November 11, 2024 • 48 mins
Welcome to Buffalo HealthCast, the official podcast of the University at Buffalo's School of Public Health and Health Professions 🎙️
In this insightful episode of Buffalo HealthCast, we sit down with Dr. Meng Wang, an environmental health scientist, to explore the hidden dangers lurking in the air we breathe and their impact on lung health. Dr. Wang reveals how baseline levels of pollutants like PM 2.5, ozone, nitrous oxide, and black carbon contribute to the progression of emphysema. As climate change fuels air pollution especially from sources like wildfire smoke.
Dr. Wang emphasizes the critical need for targeted policies to protect vulnerable populations. He also discusses accessible solutions, including DIY air purifiers, and highlights the importance of public education and awareness about air quality in our changing climate. Don't miss this vital discussion on the intersection of air pollution, health, and climate.
Follow us!
Official Webpage
Buzzsprout
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Youtube
Instagram
Facebook
Twitter
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Vennela Damarla (00:04):
Welcome to another episode of buffalo
healthcast. I'm vennela damarlaPodcast Producer, and today we
have Dr Meng Wang, a leadingexpert in environmental health
research. In this episode, wewill be discussing Dr Wong's
research, which focuses onimpact of air pollution,
particularly ozone, on lunghealth and the progression of
(00:25):
emphysema. Whether you are ahealthcare professional or
interested in learning moreabout air pollution, this
episode of valuable insights. DrWong, thank you so much for
joining us today. So before weget into your interesting
research. Can you tell us alittle bit about your background
and what motivated you to pursuethis research? Yeah,
Dr. Meng Wang (00:48):
sure, so. My name is meng Wang. I am an
environmental health scientist.
Most of my research focuses onfor assessment of air pollution
and also trying to understandhow air pollution could cause
adverse effect of human health.
(01:09):
Well, I did modeling work, andhas been involved in several
large collaborative studiesfocusing on mostly focusing on
respiratory and cardiovascularhealth. The motivation of me to
involved in this study actuallyhas been for a long time. So my
(01:31):
background actually originallyfrom atmospheric science, not
related to health at all. So atthat time, I'm curious about
like the chemistry ofatmosphere, and then realizing
some gluttons are really toxic,making me feel like how this
chemicals could affect humanhealth. So that moves me towards
(01:55):
the health field. So it's alearning process for me for
several years, and then I try toinvolved in some large cohort
studies in there. I cancollaborate with some physicians
there, environmentepidemiologist there, so I can
leverage my experience inatmospheric science, but also
(02:19):
find linkage to epidemiology. Sothat is why nowadays my I can my
focus is on air pollutionrelated epidemiology. It's
Vennela Damarla (02:32):
wonderful. Dr Wang, so let us start with some
questions. How do you see in thesection of climate change and
air quality evolving, and whatimplication does this have for
respiratory health in thefuture?
Dr. Meng Wang (02:47):
Yeah, so this is very big topic. I would say that
climate change is general term,which means that it can be
related to many extreme weatherslike increased temperature,
(03:08):
right? And then increasedtemperature can cause extreme
heat and cold storms and etc.
And this climate factors canactually impact air quality. So
one typical example is wildfire,because now you can see that
when the temperature goes up,the drought goes up, then it's
(03:32):
possible that burning is gettingmore frequent, right, especially
when we see lots of wildfireshappen in the West Coast of the
United States as well as in theCanadian country. So this is
definitely indirect impact ofclimate change on air quality
(03:55):
and the problem of wildfiresmoke is that in the US and
Canada, government has making along term effort to reduce air
pollution by many policies.
Right. Clean Air Act is verysuccessful, but because of
(04:16):
climate change and that wildfirecould offsite the effort of
Clean Air Act and talking to thefuture. So you know, the IPCC
has developed many climatemodels globally to try to pre
project how temperature orclimate factors as well as air
(04:42):
pollution, could change in thenext 50 or 100 years later. And
what they find is that thepollution level can go high if
there's no ending control onhuman activity. 80 or like human
emissions, right? So, but theyalso simulate like, if people
(05:07):
can control the greenhousegasses, which is the leading
cause of increased temperature.
So, if they can control thegreenhouse the emission of
greenhouse gasses in differentlevels, then it's possible that
temperature will go down in manyyears, and also the clean air.
(05:31):
We can still see it's all aboutthe like interactions between
human efforts and the climate.
Vennela Damarla (05:41):
Thankyou. Dr Wong, and I would completely
agree with you regarding thewildfire, and this is the topic
that you've been teaching us inthe class too. So yeah, moving
on to the next question. Couldyou briefly elaborate on how
prolonged exposure to airpollutants such as ozone pm 2.5
(06:03):
and nitrous oxide affects lunghealth and function.
Dr. Meng Wang (06:07):
Yeah. So usually, when we talk about air
pollution, we say that airpollution have two effect. One
is called a shorthand effect.
Another one is called long termeffect. The shorthand effect, in
fact, it's like when airpollution goes high very
rapidly, like wildfire event,then people may get disease
immediately, right? And that isreally because people already
(06:31):
have some pre existing disease.
So we call it like a harvest ofhuman but for long term effect
air pollution, just becauseeveryone breathes air, right? So
it's kind of explored to takelife long. Many studies have
(06:51):
already find that. So if peoplepersist the exposed to air
pollution for many years, it'spossible that the pollution
could increase their risk fromthe beginning for the Healthy
People, and then graduallyincrease their biological
(07:11):
pathways and clinical symptomsand eventually increase the
Disease and come back to therespiratory disease. Actually,
you can see that air pollutionusually enters our bodies
through respiratory system,right through respiratory tract.
(07:32):
Respiratory disease definitelyis most directly impacted by air
pollution in terms of thepollutant. Though we know that
particulate matter, and also ourmost important one. Particulate
Matter is important because theyare so tiny that they can easily
enter into our respiratorytract. The train here area is
(07:56):
more like the connection betweenthe lung and our circulation
system. So once this, if theparticles are more enough, it
can enter into our circulationsystem. And of course,
cardiovascular disease, thatmeans that particulate matter
not holding a factor with BFPdisease, but also increased risk
(08:17):
of cardiovascular disease backto Otto. So Autumn is the gas
pollutant. So autumn is usuallyenters into our affecting our
lung. But OM is very activepollutant. It's easily interact
with other pollutant. So there'sonce Otto enters into our
(08:41):
respiratory tract. It can causelots of chemistry happen in our
lung. So this chemistry mayrelease a new pollutant and then
increase the risk of our lungdisease. So this is a basic
understanding for now in termsof how, PM, 2.9 organ may cause
(09:03):
respiratory disease.
Vennela Damarla (09:05):
Well, I really appreciate how you have detailed
everything. Dr Wong, so whichpollutant do you think have a
stronger association with lungdisease progression compared to
other pollutants?
