3 ms·

Newsflash, living in a healthy environment is healthy!

• noelwelsh 2mo ago
  Pointless anti-intellectualism. There is a big difference between believing something is true, and demonstrating it is true and measuring the effect. One is a vibe. The other can drive policy.
  • wartywhoa23 2mo ago
    It's not pointless anti-intellectualism, it's pro-humanism. History holds enough examples of intellectuals who out of absolute lack of any human compassion subjected fellow human beings to anti-humane conditions, hoping to find and push the limits of their bodies and psyches in order to maximize profits, ahem, sorry, optimize spending. And those who you hope to be able to set "policies" on further cramming of people into the machine are either exactly those who profit off that, or eat crumbs from that table. Yet there are always heart/right hemisphere dead morons who need precise numbers and conclusions written in blood instead of simply relying on common sense.
  • dzhiurgis 2mo ago
    Found the government consultant!
• internet_points 2mo ago
  It was news to me that the lung damage from pollution isn't necessarily permanent in children, if a change in environment happens early enough. Up until reading this, I was under the impression it would be. We had a lot of construction work in the neighborhood, our house covered in fine dust particles each day. My kid got asthma in the same period, keeps asking when she can stop taking the medicines, and I say "I don't know" thinking "probably never". But maybe now the construction work is over, there is hope? (And if construction starts again, we know that it is better to move, because there is hope.)
• TheOtherHobbes 2mo ago
  Of course, but governments and corporations have consistently argued otherwise. In the UK's far-right media culture, Khan's ULEZ is painted as fringe extremism, not as a common sense public health measure.