Reader comments
Does pollution raise heart risks?

Pope�s �research� methods have a history of being unscientific and should not be relied on. Deliberate or not, he uses the false notion that �correlation is causation,� i.e., assuming that if two things happen at the same time, then one causes the other. For example, if 97% of cancer patients have eaten tomatoes, then obviously tomatoes cause cancer (?).

He also often fails to consider �confounding factors,� which are other relevant variables that might explain the results. In the past he has refused to make his data available for peer review, which should raise a big red flag about the validity. Yes, we should work to reduce pollution in cost-effective ways, but we should not rely on unreliable research in the process.

Reason - Having read his work in the past,Pope's research is a heck of a lot better than you imply. If he committed all the sins you suggest, he would never make it through the peer review process. Just because you don't like the results doesn't mean they aren't valid.

Wake up all of you! Not only does the 'inversions' cause heart problems with PM2.5 but, many citizens are choking from the bad air in UTAH! Asthma, Allergies, respiratory problems, lymphoma, high autism rates, etc.... it's BAD when is everyone going to quit pointing fingers and take REAL ACTION so we all can breathe.

Various additional studies(UCLA, Stanford) have implicated exposure to particulate pollution as the direct cause of Sudden Heart Syndrome. Within 24 hours of exposure to woodsmoke, for example, death can occur. Unfortunately, there is a complete lack of awareness of the very dire consequences of wood-burning pollution. Only one website addresses
the issue forcefully: www.burningissues.org.