Dr. Meng Wang (09:20):
So I would say that I cannot make a judgment so
far. So you can see thatdifferent studies have different
findings. Some studies, theyfind that PM, 2.5 may be the
most important one. Some definealso, or some study defined WC
or other pretense. So that'sreally depending on the
(09:41):
population, study area and alsomonitoring technology, Explorer
assessment, I would sayparticulate matter, fine
particulate matter, or maybe themost important risk factor for
respiratory disease so far. Upbecause there's many studies
(10:02):
have shown this consistentlyshow this results. Okay,
Vennela Damarla (10:07):
so you have mentioned about the long term
effects as well as the shortterm effects of air pollution.
So how do you think the longterm effects of cumulative
exposure to air pollutantsdiffer from the short term
impacts of acute exposure onrespiratory health?
Dr. Meng Wang (10:25):
Yeah, that's a great question. Usually, if we
think about shorthand exposure,we compare. So if we think about
shorthand exposure, we comparewhether the exposure on the day
(10:46):
that has a high level ofpollution, as more people get
disease, compared to the dayanother day, next to the day
before and after this day Wherethe concentration is low, lower
number of people get delays. Sothat is comparison of understand
(11:07):
the shorthand effect of airpollution. I would say that
shorthand effect happens becauseair pollution, important air
pollution events happen. So somedays when pollution happens,
high pollution level in certaindays and another days it goes
up. So in that way, when theconcentration immediately gets
(11:28):
high. So people who has diseasealready respiratory disease, for
example, so they will nottolerant to that high level of
pollution, and then it'spossible that they may get
immediate disease sequence. Soone several typical examples
(11:51):
would be like people who had aCOPD, they may have severe
symptoms, getting more severerecipients during the high level
pollution days, and then thismay cause them to go to the
hospital immediately, or go tothe or more severely, may cause
(12:12):
people die. So all this happenedat very short time period, but
it usually affects the peoplewho already have pre existing
disease, or had a like lowimmune system, right? Or have
some Alexa sample population,but long term, back to the long
(12:32):
term exposure to air pollutionand health. This is maybe
different to mechanism. So longterm exposure, we don't consider
like extreme air pollutionevent. It's more like a average
exporter over long term period.
So it's like people always wecompare people living in high
(12:55):
pollution area to the people wholive in low exposure location
area, and follow them up andsay, better they develop these
disease so, because it's followso long period, and people can
be from air pollution Andgradually increase their for
(13:16):
example, their like biologicalresponse, for example, like
without it, can increase therisk of inflammation, passive
stress, and this inflammation,if it's keep going on the
inflation and lead to certainsubclinical diseases. So for
(13:37):
example, their lung function maygo down, their blood pressure
may go up, right? And these arethe like pre clinical,
subclinical symptoms. So forrespiratory disease, one typical
example is emphysema. Emphysemais a structure change of their
lung, so once it happened, it'snot reversible, right? And and
(14:00):
also for cardiovascular disease,we have a term called as those
sclerosis, meaning that the plugbuild up in cables vessels, and
when it gets more serious, theplot cannot be removed, right?
Unless you take us surgery. Sothis is how air pollution can
gradually affecting thedevelopment of disease.
Vennela Damarla (14:26):
So do you think short term exposure to air
pollution with the pre existingconditions can cause
irreversible lung damage?
Dr. Meng Wang (14:35):
It's possible. I would say that, like I said,
when short term air pollutionevent happens. It can worsen the
lung disease or lung structurein that way. I say it's possible
to cause some in reversibledisease, but not like long train
(14:57):
exposure, because the verysupport disease.
Vennela Damarla (15:01):
what were the most surprising findings
regarding the associationbetween the air pollution and
lung health in your study?
Dr. Meng Wang (15:09):
Let me first introduce the study a little
bit. So this is a multi sidestudy in United States. So
United States, we select 680sand then each city recruit 1000
people, starting from 2000 andfollow them up all the way until
(15:33):
2020, so it's like a 20 yearsfollow up period. And during
this period, people will take CTscans apart about every four or
five years and also take lungfunction test at the same time.
(15:54):
So it's like a repeatmeasurement over time. The good
thing of this study this size,like it's longitudinal follow up
study with repeat measurement,so you can really track the
progression of lung disease overtime. So using CT scan, it can
(16:15):
use physiological technology,quantify the area where the lung
has abnormal change, have normalchange, can be converted to this
decide whether or severe theEmma sigma symptom is. So the
larger area the abnormal areais, then the most Emma sigma is
(16:39):
we expect. So in this case, wecan see that the whole the
emphysema progress over time andin the meantime. So the group I
working with at University ofWashington, we developed high
resolution air pollution model.
High Resolution means that itcan predict air pollution bi
weekly, and also at every singlelocation of the participants. So
(17:06):
each participant will assignunique Data Explorer value to
them, so we can really tracktheir air pollution data
longitudinally for theseparticipants as well. So both
explorer and outcomes arelongitudinal data, so we can
link them together to see okaywhether people living or exposed
(17:30):
to high level of air pollutionin this area also has faster
progression of emphysema overthese 20 years and yeah. So we
focus on several key proteins.
One is PM, 2.5 or fiveparticulate matter. Second one
(17:53):
is an o2, oxides of nitrogen,which is indicator of traffic
emission. Third one is autumn,which is a secondary pollutant,
very important to respiratorydisease, and the last one is
black carbon. So surprisingly,we actually find that all these
(18:13):
pollutants at baseline areassociated with faster
progression of eczema over time.
So baseline explorer means thatthe Explorer level assigned to
the time as a time when peopleare recruited in 2000 so what it
means is that at the time, ifpeople exposed to high levels of
game, 2.5 or ozone, for example,at the beginning, in early
(18:40):
years, when they recruit thisimpact could be lifelong,
already impacted theirprogression over time. So this
is important, because you knowthat air pollution goes down
right? So this means thatpeople, like older people, may
not really get benefit fromreally get benefit from clean
(19:04):
air at the beginning, so at thattime, the the bad air and
already trigger theirrespiratory disease. Well,
Vennela Damarla (19:16):
your study also tells that while concentration
of particulate matter 2.5 andoxides of nitrogen decreased
during the study, but ozonelevels remain a concern. So what
factors do you think thatcontribute to the increased
level of ground level ozone?
Dr. Meng Wang (19:34):
Yeah, so this, this is good question, and also
complicated story. This is back.
We'll be back to talk a littlebit background about atmospheric
chemistry. So you know, for fineparticulate matter, I would just
say at least a half of theparticular PM, 2.5 man made
sources like. Our vehicleemissions, our industry
(20:00):
emissions, cooking, allgenerated particles. But autumn
is different. Autumn is asecondary pollutant, which means
that their product formation ofautumn is not dependent on the
lack of a man made emission.
