 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Asthma / September 2008New photo of my air filter ( truth)
http://s140.photobucket.com/albums/r31/mlarry51/?action=view¤t=filter2.jpg this is actually worse then last spring same 28 days. Traffic is worse and I am close to big street. which is getting more traffic but this shows why my lungs constrict. This is filter from air coming from outside . This is why we are shown commercial after commerical for asthma meds. This is forced upon us and nothing is done. Shame shame > This is filter from air coming from outside . What the heck kind of system do you have that pulls in outside air? Looks like a conventional A/C filter which would recirculate inside air. An evaporative system would draw outside air but you do not use those in PA and certainly not in the winter. Sounds like you've got a dirty home but most any filter will like that after a month or two most anywhere. Sorry but I do not believe your system draws in outside air. And yes, I am involved in that industry. > This is why > we are shown commercial after commerical for asthma meds. This is forced > upon us and nothing is done. Shame shame Asthma drug commercials rank pretty low compared with other drugs. Nice try. >> This is filter from air coming from outside . > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Asthma drug commercials rank pretty low compared with other drugs. Nice > try. No you have a nice try . I said until the epa or gov or scientists compare exact health of people relevant to exact pollution figures, my links show harm correlated to levels of pollution people live and work in . Moderate or worse .. people die in much more, People who live in crowded streets, near coal or downwind from coal states and oil refineries get more damage. Like I said. unless you compared the commercials that we get compared to the commercials you get, you can't say where they rank. The places that obviously get more pollution would get more need for commercials and I think would have most polluted air inside. I have been to other cities and my lungs constrict to exact amounts of parituculate pollution that happens in places like here compared to clean air. and where you are, Yes this is regular furnance system,,,,the air that circulates though is air that comes in from outside . Thus the people who get cleaner air which you call recirculated have less asthma. and other diseases. Thus often the quality of the air inside the house is often reflective of the air outside. plus whatever is inside the house. > my links show > harm correlated to levels of pollution people live and work in . Moderate or > worse .. people die in much more, Thats because you ignore studies that show the exact opposite such as Mexico City (about the worst polluted city in the world) and Athens among many others. I posted the links to those studies before and you dismissed them because they didn't agree with your views. > where you are, Yes this is regular furnance system,,,,the air that > circulates though is air that comes in from outside. Doubtfull. Your system recirculates. Bringing cold outside air in would be highly inefficient. A furnace does bring in outside air to the burner but an exchanger is used to transfer heat into the home. > Thus often the quality of the air inside the house is often > reflective of the air outside. plus whatever is inside the house. This is entirely wrong. It is VERY common for the inside air quality of a home to be worse than the outside. You need to study up on just why that is! Read up on indoor air pollution. It's a huge problem and has little to do with pollution outside. a furnace brings outside air to the furnace. And I spent time trying to rationalize you saying it just recirculates the air wow how surprising! ">> Thus often the quality of the air inside the house is often >> reflective of the air outside. plus whatever is inside the house. > > This is entirely wrong. It is VERY common for the inside air quality of a > home to be worse than the outside. You need to study up on just why that > is! Read up on indoor air pollution. It's a huge problem and has little > to do with pollution outside. I think you don't get it. I never said the air inside the house was good, I said that if the air outside is bad thats the exact air that comes inside to be heated. Thus when its good air outside I breathe better inside and outside. As for Mexico City and third world countries.... Have you ever been to a welfare doctor? They have thousands of people to look after. Ever been to a welfare line.? Thee are more people waiting in lines at welfare in one hour in one city then the entire correspondence from people on this group .for the last ten years. So when people here think their little world shows amount of true concern forget. . Now if bad stuff happens inside like mold , thats likely to affect the condition of the air. . If what you said were true , then the people inside with good air wouldn't experience any advantages.Mexico city is irrelevant.. I left tens of links to damage from particulate pollution and what happens when real studies show damage. Seems like the few studies ever made all show harm comparatitive to amount people breath. Big gov agencies have said millions of people are dying from air pollution and having major damage they just don't go further and blast about it on the public service announcement and tell people in harms way or further show who exactly is going to get what and from how much? You know why? ?The people who control the choices would demand the leaders head.the people would actually be scared and demand more action.I am actually shocked of the links they do have now after complaining without them for ten years. Go to phil.media where I left links to at