4 ms·

1-29 days is… vague. However, the study also does not seem to consider the much, much tighter particulate emission rules that new wood stoves and similar have h

1-29 days is… vague. However, the study also does not seem to consider the much, much tighter particulate emission rules that new wood stoves and similar have had to follow. The EPA has tightened it every few years (I think the last one was 2015?) An old wood stove is almost nothing (and I literally mean almost nothing) to a modern wood stove in efficiency or air cleanliness. It would almost be like if you did a study about the toxicity of cars but used data from when we had leaded gas. There’s still a toxicity there but your results are going to be a mess.

happytiger 3y ago
It’s a study in correlation, presuming causation. Research on whether dual burning stoves that reprocess their own exhaust and don’t leak like old ones (the ones you’re referring to) or other systems could be done, but this is baseline research. You can use the same logic to attack the choice of fuels, or species of wood, or types of seals and whether air is taken from the inside or the outside of the structure, and all of it would also be as valid as your argument. You could also try to invalidate this for only focusing on women. But, while valid arguments (as is yours), it sidesteps the purpose of the study. It’s simply not the hypothesis of this particular study, which was simply establish a correlation between the presence & use of wood burning fuel in fire burning devices and lung cancer incidence in women. Don’t throw out the bathwater with the babe.
fzeroracer 3y ago
It's still an important investigation because unfortunately things are never idiot proof. For example, my parents have a pellet stove and it was not uncommon for it to occasionally leak, followed by my parents putting in a shoddy self-made fix. These kind of studies could indicate some flaw in the way we're creating wood stoves, or some consumer-related failure that needs to be better worked around. Or it could be that consumers are just using older wood stoves. But you gotta start with a baseline.

happytiger 3y ago

It’s a study in correlation, presuming causation. Research on whether dual burning stoves that reprocess their own exhaust and don’t leak like old ones (the ones you’re referring to) or other systems could be done, but this is baseline research. You can use the same logic to attack the choice of fuels, or species of wood, or types of seals and whether air is taken from the inside or the outside of the structure, and all of it would also be as valid as your argument. You could also try to invalidate this for only focusing on women. But, while valid arguments (as is yours), it sidesteps the purpose of the study. It’s simply not the hypothesis of this particular study, which was simply establish a correlation between the presence & use of wood burning fuel in fire burning devices and lung cancer incidence in women. Don’t throw out the bathwater with the babe.

fzeroracer 3y ago

It's still an important investigation because unfortunately things are never idiot proof. For example, my parents have a pellet stove and it was not uncommon for it to occasionally leak, followed by my parents putting in a shoddy self-made fix. These kind of studies could indicate some flaw in the way we're creating wood stoves, or some consumer-related failure that needs to be better worked around. Or it could be that consumers are just using older wood stoves. But you gotta start with a baseline.