It's based on the chemistry.
It's a product of primarypollutants like pm, 2.5 oxides
(20:23):
of nitrogen, this pollutant. Soif the Clean Air Act, basically
the at the beginning is tocontrol memory sources. But if
you control memory sources, youcontrol the emissions from
pollutant generated from memorysources such as oxygenator such
as oxides of nitrogen, but youcannot control OSM because ozone
(20:47):
is not directly needed by theany of these manmade sources
actually back to the chemistry.
So autumn formation is verycomplicated, but in some
circumstances, lower level ofoxides of nitrogen and increase
(21:08):
the level of autumn. So that'swhy control also. It's very
challenging so far, even thoughin the US there's many policies
to control autumn, but it's verydifficult. You can imagine, like
during the COVID pandemic,there's many industries. There
(21:33):
are many people do not come out,so they do not drive and we have
significant reduction of trafficemission, they will get better,
much better air quality in termsof PMG on the fire size,
nitrogen. On the other hand, wehave a worsened ozone situation
(21:53):
during this period. So it'scomplicated story back in in
terms of chemistry and when linkthis flu trend to health effect,
then that could be differentmechanism as well. Yes,
Vennela Damarla (22:11):
so despite the alarming findings, what gives
you the hope for improving thelung health outcomes in the
context of raising air pollutionlevels,
Dr. Meng Wang (22:21):
I would say that overall air pollution, air
quality is getting betteroverall, but we do see that it's
unevenly distributed oranchored, disproportionately
affecting different people,especially some like low income
(22:42):
communities, they arehistorically exposed to close to
industry or like those twotraffic area, so their pollution
level may not really receive theadequate benefit from the Clean
Air Act. So in that way, theirair pollution level may not
really goes down that rapidly,and their health effect may be
(23:04):
of concern now in the UnitedStates, and back to the what we
can do to improve lung health.
So I think there are two aspectswe need to think about. One is
the policy this level of policymakers, they may the policy
should focus more on this, likevulnerable population,
(23:30):
underserved community, thispopulation, not focus on
everyone, like previously in theact. It's like overall entire
country, but now it should bemore specifically focused on
underserved community to reducetheir level of solution. So we
can see that many sponsors likethe EPA and I actually invest
(23:56):
the money to find to helpcommunities to improve their
resilience to air pollution. Onething they can do is that have
education to people, becausepeople in there, they may not
well educated, knowing how to ifair pollution event happens,
(24:18):
what we should do, right? Solike normally, if wildfire
comes, then people will receivealert. They will have access to
internet, watch TV, and thenthey know that, okay, next day,
the model will have wildfiresthat we need to do something.
But for low income communities,they may not know this they may
(24:39):
not have access to know thisknowledge. So in that way, the
government should have somepolicies to help them increase
their alert to this event,helping them, giving them
resource to get access to thisalert. On the other hand. I
think the prevention could be atan individual level. Air pre
(25:03):
fire has many studies haveevidence that air pre fire can
reduce air pollution, especiallyparticulate matter, very
effectively. But the problem isthat this technology only be
applied quite a lot of highincome communities, but for low
income communities, people maynot afford this air purifier,
(25:25):
but luckily, now there are somestudies trying to build up like
the DIY air pre fires. It's verysimple. You just use the future
air filter, built up a box andthen attach a box fan. This
could be a very simple airpurifier, but more efficient
(25:47):
than commercial one, and it costlike 1/3 or half price of the
commercial air purifier. This isa very good example may be
possibly used to increasepeople's health in terms of
recipient days.
Vennela Damarla (26:11):
Yeah, so DIY, air purifier, this is something
new that I've learned today. DrWong, so the population such as,
have low income communities andthe population living near
industries. How do you protectthis population from air
pollution? What can be done,
Dr. Meng Wang (26:33):
like I said, this effort that should be done by
both policy makers andindividual like community
residents. So now we have somestudies find we have some
connections with the buffaloAfrican American community, and
(26:56):
we know that they are livingclose to many of the communities
are close to major road or tooclose to highway. So what we are
hoping to do is that, first toincrease their education level,
like holding some event to thecommunity, and to introduce,
(27:17):
like, given a background aboutair pollution, what is so in
that way, when air pollutionevent comes, they can know about
this. And also, another way todo is like people. The problem
for people is that they don'tknow their explorer level, what
(27:39):
the exposure level is. So ourpilot study is doing now is to
give them the low sub costsensor and monitor. The local
sensor monitor is cheap, like a30 to 50 bucks, but it can
visualize the readings of levelsof evolution as well as the
(28:02):
color to indicate like green,yellow, red to indicate whether
they should be concerning abouttheir indoor air quality. So in
that way, we hope that this willhelp the community people to get
early alert of their indoor airquality problem, and we also try
(28:25):
to use, like I mentioned, a DIYair purifier to see how
effective it is to improve theirhealth. And what's normal, I
think now in this study, is thatwe notice that the sample
population, for example, wetypically focus on elderly
(28:48):
participants. Elderparticipants, they they may
have, like a decline memory, sothey may not really know that.
Okay, I should check the airsensor readings and when should
I turn it on? When should I turnit off? There's really a lot of
burden on them, so what we do isthat we do it like a smart
(29:12):
control system. We can use theair sensor to determine when we
can switch on, switch off, theirblog, and the plug will connect
to the beautiful air purifier.
So everything could beautomatic, so we can set up a
safety level to them. Once thelevel is above the safety level,
then automatically turn on theair purifier. So in that way, we
(29:37):
hope that this can help people,especially older people, or the
self population, improving theirhealth.
Vennela Damarla (29:46):
Well, moving on to the next question, so how
effective would be the Clean AirAct? You think the Clean Air Act
would help people to protectfrom the air pollution with pre
existing. Conditions,respiratory conditions, older
individual and people from lowsocio economic status, yes,
Dr. Meng Wang (30:08):
so I want to say that the original design of
Clean Air Act is trying toreduce the overall emission of
air pollution. That's includingthe traffic industry, everything
this, because there's manypolicies behind it trying to
reduce the manmade emission sothe fusion level goes down
(30:31):
rapidly, I would say over thepast 30 years. Yeah, so like 30
years ago, the pm treatmentlevel could be about over 50
microgram per cubic meter. Nowit's below 10. So it's a
remarkable achievement to theair pollution. So definitely I
(30:52):
believe that because airpollution goes down so much, so
much so there's a huge benefiton respiratory health. And
actually some studies alreadyevident your evidence. For
example, one study conducted inCalifornia works on children's
health. So recruited schoolchildren in elementary school
(31:18):
and in seven sites, and thenthey follow them up for multiple
years, and they check whetherreduced air pollution is
associated with better lungfunction, increase the lung
function. And they did find asignificant association, and
that's very encouraging andclear evidence supporting that a
(31:44):
clean air effect is veryeffective, but back to like the
benefit applied to everyone, butnot equally applied to everyone.