least ten studies to damages..from air pollution and particulates. As for Mexico city,, yeah I will wait a life time for them to keep accurate records ...like breathing air that turns air filters black and agencies rate f is good for ya.. Your not even thinking straight. Just the opposite... My foot. > a furnace brings outside air to the furnace. > And I spent time trying to rationalize you saying it just recirculates the > air wow how surprising! A furnace does not bring outside air into the inside of the house through your filter. It brings it to the combustion chamber which exhaust the air back outside. The air inside your home is recirculated and heated by the exchanger. Got it? > I think you don't get it. I never said the air inside the house was good, I > said that if the air outside is bad thats the exact air that comes inside to > be heated. The dirt in your air filter is almost entirely generated from INSIDE your home. You don't seem to know much about HVAC, heating and cooing systems do you? > As for Mexico City and third world countries.... Have you ever been > to a welfare doctor? They have thousands of people to look after. You've never been to Mexico's Dr's or hospitals have you? They are modern and well equipped with well educated Dr's and staff. Contrary to most Americans belief, most Mexicans are not dirt poor. Athens is also heavily polluted but shows a low incidence of respiratory ailments. Pollution is never a good thing but theres more to it that your over simplification. > air pollution and particulates. As for Mexico city,, yeah I will wait a life > time for them to keep accurate records Sigh. It wasn't the Mexicans that did the world wide study. Mexico City was just one world city contained in the study. But, you know very little about Mexico which is quite clear. Your views about Mexico seem to be the stereotypical ones of many Americans and are flatly wrong. >> a furnace brings outside air to the furnace. >> And I spent time trying to rationalize you saying it just recirculates [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > your filter. It brings it to the combustion chamber which exhaust the air > back outside. Dare I ask this question? When the air goes outside, what air comes back inside to the combustion chamber lol Why is it the places with most particulate pollution usually has the studies to show damage ? lol I would suppose if house offered no protection and only recirculated air then everyone inside a home would have same damage. which of course is not the truth. I said this many times, the places with the most pollution usually have the most people adversly affected. The degree in which people get polluted air the most times or the least amount of clean air, or the total amount of most pollution, get far more illness and respiratory disease then those that don't. Of course until you get those studies you can claim otherwise. F rated air and air from a furnance does not always have the exact same amount of damage. The air coming into my house which is clean seldom does me any damage from constricted breathing. I assumed then if it was just recirculated air that would not be true. You don't know what your talking about. . The air inside your home is recirculated > and heated by the exchanger. Got it? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > The dirt in your air filter is almost entirely generated from INSIDE lol nope, > your home. You don't seem to know much about HVAC, heating and cooing > systems do you? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > about Mexico which is quite clear. Your views about Mexico seem to be the > stereotypical ones of many Americans and are flatly wrong. I trust the studies that show damage from pollution . Did you read them? Why not concentrate on those ? Why would us spend billions to try to get clean air if there was no damage? Your almost unbelievably stupid. Sure global warming is one thing, pollution from particulates and damage from them is another. The reason we are looking for more ways to clean the air is because of global warming and because we know the risks of health affects from pollution. Why would the epa issue warnings for people in cities with moderate to warning level air if it did no damage? lol you almost sound like the 9/11 people who think the cia bombed their own building. Why would the city with most asthma, be the city with the lowest percentage of clean air ? lol Here are some more links http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071228/ap_on_re_us/aging_west > as long as your sitting ducks for asthma and lung institutes and cancer > hospitals and more and more hospital annexes and directly in path of coal [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jul2007/clim-j19.shtml > http://www.megaportal.us/newsa/Avril.php?ArticleID=X3uu1Y3x2v1xG1Y1Z2k383e3 > [quoted text clipped - 121 lines] > allowed to lose their health for no good reason when so much more can be > done now. ( also in many other areas close to pollution and on east coast. > Dare I ask this question? When the air goes outside, what air comes back > inside to the combustion chamber lol Outside air goes to the combustion chamber and is then exhausted back outside. You showed a photo of a filter saying it was filtering outside air. It does no such thing. It recirculates air inside the home. If you can't comprehend this then look up how a swamp cooler works. They do draw in outside air into the house. Your furnace does not. >> The dirt in your air filter is almost entirely generated from INSIDE > > lol nope, Yep. Indoor air pollution is often well above anything outside. This is why indoor air is so often far worse than outside air. > I trust the studies that show damage from pollution Yes I know you do