Printable Page Headline News   Return to Menu - Page 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 13
 
 
Pollution Death Toll High              10/20 18:17

   Study: World Pollution Deadlier Than Wars, Disasters, Hunger

   Environmental pollutants are killing at least 9 million people and costing 
the world $4.6 trillion a year, a toll exceeding that of wars, smoking, hunger 
or natural disasters, says a new study. But the researchers who compiled the 
statistics say pollution receives scant attention from global policy makers.

   NEW DELHI (AP) -- Environmental pollution -- from filthy air to contaminated 
water -- is killing more people every year than all war and violence in the 
world. More than smoking, hunger or natural disasters. More than AIDS, 
tuberculosis and malaria combined.

   One out of every six premature deaths in the world in 2015 -- about 9 
million -- could be attributed to disease from toxic exposure, according to a 
major study released Thursday in The Lancet medical journal. The financial cost 
from pollution-related death, sickness and welfare is equally massive, the 
report says, costing some $4.6 trillion in annual losses -- or about 6.2 
percent of the global economy.

   "There's been a lot of study of pollution, but it's never received the 
resources or level of attention as, say, AIDS or climate change," said 
epidemiologist Philip Landrigan, dean of global health at the Icahn School of 
Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and the lead author on the report.

   The report marks the first attempt to pull together data on disease and 
death caused by all forms of pollution combined.

   "Pollution is a massive problem that people aren't seeing because they're 
looking at scattered bits of it," Landrigan said.

   Experts say the 9 million premature deaths the study found was just a 
partial estimate, and the number of people killed by pollution is undoubtedly 
higher and will be quantified once more research is done and new methods of 
assessing harmful impacts are developed.

   Areas like Sub-Saharan Africa have yet to even set up air pollution 
monitoring systems. Soil pollution has received scant attention. And there are 
still plenty of potential toxins still being ignored, with less than half of 
the 5,000 new chemicals widely dispersed throughout the environment since 1950 
having been tested for safety or toxicity.

   Asia and Africa are the regions putting the most people at risk, the study 
found, while India tops the list of individual countries.

   One out of every four premature deaths in India in 2015, or some 2.5 
million, was attributed to pollution, the study found. China's environment was 
the second deadliest, with more than 1.8 million premature deaths, or one in 
five, blamed on pollution-related illness.

   Several other countries such Bangladesh, Pakistan, North Korea, South Sudan 
and Haiti also see nearly a fifth of their premature deaths caused by pollution.

   To reach its figures, the study's authors used methods outlined by the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency for assessing field data from soil tests, as 
well as with air and water pollution data from the Global Burden of Disease, an 
ongoing study run by institutions including the World Health Organization and 
the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

   Even the conservative estimate of 9 million pollution-related deaths is 
one-and-a-half times higher than the number of people killed by smoking, three 
times the number killed by AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined, more than 
six times the number killed in road accidents, and 15 times the number killed 
in war or other forms of violence, according to GBD tallies.

   It is most often the world's poorest who suffer. The vast majority of 
pollution-related deaths -- 92 percent -- occur in low- or middle-income 
developing countries, where policy makers are chiefly concerned with developing 
their economies, lifting people out of poverty and building basic 
infrastructure, the study found. Environmental regulations in those countries 
tend to be weaker, and industries lean on outdated technologies and dirtier 
fuels.

   In wealthier countries where overall pollution is not as rampant, it is 
still the poorest communities that are more often exposed, the report says.

   "What people don't realize is that pollution does damage to economies. 
People who are sick or dead cannot contribute to the economy. They need to be 
looked after," said Richard Fuller, head of the global toxic watchdog Pure 
Earth and one of the 47 scientists, policy makers and public health experts who 
contributed to the 51-page report.

   "There is this myth that finance ministers still live by, that you have to 
let industry pollute or else you won't develop, he said. "It just isn't true."

   The report cites EPA research showing that the U.S. has gained some $30 in 
benefits for every dollar spent on controlling air pollution since 1970, when 
Congress enacted the Clean Air Act, one of the world's most ambitious 
environmental laws. Removing lead from gasoline has earned the U.S. economy 
another $6 trillion cumulatively since 1980, according to studies by the U.S. 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

   Some experts cautioned, however, that the report's economic message was 
murky. Reducing the pollution quantified in the report might impact production, 
and so would not likely translate into gains equal to the $4.6 trillion in 
economic losses.

   The report "highlights the social and economic justice of this issue," said 
Marc Jeuland, associate professor with the Sanford School of Public Policy and 
the Duke Global Health Institute at Duke University, who was not involved in 
the study.

   Without more concrete evidence for how specific policies might lead to 
economic gains, "policy makers will often find it difficult to take action, and 
this report thus only goes part way in making the case for action," he said.

   Jeuland also noted that, while the report counts mortality by each 
pollutant, there are possible overlaps -- for example, someone exposed to both 
air pollution and water contamination -- and actions to address one pollutant 
may not reduce mortality.

   "People should be careful not to extrapolate from the U.S. numbers on net 
(economic) benefits, because the net effects of pollution control will not be 
equivalent across locations," he said.

   The study's conclusions on the economic cost of pollution measure lost 
productivity and health care costs, while also considering studies measuring 
people's "willingness to pay" to reduce the probability of dying. While these 
types of studies yield estimates at best, they are used by many governments and 
economists trying to understand how societies value individual lives.

   While there has never been an international declaration on pollution, the 
topic is gaining traction.

   The World Bank in April declared that reducing pollution, in all forms, 
would now be a global priority. And in December, the United Nations will host 
its first-ever conference on the topic of pollution.

   "The relationship between pollution and poverty is very clear," said Ernesto 
Sanchez-Triana, lead environmental specialist at the World Bank. "And 
controlling pollution would help us address many other problems, from climate 
change to malnutrition. The linkages can't be ignored."


(ES)

 
Copyright DTN. All rights reserved. Disclaimer.
Powered By DTN