So some places may have, forexample, far away from the
sources, may have less issue,but other resources, lots of
(32:07):
communities near industry andthat, so they also need to
consider about the economics. Soin that way, there's always
fight between industry and thelocal community, the main the
industry may not want to reducetheir emission a lot, but
(32:27):
community people concerned aboutit. So this about environmental
justice issue remains, stillremains in the United States,
and that's also one of the mostimportant topic. Now, okay,
Vennela Damarla (32:44):
so what do you think are the biggest
misconceptions about the effectsof air pollution and health and
how can we educate the public?
Dr. Meng Wang (32:55):
But what I can say, one thing probably people
may overlook or negligible isthat? So in some areas where air
pollution is low, people mayfeel that they are pretty safe.
There's no problem. Airpollution has no effect on them
(33:16):
at all, that they don't careabout air pollution at all. I
think on one hand, it's goodthat air pollution is air
quality is good. They may haveother environmental issue that
they can they should be careful.
But on another hand, currentstudies, they did not find,
suggest that there's a safethreshold of air quality, of air
(33:41):
pollution health. It means thateven air pollution level is very
low, there's a still adverseeffect on human health. We
cannot say that. Okay, airpollution below five microgram
per kilometer, you don't need tocare about it. There's no impact
on you. Even it's lower, stillhave impact. It's like
(34:05):
pathogenic compounds. You knowthat's constant. Genetic
compound may cause cancer nomatter how low the level is, and
always cause cancer. Haveagreed, can always increase the
risk of cancer. Thing for airpollutant, we cannot say that,
okay, areas are pretty airquality are pretty good, and
(34:28):
then people don't need to careabout it. So I think that's
something we need to educatepeople that air pollution should
always be care about, eventhough you are in a clean air
location,
Vennela Damarla (34:45):
yes. Doctor Wong noted, like you said, even
the air pollution is lower, itcan have an impact in a long
run, yeah. So in your view, howsignificant is the role of
ambient air pollution as a risk?
Factor for chronic lung diseasescompared to other known risk
factors, such as smoking oroccupational hazards.
Dr. Meng Wang (35:09):
Yeah, so I would say that that's depending on
what's the level of populationyou mentioned about. So if we
talk about individual level,like for single people, maybe
many other factors. Smoking maybe very important risk factor
(35:30):
for these people. And if peoplehave poor dare to have it, they
may there may be a big problem.
But when we talk aboutpopulation level, meaning that
including all the people,putting all the people together,
and put and then we reckon therisk based on differential risk
(35:50):
factors, then air pollutionwould be top leading factors. So
the long set general, you knowloan set is like the top medical
general, set general release,the top rank the risk factors
that cause people dying everytwo or three years. And if you
(36:16):
read the long set general, youwill see that the ranking of air
pollution, typically, PMG pointgoes up year by year. So like
five years ago when I read thelong set general five Part Two,
the matter already ranked asnumber five of risk factor that
(36:41):
may cause people time. Thereason is that, or I would say
that opposite is the riskfactors are smoking, like blood
high blood pressure, so allthese traditional risk factors.
The reason why air pollutionbecause so many people die, but
(37:04):
its level is actually low. Thereason is really because all the
people are exposed to airpollution compared to a few
people mode. So because everyoneare exposed to air pollution,
potentially, the number ofpeople get disease could be
substantial. If you sum up thesepeople who get disease as number
(37:27):
could be really huge. And alsothen, if you look at the ranking
in the most recent year,actually, image open the file is
now top one or top two. So it'snow the top of top of the top is
(37:48):
the ranking of this riskfactors. So the reason for it,
in my understanding, is thatmany of the traditional risk
factors has better controlbecause people know how to do
it, and it's very effective now,adding more effective now, and
(38:12):
we have, like, a smoking controlpolicy, and we have a better
health care so in that way,traditional risk factors has
been controlled, and the peopleget this disease because of the
stresses factor. But now for airpollution, even though air
(38:35):
pollution level goes down, alsoin many developed countries, I
would say, not all thecountries, but the population
size going up, so it's offsetthe benefit of air pollution. So
eventually the number of peopledie because of air pollution has
(38:57):
been the ranking go up. Okay, soI hope I explained this clear.
Vennela Damarla (39:04):
Yes, doctor Wong, you, you have explained it
very clearly. You have mentionedthat PM, 2.5 is the leading air
pollutant right now. So arethere any measures taken to
control a PM, 2.5 air pollutant,
Dr. Meng Wang (39:21):
yes, so PM, 2.5 is not like a new star. It's
like an old friend for us formany years. So I would say that
probably 1980s so there's thefirst study called the Harper
(39:42):
six city study. That study, theyidentified that the five
particulate matter is stronglyassociated with mortality in a
cohort study. From there, peopleknow that particulate matter is
um. Important risk factor. Andfrom then on, many studies prove
(40:05):
this concept. And then EPArealized this problem. So for
the Clean Air Act, controllingPM, 2.05 is one of the major
task. So I would say that in theUnited States control. PM, 2.5
(40:26):
this effort keep going on formany years. There's lots of
policies at like federal level,state level and country level,
community level, individuallevel to control the pm 2.54
Vennela Damarla (40:44):
it's really awful to know that pm 2.5 is
increasing mortality rate. Andit's also good to know that
there have been a lot ofmeasures and efforts by the
government and then acts andpolicies to control this. So
despite the challenges presentedby the air pollution, what gives
you hope for the future of lunghealth and public policy?
Dr. Meng Wang (41:08):
Yeah, I would say that the current policies are
still effective in reducing em3.5 so now you know that the
standard, the pm 2.5 standard,by EPA, become more rigorous
(41:29):
every 10 years. So every 10years, then EPA will re evaluate
their policy, the standard, pm2.5 standard, whether it's
adequately protected humanhealth. So very recently, I
think this year, EPA updateduscpa updated the pm 2.5
(41:51):
standard, saying that the annualaverage level of pm 2.5 should
be below nine micrograms percubic meter. Previously the
level is 12 microgram per cubicmeter. So this is drop. And
(42:11):
given that the level is alreadylow, and they still want to
reduce this level, so you cansee that it's it's like reduce
the pollution by 25% it's a veryambitious policy, and I think
this policy will making surethat improving Air Quality will
(42:38):
still be beneficial to ourrespiratory health,
cardiovascular health, humanhealth. Well, on the other hand,
I think even though, in additionto the policy, the classic or
traditional policy, liketraditional source of air
(43:00):
pollution, we may think moreabout controlling new source of
pollution. Like I mentioned, howwe can control climate change.
We can slow down the climateglobal warming this step, just
like I said, climate change haveindirect impact on air quality.
