 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / February 2007healthiest city?
who need a good worker in New Mexico? Albuquerque > who need a good worker in New Mexico? Try Los Alamos. I hear they need someone who can remember where they put the classified document disks. >> who need a good worker in New Mexico? > > Try Los Alamos. I hear they need someone who can remember where they put > the classified document disks. I assume this is funny. This is what happens when we undercut our kids health. The city with the most particulate pollution as in frequency also has one of the lowest graduation rates. I honestly think employers should ask a question about where residents live, how much particulate pollution did you get , in order to determine health and brain fuction and predictability for illness. I think the policy makers who allowed this poison should be sued together with auto makers who had to know what happens when all these cars and coal plants get together in big populated areas > The city with the most particulate pollution as in frequency also > has one of the lowest graduation rates. While that maybe true it would be incorrect to extrapolate that to mean the pollution is the cause of low graduation rates. More likely the two are independently related to common causes inherent in the culture of such cities. > I think the policy makers who allowed this > poison should be sued together with auto makers who had to know what happens > when all these cars and coal plants get together in big populated areas Thats true but the blame isn't all the auto makers. The major problem is with the consumer. They are the ones who fund it and continue to do so by opting to purchase less clean vehicles. Changing consumer demand is where it has to start because thats where the funds are. High gas prices are a big incentive for consumers to conserve and purchase less polluting vehicles. Yet when gas prices climb people including so called enviromentalists and conservationists rant and rave. Why? Because they often purchase the very same high polluting vehicles as the population as a whole. >> The city with the most particulate pollution as in frequency also has one >> of the lowest graduation rates. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > are independently related to common causes inherent in the culture of such > cities. If you believe everything is connected, then I assume thats my way of saying the same thing. >> I think the policy makers who allowed this poison should be sued together >> with auto makers who had to know what happens when all these cars and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > opting to purchase less clean vehicles. Changing consumer demand is where > it has to start because thats where the funds are First off Govt has to lead by example. If there are tens of thousands effected just by breathing moderate amounts of this, including early death, whose responsibility is it to protect and tell kids who have asthma and no way to protect themselves or adults who get more cancers in places with more pollution? You can say its the responsibility of cigarette smokers to not smoke, but for so long they were marketed to by slick sales ads-. The dangers were not posted on ads till a certain date, if I remember. The people who are in the path of particulate pollution coupled with other pollutions like coal are often not warned at all! Literally if they don't have money they also can't get out of the way. If I buy a honda with great gas mileage I am still going to get 49 plus days of warning level air in spring and winter by virtue of my location. At some point govt has responsibility to protect people. I think we undercut and spite our own development by not doing more and promoting better air standards faster. If we could not do more that would be one thing, but many many experts said time and again, we can do more! . So what option is left then promoting someone to sue the people who leave no option for those effected. The last option is to move. Why don't they pay to move me and pay for all my meds where there is a gigantic chance I wouldn't have had to take in cleaner air.. thats the amazing part. If not for that polluted air that is allowed to continusoully be uncontrolled with rising particulate rates, if not for that, I would have a better life. If not for policy makers who allows it and the most amazing thing, is even the epa has some amazing way to measure the toxins, but can't do more to stop it? Whats the sense of having agencies in place to say for example, if you exercise in moderate pollution you might do more damage then if you didn't but not have it promoted in major news media? Or have a way for kids to exercise to avoid it? Its crazy simply crazy.if not for this poison I would not have suffered. and I know that to be as certain as I do, anything in this life. They are getting away with murder.slow murder, fast murder and with many its called cancer or heart disease. ... . High gas > prices are a big incentive for consumers to conserve and purchase less > polluting vehicles. Yet when gas prices climb people including so called > enviromentalists and conservationists rant and rave. Why? Because they > often purchase the very same high polluting vehicles as the population as > a whole. > First off Govt has to lead by example. Thats a very slow way to go about it. The average mpg laws are increased on a semi-annual basis. The problem is that the consumer doesn't fund it as fast as desired. Taking a pen and instantly signing a law saying all cars made next year need to get 50mpg or better isn't going to work. The fastest way to get it changed is to change the attitudes of the consumer because they are the ones with the money required for such changes in technology and not the government. > You can say its the responsibility of cigarette smokers to not > smoke, but for so long they were marketed to by slick sales ads-. The > dangers were not posted on ads till a certain date, if I remember. Warnings were put out in the 60's. New smokers continued to gain in numbers until the late 80's despite the warnings. You can't legislate stupidity. > At some point govt has > responsibility to protect people. I think we undercut and spite our own > development by not doing more and promoting better air standards faster. What exactly do you purpose? Government can educate people better but its the people who are the ones that have to make changes in their daily habits. There is no instant solution to solve the problem. It starts with people. > Why don't they