F
- Status
T
Theo520
Guest
More biased research to push an agenda.
From my quick read, half the premature deaths were tallied in China and India, so it’s really a regional issue not a global endemic.
We’ve already got the tech to clean up the pollution, the west has used it for many decades. India and China just lack the will to implement.
From my quick read, half the premature deaths were tallied in China and India, so it’s really a regional issue not a global endemic.
We’ve already got the tech to clean up the pollution, the west has used it for many decades. India and China just lack the will to implement.
Last edited:
T
Theo520
Guest
Wow, people in these countries are living much longer, in spite of the pollution.
I guess the benefits from whatever they are producing is far outweighing the effects of the pollution.
Life Expectancy at Birth in China, Europe, USA and India: 1950-2050 (Both Sexes)
I guess the benefits from whatever they are producing is far outweighing the effects of the pollution.
Life Expectancy at Birth in China, Europe, USA and India: 1950-2050 (Both Sexes)
R
RandomAlias
Guest
I thought the article was pretty good.
Do you dispute their claim that pollution worldwide is deadlier than war, disaster, hunger?
Have you discovered any factual errors in the article?
Do you question the researchers’ credentials or medical expertise?
What do you think their agenda is?
What is your agenda? To defend the status quo?
Last edited:
T
Theo520
Guest
@RandomAlias
Perhaps you could start by responding to the specific points I made.
Engage, not deflect
Perhaps you could start by responding to the specific points I made.
Engage, not deflect
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
“It is just a regional issue” is an appropriate response when some small region is experiencing a problem unique to their region. But the China and India, where you say half the premature deaths were tallied, comprise 35% of the world’s population. The fact that 50% of the deaths are among 35% of the world’s population is not that much of a distinction.
Also, it is disingenuous to blame their failures on the “lack of will.” Sure, the technology exists to clear up and prevent pollution. But the utilization of that technology takes more than a mere will to use it. It takes resources. And somehow, a disproportionate share of the world’s resources seem to be ending up serving the needs of the more developed world. So blaming others for not having resources when we are taking more than our share of them is not quite right.
Also, your next post tries to discount the problem by pointing out that even the underdeveloped countries have longer life expectancy now. That is a deflection (speaking of deflections).
Last edited:
T
Theo520
Guest
Thanks for not ignoring my points stated!
- I think my point is valid. Even continents can be deemed ‘regions’ on the global scale and the authors should have highlighted the much more serious issue they calculated in China and India, these two countries significantly boost the global average numbers in the article. That the rates are driven by China and India was buried in the detail of the article.
- Please watch your words, I never said they were “failures”, that was all you. I think India and China are developmentally appropriate. However they do at present lack the will to implement many basic pollution controls. For example, China builds all their new coal plants with NOX scrubbers, but the managers often turn them off. The utility agreement actually gives them higher pricing to cover the cost, but their lack of will (enforcement?) means the managers can further boost profits by quietly turning off the NOX equipment. China and India don’t need our subsidies (that’s what you want, right?) to start implementing basic air quality standards. It is just a matter of collective will power. Their citizens need to see the numbers and realize they can stop the self harm with little extra cost. But at the end of the day, it’s more their decision than yours or mine.
- Why shouldn’t an analysis of premature death look at longevity? My point is very apropos to the topic. We are all living longer, perhaps because of the things that do produce some pollution.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
They did. As you said, it is in the details of the article. You are complaining then that this regional imbalance should have been incorporated into the headline? People should not draw firm conclusions from reading just the headline, which can only be so long.
That is disturbing, I admit. But even something as simple as enforcement takes some additional resources.
No. I just want people to stop blaming them for their weak wills.
Perhaps, or perhaps not. Perhaps we are just smarter now. The subject is variations of longevity as a function of cause. You brought up variations in longevity as a function of time and technological progress. Although your observations were correct, they do not apply to the subject of the thread, which was the relative contributions of war, etc. compared to pollution.
T
Theo520
Guest
ROFL, when it’s buried in the detail of the article then by definition, IT’S NOT HIGHLIGHTED.
To do that, you put it in the title or at least your first paragraph.
So what exactly are you saying should be done? The article comes across more as blaming the west, when we don’t seem to have a problem.
Not really any ‘perhaps’ about it.
Very very few people in the developed world die by disaster and hunger, largely due to benefits from our industrialization. Death from war has also been virtually eliminated as a national contributor to early death.
In China and India, they had real issues with death from hunger. Their industrialization has been the prime factor in extending their life spans. The article didn’t seem to show death from pollution is getting worse, just that we’ve been highly effective in mitigating the old killers.
I’d also wager that death by pollution has also dropped. Old fire based heating and cooking methods are big direct and indirect killers.
Last edited:
F
frobert
Guest
The reason that China has so much pollution is that the US and most western countries have exported their factories and waste to China.