(43:22):
So for example, now governmenthas some policies other than
carbon neutralization. It'sbasically to reduce the carbon
consumption, and in that way,the emission of greenhouse
gasses will be controlled andthe temperature, hopefully the
temperature will be flattenedout or go down in the future,
(43:47):
and then in that way, solutionlevel goes down, in the same
case of the greenhouse gasses.
So that's another angle I thinkshould be care about myself, air
pollution control and thebeneficial to respiratory
disease.
Vennela Damarla (44:06):
Thank you, Doctor Wong for providing a
great summary. So what finaladvice would you give to our
listeners about protecting theirfamilies from air pollution?
Dr. Meng Wang (44:17):
Yeah, so for families, I think I would
suggest that everyone shouldknow some basic about air
quality. First, we should knowthat everyone are exposed to air
pollution. So if there are manyresources, actually, the
(44:40):
researchers, government aremaking effort to provide many
resources to communityresidents, helping them to
understand what's the level itis. I can come up some
resources, hopefully can behelpful. So one is that uscp
have website. It showing thelevel of air pollution based on
(45:04):
their air monitoring stationsthere, and when you train
station will join visualize thelevel of pollution. For example,
in New York State, the US,nysdc, they have a website, and
they keep updating the level ofair pollution hourly. So this
could be a resource to look at,okay, whether your residential
(45:26):
location is safe or not. Anotherresource is that, like the US,
CDC and EPA, they develop somemap for the environmental
justice map or socialvulnerability index map. So what
this map is useful is that itgives you every single community
(45:51):
some the information aboutwhat's the leading environmental
risks are in this community,because not all the communities
have the same environmentalproblem. Some community may have
problem of noise. Explore. Someof them may have like air
pollution. Some of them may havelike the waste water, for
(46:13):
example. So this map will givingyou a sense about what's the
problem in your environmentalproblem in your community. This
will help people to understandthis. And another one, I would
suggest, is that if peopleidentify that air pollution is a
problem, or you're concerningabout air pollution problem, the
(46:37):
easiest way is to use airpurifier. It's very effective to
remove air pollution. And also,there's now several community
organizations invest they arehelping residents to solve the
environmental problems. So thereare many approaches hopefully
(46:58):
can help the family to firstknow their risk of air
pollution, Second, take actionsto prevent air pollution. So
Vennela Damarla (47:09):
are there any final concluding thoughts you
would want to share with us? DrWong,
Dr. Meng Wang (47:14):
well, I would say that air pollution is always a
problem, but the problem of airpollution as angle has been
shifting from traditionalindustrial control towards Eco
(47:37):
community problem of airpollution, then not towards
climate change, impact on airpollution and the human health.
So it's like, keep going onstory, and we are making effort
to understand the problem,helping people to solve their
(47:58):
problem and hopefully to improvetheir health.
Vennela Damarla (48:02):
Thank you so much. Dr Wong, it's been really
an insightful session. Staytuned for another episode on
buffalo healthcast. Thank you.
Welcome to another episode of buffalo
healthcast. I'm vennela damarlaPodcast Producer, and today we
have Dr Meng Wang, a leadingexpert in environmental health
research. In this episode, wewill be discussing Dr Wong's
research, which focuses onimpact of air pollution,
particularly ozone, on lunghealth and the progression of
(00:25):
emphysema. Whether you are ahealthcare professional or
interested in learning moreabout air pollution, this
episode of valuable insights. DrWong, thank you so much for
joining us today. So before weget into your interesting
research. Can you tell us alittle bit about your background
and what motivated you to pursuethis research? Yeah,
Dr. Meng Wang (00:48):
sure, so. My name is meng Wang. I am an
environmental health scientist.
Most of my research focuses onfor assessment of air pollution
and also trying to understandhow air pollution could cause
adverse effect of human health.
(01:09):
Well, I did modeling work, andhas been involved in several
large collaborative studiesfocusing on mostly focusing on
respiratory and cardiovascularhealth. The motivation of me to
involved in this study actuallyhas been for a long time. So my
(01:31):
background actually originallyfrom atmospheric science, not
related to health at all. So atthat time, I'm curious about
like the chemistry ofatmosphere, and then realizing
some gluttons are really toxic,making me feel like how this
chemicals could affect humanhealth. So that moves me towards
(01:55):
the health field. So it's alearning process for me for
several years, and then I try toinvolved in some large cohort
studies in there. I cancollaborate with some physicians
there, environmentepidemiologist there, so I can
leverage my experience inatmospheric science, but also
(02:19):
find linkage to epidemiology. Sothat is why nowadays my I can my
focus is on air pollutionrelated epidemiology. It's
Vennela Damarla (02:32):
wonderful. Dr Wang, so let us start with some
questions. How do you see in thesection of climate change and
air quality evolving, and whatimplication does this have for
respiratory health in thefuture?
Dr. Meng Wang (02:47):
Yeah, so this is very big topic. I would say that
climate change is general term,which means that it can be
related to many extreme weatherslike increased temperature,
(03:08):
right? And then increasedtemperature can cause extreme
heat and cold storms and etc.
And this climate factors canactually impact air quality. So
one typical example is wildfire,because now you can see that
when the temperature goes up,the drought goes up, then it's
(03:32):
possible that burning is gettingmore frequent, right, especially
when we see lots of wildfireshappen in the West Coast of the
United States as well as in theCanadian country. So this is
definitely indirect impact ofclimate change on air quality
(03:55):
and the problem of wildfiresmoke is that in the US and
Canada, government has making along term effort to reduce air
pollution by many policies.
Right. Clean Air Act is verysuccessful, but because of
(04:16):
climate change and that wildfirecould offsite the effort of
Clean Air Act and talking to thefuture. So you know, the IPCC
has developed many climatemodels globally to try to pre
project how temperature orclimate factors as well as air
(04:42):
pollution, could change in thenext 50 or 100 years later. And
what they find is that thepollution level can go high if
there's no ending control onhuman activity. 80 or like human
emissions, right? So, but theyalso simulate like, if people
(05:07):
can control the greenhousegasses, which is the leading
cause of increased temperature.
So, if they can control thegreenhouse the emission of
greenhouse gasses in differentlevels, then it's possible that
temperature will go down in manyyears, and also the clean air.
(05:31):
We can still see it's all aboutthe like interactions between
human efforts and the climate.
Vennela Damarla (05:41):
Thankyou. Dr Wong, and I would completely
agree with you regarding thewildfire, and this is the topic
that you've been teaching us inthe class too. So yeah, moving
on to the next question. Couldyou briefly elaborate on how
prolonged exposure to airpollutants such as ozone pm 2.5
(06:03):
and nitrous oxide affects lunghealth and function.
Dr. Meng Wang (06:07):
Yeah. So usually, when we talk about air
pollution, we say that airpollution have two effect. One
is called a shorthand effect.
