3 ms·
It's extrapolation based on the effects of that type of pollution and the amount of pollution. It's not wrong but it's not telling the whole truth either. Mor
by dsfyu404ed 8y ago
It's extrapolation based on the effects of that type of pollution and the amount of pollution.
It's not wrong but it's not telling the whole truth either. More rigorous metrics like YPLL would be better. A 20yo that drops dead is different from an elderly person that dies of lung issues a few years before cancer would have got them and more meaningful metrics attempt to capture this. "Deaths" is just a number and it doesn't tell you much. Age adjusted metrics don't make for bolt headlines or effective emotional appeals so it's understandable why nobody uses them.
- tomatotomato37 8y agoYeah, that's what really irks me about people making direct death comparisons over air pollution, especially when the QoL factor is excuse enough. Calculating the decrease in life expectancy of at-risk patients and then somehow suming them up is much more honest than implying the death of an elderly lung cancer patient a month early is a life destroyed by pollution.
- hinkley 8y agoThis conversation is a lot less abstract if you know someone with COPD or severe asthma. The condition kills them but the pollution pulls the trigger.
- kevin_thibedeau 8y agoWe probably should have all the major execs sitting on death row for the deaths "caused" by leaded fuel belching out of cars with no emissions controls at all. In places where diesel isn't placed on a pedestal to suppress gasoline usage, air quality is far better than it was 40 years ago.
- jononor 8y agoFor those that did not know, YPLL=Years of Potential Life Lost. Commonly used when estimating pollution impacts.