pay to move me and pay for all my meds Who exactly should pay you? There isn't anyone individual or company that is responsible. > that, I would have a better life. Better health perhaps but maybe no car and no job. There is no instant solution. It will take time and the general consumer has to fund the changes. They are the only ones who can. > If not for policy makers who allows it and > the most amazing thing, is even the epa has some amazing way to measure the > toxins, but can't do more to stop it? By far most pollution in any major city is from cars. Pollution from individual cars has been steadily decreasing but the number of cars on the roads has risen. The city of Los Angeles used to be by far the worst polluting city in the country and 2nd only to Mexico City worldwide. Thats not so any longer. Much of the reason is because consumers were forced to by less polluting automobiles for the very very long commutes that have become the norm there. The solution was consumer driven albiet with some decent incentives issued by the city to conserve. The forces at work that are killing us slowly are out of our individual hands. It won't take *just* the government or *just* the consumers to change it, although if one changes it will lead to a change in the other. But it all has to change - everyones' thinking has to change. The movie Who Killed the Electric Car (which is awesome, go watch it!) is an excellent example of how this works. Low polluting electric cars were available in California until the automakers took them off the market and took measures to wipe them from public view, including a disturbing ad campaign with which to make people *not* want them. The government, the automakers, and the consumers are ALL to blame for the crushing of the electric car. However, a small proportion of educated consumers have been active in pursuing the car companies to make electric cars again, and Chevy just announced the Volt which will be coming out next year. Change will come, and air quality will improve, and it DOES start with consumers. But it also starts with the government. And the automakers. And the corporations (and that will never happen with government regulations). People tend to follow like sheep so it is up to the educated consumers and government to make them aware and it will catch on. Just like it will be up to the government to influence the rest of the world, or else we will be breathing China's smog and dying even faster. > The movie Who Killed the Electric Car (which is awesome, go watch it!) > is an excellent example of how this works. Low polluting electric cars [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > crushing of the electric car. However, a small proportion of educated > consumers have been active in Thats a bit misleading. When GM made that car consumers could only obtain one through a lease with no option to buy for residual value. It was all pre-planned and well advertised before the fact. They used the vehicles to further research. It was for the most part experimental and anyone who took out a lease on one was aware they had to return it at the end of the lease. > They used the > vehicles to further research. I wonder how crushing all EV1s helped their "research". > I wonder how crushing all EV1s helped their "research". What were they supposed to do with them? Store them at their own expense? The fact remains that the lease deal was well advertised. It was no secret that the cars would be taken back at the end of the lease. Nothing occurred that wasn't said up front. I also wonder how crushing the EV1s helped their "research". It seems that the research proved that the cars could be successful. That made a lot of people at the top uneasy. Not allowing anyone to purchase the EV1s, and then crushing them, is purely wasteful, no matter how you slice it. Putting that clean technology out of the public's mind: priceless. So now let's focus on Hydrogen technology that will never get rolling (unless you like to spend $1million on a car). Not everyone swallows everything shoved down their throats. It's just a matter of time before things change, and we stop poisoning our air. But the sad part is that in the meantime, people have and will suffer. > I also wonder how crushing the EV1s helped their "research". It seems > that the research proved that the cars could be successful. That made [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > a matter of time before things change, and we stop poisoning our air. > But the sad part is that in the meantime, people have and will suffer. in the meantime people will suffer knowingly or most hopeful to politicians unknowingly I listed seven things that we have that are horrible for a city, how can one not see how things are connected, yet people like to argue the air is not bad. Number one or two in asthma and asthma doctors, and death by asthma Number one or two the number of days our air reaches moderate levels the kind that one study says does more harm then good if you exercise in it and the kind which automatically constricts lungs and a host of other horrible things ( the fact that they even did the studies surprises me) F rating my American Lung Association The most depressed city in the nation After adjusting for age distribution of the population, female mortality was 20 percent higher!!!! then average for the US and Male mortality was 33 percent higher then average! Is this healthy ? Or just a little bad? http://www.phila.gov/health/hp2010/P...emperature.pdf We have NJ doing things , mandating emission control and california and other towns get upset if they have three warning days, here we are blasted with ads for asthma and lung centers and you would not believe that so many people still don't correlate our air being bad or the city having problems We have one of the worse violent crime rates in the US and lowest percentage of kids graduating, but its me that is the problem? What world am I in? > People tend to follow like sheep so it is up to the > educated consumers and government to make them aware and it will catch > on. Consumers react to their own needs. When gas prices rise demand for more fuel efficient cars and alternative energy sources rise with it. Thats what needs to happen because its the consumer that has to fund change. Government can only do so much at a time and the public won't allow them to slap a $5/gallon tax at the pump. Doing so would heavily cause demand for alternative fuels to skyrocket and the public more willing to fund it. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.