Another one is called long termeffect. The shorthand effect, in
fact, it's like when airpollution goes high very
rapidly, like wildfire event,then people may get disease
immediately, right? And that isreally because people already
(06:31):
have some pre existing disease.
So we call it like a harvest ofhuman but for long term effect
air pollution, just becauseeveryone breathes air, right? So
it's kind of explored to takelife long. Many studies have
(06:51):
already find that. So if peoplepersist the exposed to air
pollution for many years, it'spossible that the pollution
could increase their risk fromthe beginning for the Healthy
People, and then graduallyincrease their biological
(07:11):
pathways and clinical symptomsand eventually increase the
Disease and come back to therespiratory disease. Actually,
you can see that air pollutionusually enters our bodies
through respiratory system,right through respiratory tract.
(07:32):
Respiratory disease definitelyis most directly impacted by air
pollution in terms of thepollutant. Though we know that
particulate matter, and also ourmost important one. Particulate
Matter is important because theyare so tiny that they can easily
enter into our respiratorytract. The train here area is
(07:56):
more like the connection betweenthe lung and our circulation
system. So once this, if theparticles are more enough, it
can enter into our circulationsystem. And of course,
cardiovascular disease, thatmeans that particulate matter
not holding a factor with BFPdisease, but also increased risk
(08:17):
of cardiovascular disease backto Otto. So Autumn is the gas
pollutant. So autumn is usuallyenters into our affecting our
lung. But OM is very activepollutant. It's easily interact
with other pollutant. So there'sonce Otto enters into our
(08:41):
respiratory tract. It can causelots of chemistry happen in our
lung. So this chemistry mayrelease a new pollutant and then
increase the risk of our lungdisease. So this is a basic
understanding for now in termsof how, PM, 2.9 organ may cause
(09:03):
respiratory disease.
Vennela Damarla (09:05):
Well, I really appreciate how you have detailed
everything. Dr Wong, so whichpollutant do you think have a
stronger association with lungdisease progression compared to
other pollutants?
Dr. Meng Wang (09:20):
So I would say that I cannot make a judgment so
far. So you can see thatdifferent studies have different
findings. Some studies, theyfind that PM, 2.5 may be the
most important one. Some definealso, or some study defined WC
or other pretense. So that'sreally depending on the
(09:41):
population, study area and alsomonitoring technology, Explorer
assessment, I would sayparticulate matter, fine
particulate matter, or maybe themost important risk factor for
respiratory disease so far. Upbecause there's many studies
(10:02):
have shown this consistentlyshow this results. Okay,
Vennela Damarla (10:07):
so you have mentioned about the long term
effects as well as the shortterm effects of air pollution.
So how do you think the longterm effects of cumulative
exposure to air pollutantsdiffer from the short term
impacts of acute exposure onrespiratory health?
Dr. Meng Wang (10:25):
Yeah, that's a great question. Usually, if we
think about shorthand exposure,we compare. So if we think about
shorthand exposure, we comparewhether the exposure on the day
(10:46):
that has a high level ofpollution, as more people get
disease, compared to the dayanother day, next to the day
before and after this day Wherethe concentration is low, lower
number of people get delays. Sothat is comparison of understand
(11:07):
the shorthand effect of airpollution. I would say that
shorthand effect happens becauseair pollution, important air
pollution events happen. So somedays when pollution happens,
high pollution level in certaindays and another days it goes
up. So in that way, when theconcentration immediately gets
(11:28):
high. So people who has diseasealready respiratory disease, for
example, so they will nottolerant to that high level of
pollution, and then it'spossible that they may get
immediate disease sequence. Soone several typical examples
(11:51):
would be like people who had aCOPD, they may have severe
symptoms, getting more severerecipients during the high level
pollution days, and then thismay cause them to go to the
hospital immediately, or go tothe or more severely, may cause
(12:12):
people die. So all this happenedat very short time period, but
it usually affects the peoplewho already have pre existing
disease, or had a like lowimmune system, right? Or have
some Alexa sample population,but long term, back to the long
(12:32):
term exposure to air pollutionand health. This is maybe
different to mechanism. So longterm exposure, we don't consider
like extreme air pollutionevent. It's more like a average
exporter over long term period.
So it's like people always wecompare people living in high
(12:55):
pollution area to the people wholive in low exposure location
area, and follow them up andsay, better they develop these
disease so, because it's followso long period, and people can
be from air pollution Andgradually increase their for
(13:16):
example, their like biologicalresponse, for example, like
without it, can increase therisk of inflammation, passive
stress, and this inflammation,if it's keep going on the
inflation and lead to certainsubclinical diseases. So for
(13:37):
example, their lung function maygo down, their blood pressure
may go up, right? And these arethe like pre clinical,
subclinical symptoms. So forrespiratory disease, one typical
example is emphysema. Emphysemais a structure change of their
lung, so once it happened, it'snot reversible, right? And and
(14:00):
also for cardiovascular disease,we have a term called as those
sclerosis, meaning that the plugbuild up in cables vessels, and
when it gets more serious, theplot cannot be removed, right?
Unless you take us surgery. Sothis is how air pollution can
gradually affecting thedevelopment of disease.
Vennela Damarla (14:26):
So do you think short term exposure to air
pollution with the pre existingconditions can cause
irreversible lung damage?
Dr. Meng Wang (14:35):
It's possible. I would say that, like I said,
when short term air pollutionevent happens. It can worsen the
lung disease or lung structurein that way. I say it's possible
to cause some in reversibledisease, but not like long train
(14:57):
exposure, because the verysupport disease.
Vennela Damarla (15:01):
what were the most surprising findings
regarding the associationbetween the air pollution and
lung health in your study?
Dr. Meng Wang (15:09):
Let me first introduce the study a little
bit. So this is a multi sidestudy in United States. So
United States, we select 680sand then each city recruit 1000
people, starting from 2000 andfollow them up all the way until
(15:33):
2020, so it's like a 20 yearsfollow up period. And during
this period, people will take CTscans apart about every four or
five years and also take lungfunction test at the same time.
(15:54):
So it's like a repeatmeasurement over time. The good
thing of this study this size,like it's longitudinal follow up
study with repeat measurement,so you can really track the
progression of lung disease overtime. So using CT scan, it can
(16:15):
use physiological technology,quantify the area where the lung
has abnormal change, have normalchange, can be converted to this
decide whether or severe theEmma sigma symptom is. So the
larger area the abnormal areais, then the most Emma sigma is
(16:39):
we expect. So in this case, wecan see that the whole the
emphysema progress over time andin the meantime. So the group I
working with at University ofWashington, we developed high
resolution air pollution model.