and you discount any studies that show the opposite. That tells me you have a belief and then try to verify it by finding studies that agree with your views while ignoring any data that shows otherwise. > air if there was no damage? Never said there wasn't damage. Pollution is always a bad thing and nobody has ever said otherwise. It's your incorrect extrapolation of cause and effects that is questionable as well as who is to blame. That incorrectness leads to invalid methods on dealing with the problem. In the end we both want the same thing...less pollution. >lol you almost sound > like the 9/11 people who think the cia bombed their own building. Huh?? It is you that keeps telling me about some conspiracy regarding air pollution. >> when you ignore the number one city or two city with asthma and >> respiratory >> deaths and respiratory prescriptions You ignore two of the worlds most polluted cities and their incidents of respiratory problems. You can live and work in Mexico City ok? lol The smartest athletes who depend on lung function train in clean air. If air didn't matter we would have the best long distance runners training in Mexico city and opposite? Hell we would have all the long distance and track and field start going to la and mexico city but they DONT. why don't they believe, They need to get onto your program. lol The people who are into health don't go to Mexico City or most polluted cities if they can help. The places with clean air, brings athletes, optimism , less health problems , and people with money and sometimes even less crime. >> Dare I ask this question? When the air goes outside, what air comes back >> inside to the combustion chamber lol [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > You ignore two of the worlds most polluted cities and their incidents of > respiratory problems. > You can live and work in Mexico City ok? > lol [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and field start going to la and mexico city but they DONT. why don't they > believe, They need to get onto your program. Um, you just don't read do you? I have stated over and over that pollution is never a good thing and is a cause of health problems. But your methods of dealing with it, how to correct it and analysis of it are flawed and biased and serve little purpose other than to be divisive. > The people who are into health don't go to Mexico City or most polluted > cities if they can help. The places with clean air, brings athletes, > optimism , less health problems , and people with money and sometimes even > less crime. Thats where you are wrong on many counts. Many cities with very clean air do not have low health problems. Just as many cities with high pollution do not have high health problems. Denver is heavily polluted often passing up Los Angeles. Yet, it scores low for respiratory issues. Keep up your argument and loose support to solve the problem we both agree on. >> You can live and work in Mexico City ok? >> lol [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > passing up Los Angeles. Yet, it scores low for respiratory issues. Keep > up your argument and loose support to solve the problem we both agree on. Miles while don't you post the pollution numbers for Denver compared to La from now till next year ok? Please. I talked to doctors who can't make absolute statements because the studies have not been in. I methodically feel the reaction as I told you before. Not only do my lungs constrict to exact correlation to particulate levels I started to see how others unkowingly were dying faster, getting more respiratory disease ( surprise the same city that has most days with moderate or worse pollution is also amongst the worse in numbers for the disease) and then I realized that except for diet and bad habit the number one cause for bad health or worse health is how close people live and work to pollution . Which pollution is worse or how often people just get air that is not good and its affects are another area where I believe good researchers can show cause and affect. I think obviously you have not read the links to damage from pollution I left. I think scientifics can further show the single largest cause of death and disease besides diet and bad habits is pollution > Not only do my lungs constrict to exact correlation to particulate > levels I started to see how others unkowingly were dying faster, getting > more respiratory disease I have no such correlation with my lungs. I do with pollens and molds but not particulates. My Dr's over the years have stated the exact same thing. Peoples lungs react far more to the more common allergens than they do to particulates. You have a biased opinion and are on an agenda of such and refuse to accept anything other than your own views. I have shown you studies that dispute your claim. You told me you do not care one bit about anywhere except the conditions in PA where you live. That tells me plenty. > http://s140.photobucket.com/albums/r31/mlarry51/?action=view¤t=filter2.jpg > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > we are shown commercial after commerical for asthma meds. This is forced > upon us and nothing is done. Shame shame Those pleated filters are aprox 40-50 percent efficient and they have to be replaced every 2-3 months. You may want to purchase a quality self charging electrostatic air filter that can be vacuumed off and washed. These self charging filters are aprox 90 percent efficient, are custom cut to your correct size and restrict very little air to your furnace or A/C system but they will last a lifetime! It's nice to never have to drive around searching for a filter that fits properly. You can find them at http://www.aircleaners.com |
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.