff coming out of the engines, but accumulated, it's still a lot..
When you've been in a smoke free environment and then someone lights one up, you notice the smell even more than before.

So it's got to be down to PPM's (parts per million) in the local area, how close people are to that location, wind strength etc etc. In a built up area, you could argue that the fumes are being blown around between the buildings and not getting the full dispersal they'd have if they were on a motorway..

So, location is just as important as the amount of fumes.

I used to work in a garage and we had extension pipes for diesel cars that had to be run in the garage. We didn't use the pipes so much for petrol cars unless it was in the winter and we had to close the doors.
I believe that a lot of garages these days have these pipes readily available for every car in the workshop.. Kinda makes you wish that had been done in all the years I was in that game..

But we live and learn.. and pay the price of others mess ups by the looks of things

Originally posted by timetothink
Someday when technology finds another way to fuel cars and we all find utopia...then they can start on smokers again...how's that?

Remember when they used to play the "carbon monoxide" card with cigarettes? They stopped that when people realized that walking around in a city was far worse!

A lot of VERY valid points being posted here on this topic, for and against what WHO has come up with.

Personally I do not trust WHO or their motives. If they or the government were actually that concerned, then rather than adding more tax, or banning diesel or whatever negative effect they are almost certainly about to unleash on us with this study as an excuse, all they really have to do is let diesel vehicles use corn oil or even old chip shop oil as fuel.Can work in a diesel engine without modification, is cheap and does not have the same environmental impacts, in fact if using old fryer oil, it saves the shops having to dispose of it in an environmentally friendly way.

The fact is, even if you cut your diesel with a percentage of cheap cooking oil, and you get caught, you get massive fines unless you have declared what you are doing to the government and pay them huge amounts of duty on the cooking oil because you are using it for fuel!!!...... there is you environmentally caring government for ya!

When I worked at a stupid factory many yonks ago, the early mornings were killers with the cold, and I'd stand behind the diesel forklifts and embrace the stinking stench of warmth...

I'm doomed..

Many morning I'd be trapped in the city and have to sit, inebriated and falling asleep, in the perth train station before they all went electric, and were diesel... in that enclosed tunnel that it was, the morning trains would suffocate you.

I should have cancer on my cancer by now, oh well guess it's ok to get obliterated on gutrot after all, the world did it to me, I've just accepted it, committed to it and the therapy is working so far as bad as I had expected.

But really, in all honesty, who ever would have expected that the emissions of a diesel engine, that uses a crude form of flammable liquid to function, could have caused cancer.

Next thing you know, they will be telling us that the sun gives us cancer, or sticking your head in a microwave oven with the safety trip removed, is a bad idea..

Those insane fools...