High Resolution means that itcan predict air pollution bi
weekly, and also at every singlelocation of the participants. So
(17:06):
each participant will assignunique Data Explorer value to
them, so we can really tracktheir air pollution data
longitudinally for theseparticipants as well. So both
explorer and outcomes arelongitudinal data, so we can
link them together to see okaywhether people living or exposed
(17:30):
to high level of air pollutionin this area also has faster
progression of emphysema overthese 20 years and yeah. So we
focus on several key proteins.
One is PM, 2.5 or fiveparticulate matter. Second one
(17:53):
is an o2, oxides of nitrogen,which is indicator of traffic
emission. Third one is autumn,which is a secondary pollutant,
very important to respiratorydisease, and the last one is
black carbon. So surprisingly,we actually find that all these
(18:13):
pollutants at baseline areassociated with faster
progression of eczema over time.
So baseline explorer means thatthe Explorer level assigned to
the time as a time when peopleare recruited in 2000 so what it
means is that at the time, ifpeople exposed to high levels of
game, 2.5 or ozone, for example,at the beginning, in early
(18:40):
years, when they recruit thisimpact could be lifelong,
already impacted theirprogression over time. So this
is important, because you knowthat air pollution goes down
right? So this means thatpeople, like older people, may
not really get benefit fromreally get benefit from clean
(19:04):
air at the beginning, so at thattime, the the bad air and
already trigger theirrespiratory disease. Well,
Vennela Damarla (19:16):
your study also tells that while concentration
of particulate matter 2.5 andoxides of nitrogen decreased
during the study, but ozonelevels remain a concern. So what
factors do you think thatcontribute to the increased
level of ground level ozone?
Dr. Meng Wang (19:34):
Yeah, so this, this is good question, and also
complicated story. This is back.
We'll be back to talk a littlebit background about atmospheric
chemistry. So you know, for fineparticulate matter, I would just
say at least a half of theparticular PM, 2.5 man made
sources like. Our vehicleemissions, our industry
(20:00):
emissions, cooking, allgenerated particles. But autumn
is different. Autumn is asecondary pollutant, which means
that their product formation ofautumn is not dependent on the
lack of a man made emission.
It's based on the chemistry.
It's a product of primarypollutants like pm, 2.5 oxides
(20:23):
of nitrogen, this pollutant. Soif the Clean Air Act, basically
the at the beginning is tocontrol memory sources. But if
you control memory sources, youcontrol the emissions from
pollutant generated from memorysources such as oxygenator such
as oxides of nitrogen, but youcannot control OSM because ozone
(20:47):
is not directly needed by theany of these manmade sources
actually back to the chemistry.
So autumn formation is verycomplicated, but in some
circumstances, lower level ofoxides of nitrogen and increase
(21:08):
the level of autumn. So that'swhy control also. It's very
challenging so far, even thoughin the US there's many policies
to control autumn, but it's verydifficult. You can imagine, like
during the COVID pandemic,there's many industries. There
(21:33):
are many people do not come out,so they do not drive and we have
significant reduction of trafficemission, they will get better,
much better air quality in termsof PMG on the fire size,
nitrogen. On the other hand, wehave a worsened ozone situation
(21:53):
during this period. So it'scomplicated story back in in
terms of chemistry and when linkthis flu trend to health effect,
then that could be differentmechanism as well. Yes,
Vennela Damarla (22:11):
so despite the alarming findings, what gives
you the hope for improving thelung health outcomes in the
context of raising air pollutionlevels,
Dr. Meng Wang (22:21):
I would say that overall air pollution, air
quality is getting betteroverall, but we do see that it's
unevenly distributed oranchored, disproportionately
affecting different people,especially some like low income
(22:42):
communities, they arehistorically exposed to close to
industry or like those twotraffic area, so their pollution
level may not really receive theadequate benefit from the Clean
Air Act. So in that way, theirair pollution level may not
really goes down that rapidly,and their health effect may be
(23:04):
of concern now in the UnitedStates, and back to the what we
can do to improve lung health.
So I think there are two aspectswe need to think about. One is
the policy this level of policymakers, they may the policy
should focus more on this, likevulnerable population,
(23:30):
underserved community, thispopulation, not focus on
everyone, like previously in theact. It's like overall entire
country, but now it should bemore specifically focused on
underserved community to reducetheir level of solution. So we
can see that many sponsors likethe EPA and I actually invest
(23:56):
the money to find to helpcommunities to improve their
resilience to air pollution. Onething they can do is that have
education to people, becausepeople in there, they may not
well educated, knowing how to ifair pollution event happens,
(24:18):
what we should do, right? Solike normally, if wildfire
comes, then people will receivealert. They will have access to
internet, watch TV, and thenthey know that, okay, next day,
the model will have wildfiresthat we need to do something.
But for low income communities,they may not know this they may
(24:39):
not have access to know thisknowledge. So in that way, the
government should have somepolicies to help them increase
their alert to this event,helping them, giving them
resource to get access to thisalert. On the other hand. I
think the prevention could be atan individual level. Air pre
(25:03):
fire has many studies haveevidence that air pre fire can
reduce air pollution, especiallyparticulate matter, very
effectively. But the problem isthat this technology only be
applied quite a lot of highincome communities, but for low
income communities, people maynot afford this air purifier,
(25:25):
but luckily, now there are somestudies trying to build up like
the DIY air pre fires. It's verysimple. You just use the future
air filter, built up a box andthen attach a box fan. This
could be a very simple airpurifier, but more efficient
(25:47):
than commercial one, and it costlike 1/3 or half price of the
commercial air purifier. This isa very good example may be
possibly used to increasepeople's health in terms of
recipient days.
Vennela Damarla (26:11):
Yeah, so DIY, air purifier, this is something
new that I've learned today. DrWong, so the population such as,
have low income communities andthe population living near
industries. How do you protectthis population from air
pollution? What can be done,
Dr. Meng Wang (26:33):
like I said, this effort that should be done by
both policy makers andindividual like community
residents. So now we have somestudies find we have some
connections with the buffaloAfrican American community, and
(26:56):
we know that they are livingclose to many of the communities
are close to major road or tooclose to highway. So what we are
hoping to do is that, first toincrease their education level,
like holding some event to thecommunity, and to introduce,
(27:17):
like, given a background aboutair pollution, what is so in
that way, when air pollutionevent comes, they can know about
this. And also, another way todo is like people. The problem
for people is that they don'tknow their explorer level, what
(27:39):
the exposure level is. So ourpilot study is doing now is to
give them the low sub costsensor and monitor. The local
sensor monitor is cheap, like a30 to 50 bucks, but it can
visualize the readings of levelsof evolution as well as the
(28:02):
color to indicate like green,yellow, red to indicate whether
they should be concerning abouttheir indoor air quality. So in
that way, we hope that this willhelp the community people to get
early alert of their indoor airquality problem, and we also try
(28:25):
to use, like I mentioned, a DIYair purifier to see how
effective it is to improve theirhealth. And what's normal, I
think now in this study, is thatwe notice that the sample
population, for example, wetypically focus on elderly
(28:48):
participants. Elderparticipants, they they may
have, like a decline memory, sothey may not really know that.
