Reader comments
Is air pollution as harmful as smoking?

Air Quality Board & Dr. Packham:
Please stop taking the role of protecting industry. Please, please protect our health. Don't knit-pick the physicians who are working diligently to provide information Joe Public discerns in regard to pollution. Bathed in heavy metals such as mercury and cadmium 24-7 is deadly to baby's tiny nervous systems that is so sensitive to chemical exposure. The adult nervous system can take more (but who would elect to). The assumption the public will think its okay to smoke is just not correct.

Folks serving on the Air Quality board who are upholding industry right to continue to pollute should feel as comfortable as a porcupine in a balloon factory.
Air Quality - Dr. Packham - DO YOUR JOB!!!!

Dr. Packham...Thanks again for correcting the record on this issue that gets so blown out of proportion.

And...don't bother to listen to the whacko naysayers from Sevier County like the one posting above (not the board of industry)... They are just upset about fighting a losing battle over NEVCO's proposed power plant in Sigurd and figure you are an easy target to take their frustrations on. A little bit more educated people understand that you are just upholding the laws and standards that are ALREADY in place for these kinds of things.

Keep up the good work my friend!!!!

This dust-up reminds me of the definition of a gaffe: when someone opens their mouth and accidentally tells the truth.

The real concern is not that people will think that breathing Utah's air is just as bad as ACTUALLY smoking. The real concern is that people will realize that breathing Utah's air on a regular basis is much worse for you than than the limited exposure to second-hand smoke that any person is ever likely to encounter.

If just breathing Utah's air is worse for you than second-hand smoke, the whole "official" rationale for smoking bans, and particularly outdoor smoking bans, pretty much goes away. (Note to D-News editor: notice how easy it is to avoid silly puns like "goes up in smoke.") Of course, that will still leave all the real reasons for smoking bans like moral disapproval, dislike of the smell, and general busybodyism.

Indoor air quality is very important, especially if you choose to smoke. RADON causes non-smoking lung cancer, so even if you choose not to smoke you can get lung cancer. The EPA estimates indoor air is 2-5 times worse than outdoor air. So take some positive steps to greenify the air inside your home. A RADON mitigation system can help cleanse the air and protect the air inside your home.

As a toxicologist, he's simply pointing out the ridiculousness of the their position.

First off, despite occasional spikes in pollution during the summer or winter Utah's overall air quality is rated "good" by the EPA. Such as today, when the partculate levels are well below the EPA limit.

Second, even during high pollution days the amount and type of toxins in the air do not come even close to the amount of toxins breathed in by a cigarette smoker. Cigarette smoke contains many more toxins than just particulate matter, and most of those are sucked directly into the smoker's lungs.

Finally, even if it is comparable to smoking, it doesn't seem to be having a significant effect on the population as a whole: Utah has the lowest lung cancer rate in the US.

So even though roughly 80% of Utahns live in counties that are designated as "non-attainment" for particulate pollution, our lung cancer rate is still far below the national average.

Steve Packham is a courageous scientist who is basing his statements on real data, not fashionable opinions or politically-correct agendas.

You ignore Steve Packham's position on air pollution. Although he doesn't think air pollution is like smoking, he states that the health effects of Utah's air pollution are "unacceptable."

Pollution is having a significant impact on Utahns. Talk to ER doctors and pediatricians.

Our air pollution causes increased heart attacks and strokes, cardiovascular disease, impaired lung growth in children and teenagers, increased ER visits for respiratory problems, more severe asthma and respiratory illness in children, and increased cancers. Lung cancer rates would be even lower if we had better air quality.

The Doctors are parroting the sierra Club's line on pollution and transportation. Their website doesn't even have any new or authoritative studies; it only has a bunch of mostly-junk sierra Club studies.

By doing more emoting than reasoning or learning, the "Doctors" show their opinion is biased and of scant value to truth-seeking people. Some of what they have to say along with some of the positions from "Utah Moms..." is of value, but, overall, they will do more harrm to clean air than benefit. Their blind, pro-transit bias is a case in point.

The legislative audit noted that 92% of the service miles drven by UTA buses produced more of the hartmful diesel pollutant, NOx, than it prevented. Throughout UTA's history, the share of bus trips to car trips has only gone down. There is no possibility that UTA buses will ever prevent pollution. Even WFRC analysts show essentially zero positive impact clear off in 2030.

"UTA is a net polluter" said the audit.

The doctors should heal their own left-wing ignorance of transportation and transit-induced pollution. Try leaning before prescribing, next time.

I don't know if I believe it, but having asthma definetly makes me wonder.......