I hope you are right that the tech is available to clean up the pollution because we will soon to need it to clean up the rubbish that we have been sending to China.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/11/news/china-scrap-ban-us-recycling/index.html
If you believe China doesn’t have the will or the tech to fight pollution then you shouldn’t read following.
Last edited:
F
frobert
Guest
You need to get an updated graft.
In spite of all its tech and expensive health care the US is a laggard when compared to other developed nations.
T
Theo520
Guest
I think your examples are prooftexting a bit. The US is equivalent to the combined EU (let’s focus on current expectations, not what we think it might be for babies born in 20+ yrs).
If you drill down in the US, we have states that exceed the EU average and some that fare badly. Our states are largely equivalent to most EU countries in size
Yes, there are things we can do to increase our life expectancy, most are related to diet not pollution.
Last edited:
F
frobert
Guest
You are the one who made the point that tech was the answer but when I compared the US to nations who have equal tech you don’t think it is valid. Cherry-picking are we?frobert:
I think your examples are prooftexting a bit. The US is equivalent to the combined EU where we are 4 yrs shorter (let’s focus on current expectations, not what we think it might be for babies born in 20+ yrs)
If you drill down in the US, we have states that exceed the EU average and some that fare badly. Our states are largely equivalent to most EU countries
List of U.S. states and territories by life expectancy - Wikipedia
Yes, there are things we can do to increase our life expectancy, most are related to diet not pollution.
BTW, are you ignoring the fact that China is the world’s factory and up until Sept they have been recycled a large portion of the world’s waste.
Edit: The chart you included in your post was updated on 18 December 2011.
Last edited:
F
frobert
Guest
T
Theo520
Guest
LOL, the topic of the thread is pollution and I was right to explain that adopting basic pollution mitigation tech long used in the ‘west’ would have a huge impact in places like India and China. Our normal pollution controls won’t solve everything but it will improve their air and water quality.
China and India are more like the US in the 60’s. Once they start to care about pollution, they can reduce it dramatically (like we did in the 70’s)
Last edited:
T
Theo520
Guest
More material that’s a sad excuse for public funded research.
I’ve read up on this before and the premature deaths are virtually all attributed to people with severe lung conditions, severe allergies, etc, not the common man. Normal dust and spring pollen also causes premature death with these people. What they need are HEPA air filters in their hospital rooms, so they can live another week, or year longer.
F
frobert
Guest
I don’t recall saying tech isn’t helpful but you have not supported that tech will clean up the mess we made and continue to make. Hint: it won’t. The point I made was that even with all its tech the US is a laggard,frobert:
LOL, the topic of the thread is pollution and I was right to explain that adopting basic pollution mitigation tech long used in the ‘west’ would have a huge impact in places like India and China. Our normal pollution controls won’t solve everything but it will improve their air and water quality.
China and India are more like the US in the 60’s. Once they start to care about pollution, they can reduce it dramatically (like we did in the 70’s)
If you did some research on China you would likely be surprised on how much tech they have.
F
frobert
Guest
And what do you think causes and/or makes severe lung conditions, allergies, etc, worse? Don’t just read sources that lie to you.frobert:
More material that’s a sad excuse for public funded research.
I’ve read up on this before and the premature deaths are virtually all attributed to people with severe lung conditions, severe allergies, etc, not the common man. Normal dust and spring pollen also causes premature death with these people. What they need are HEPA air filters in their hospital rooms, so they can live another week, or year longer.
T
Theo520
Guest
I did support what I said with an example, from CHINA. Google it if you want corroboration.
I’ve lived in China so I have a good idea of what they do and don’t do. Their basic air and water pollution levels would drop dramatically with a uniform implementation of tech that is well developed in the West.
If there are problems with US longevity, it’s not caused by general pollution level. It seems we continue to make positive progress on air pollution.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Perhaps we ought to make some distinctions here.
First of all, the “life expectancy at birth” chart in your post # 10 is a projection 22 years from now. Nobody really know what it will be 22 years from now.
Second, “longevity” is a statistical thing. The older a population is, the longer is its longevity on average. That’s because a person who is, for example, now 70 years old has excaped all the hazards of the first 70 years of life.
Also, if China is accepting all kinds of waste from the U.S. for recycling, and if that recycling is polluting, then that, in itself, shows an attitude of low concern about pollution and it’s reasonable to believe the attitude also affects what it does in its non-recycling endeavors.
First of all, the “life expectancy at birth” chart in your post # 10 is a projection 22 years from now. Nobody really know what it will be 22 years from now.
Second, “longevity” is a statistical thing. The older a population is, the longer is its longevity on average. That’s because a person who is, for example, now 70 years old has excaped all the hazards of the first 70 years of life.
Also, if China is accepting all kinds of waste from the U.S. for recycling, and if that recycling is polluting, then that, in itself, shows an attitude of low concern about pollution and it’s reasonable to believe the attitude also affects what it does in its non-recycling endeavors.
- Status