Okay, I should check the airsensor readings and when should
I turn it on? When should I turnit off? There's really a lot of
burden on them, so what we do isthat we do it like a smart
(29:12):
control system. We can use theair sensor to determine when we
can switch on, switch off, theirblog, and the plug will connect
to the beautiful air purifier.
So everything could beautomatic, so we can set up a
safety level to them. Once thelevel is above the safety level,
then automatically turn on theair purifier. So in that way, we
(29:37):
hope that this can help people,especially older people, or the
self population, improving theirhealth.
Vennela Damarla (29:46):
Well, moving on to the next question, so how
effective would be the Clean AirAct? You think the Clean Air Act
would help people to protectfrom the air pollution with pre
existing. Conditions,respiratory conditions, older
individual and people from lowsocio economic status, yes,
Dr. Meng Wang (30:08):
so I want to say that the original design of
Clean Air Act is trying toreduce the overall emission of
air pollution. That's includingthe traffic industry, everything
this, because there's manypolicies behind it trying to
reduce the manmade emission sothe fusion level goes down
(30:31):
rapidly, I would say over thepast 30 years. Yeah, so like 30
years ago, the pm treatmentlevel could be about over 50
microgram per cubic meter. Nowit's below 10. So it's a
remarkable achievement to theair pollution. So definitely I
(30:52):
believe that because airpollution goes down so much, so
much so there's a huge benefiton respiratory health. And
actually some studies alreadyevident your evidence. For
example, one study conducted inCalifornia works on children's
health. So recruited schoolchildren in elementary school
(31:18):
and in seven sites, and thenthey follow them up for multiple
years, and they check whetherreduced air pollution is
associated with better lungfunction, increase the lung
function. And they did find asignificant association, and
that's very encouraging andclear evidence supporting that a
(31:44):
clean air effect is veryeffective, but back to like the
benefit applied to everyone, butnot equally applied to everyone.
So some places may have, forexample, far away from the
sources, may have less issue,but other resources, lots of
(32:07):
communities near industry andthat, so they also need to
consider about the economics. Soin that way, there's always
fight between industry and thelocal community, the main the
industry may not want to reducetheir emission a lot, but
(32:27):
community people concerned aboutit. So this about environmental
justice issue remains, stillremains in the United States,
and that's also one of the mostimportant topic. Now, okay,
Vennela Damarla (32:44):
so what do you think are the biggest
misconceptions about the effectsof air pollution and health and
how can we educate the public?
Dr. Meng Wang (32:55):
But what I can say, one thing probably people
may overlook or negligible isthat? So in some areas where air
pollution is low, people mayfeel that they are pretty safe.
There's no problem. Airpollution has no effect on them
(33:16):
at all, that they don't careabout air pollution at all. I
think on one hand, it's goodthat air pollution is air
quality is good. They may haveother environmental issue that
they can they should be careful.
But on another hand, currentstudies, they did not find,
suggest that there's a safethreshold of air quality, of air
(33:41):
pollution health. It means thateven air pollution level is very
low, there's a still adverseeffect on human health. We
cannot say that. Okay, airpollution below five microgram
per kilometer, you don't need tocare about it. There's no impact
on you. Even it's lower, stillhave impact. It's like
(34:05):
pathogenic compounds. You knowthat's constant. Genetic
compound may cause cancer nomatter how low the level is, and
always cause cancer. Haveagreed, can always increase the
risk of cancer. Thing for airpollutant, we cannot say that,
okay, areas are pretty airquality are pretty good, and
(34:28):
then people don't need to careabout it. So I think that's
something we need to educatepeople that air pollution should
always be care about, eventhough you are in a clean air
location,
Vennela Damarla (34:45):
yes. Doctor Wong noted, like you said, even
the air pollution is lower, itcan have an impact in a long
run, yeah. So in your view, howsignificant is the role of
ambient air pollution as a risk?
Factor for chronic lung diseasescompared to other known risk
factors, such as smoking oroccupational hazards.
Dr. Meng Wang (35:09):
Yeah, so I would say that that's depending on
what's the level of populationyou mentioned about. So if we
talk about individual level,like for single people, maybe
many other factors. Smoking maybe very important risk factor
(35:30):
for these people. And if peoplehave poor dare to have it, they
may there may be a big problem.
But when we talk aboutpopulation level, meaning that
including all the people,putting all the people together,
and put and then we reckon therisk based on differential risk
(35:50):
factors, then air pollutionwould be top leading factors. So
the long set general, you knowloan set is like the top medical
general, set general release,the top rank the risk factors
that cause people dying everytwo or three years. And if you
(36:16):
read the long set general, youwill see that the ranking of air
pollution, typically, PMG pointgoes up year by year. So like
five years ago when I read thelong set general five Part Two,
the matter already ranked asnumber five of risk factor that
(36:41):
may cause people time. Thereason is that, or I would say
that opposite is the riskfactors are smoking, like blood
high blood pressure, so allthese traditional risk factors.
The reason why air pollutionbecause so many people die, but
(37:04):
its level is actually low. Thereason is really because all the
people are exposed to airpollution compared to a few
people mode. So because everyoneare exposed to air pollution,
potentially, the number ofpeople get disease could be
substantial. If you sum up thesepeople who get disease as number
(37:27):
could be really huge. And alsothen, if you look at the ranking
in the most recent year,actually, image open the file is
now top one or top two. So it'snow the top of top of the top is
(37:48):
the ranking of this riskfactors. So the reason for it,
in my understanding, is thatmany of the traditional risk
factors has better controlbecause people know how to do
it, and it's very effective now,adding more effective now, and
(38:12):
we have, like, a smoking controlpolicy, and we have a better
health care so in that way,traditional risk factors has
been controlled, and the peopleget this disease because of the
stresses factor. But now for airpollution, even though air
(38:35):
pollution level goes down, alsoin many developed countries, I
would say, not all thecountries, but the population
size going up, so it's offsetthe benefit of air pollution. So
eventually the number of peopledie because of air pollution has
(38:57):
been the ranking go up. Okay, soI hope I explained this clear.
Vennela Damarla (39:04):
Yes, doctor Wong, you, you have explained it
very clearly. You have mentionedthat PM, 2.5 is the leading air
pollutant right now. So arethere any measures taken to
control a PM, 2.5 air pollutant,
Dr. Meng Wang (39:21):
yes, so PM, 2.5 is not like a new star. It's
like an old friend for us formany years. So I would say that
probably 1980s so there's thefirst study called the Harper
(39:42):
six city study. That study, theyidentified that the five
particulate matter is stronglyassociated with mortality in a
cohort study. From there, peopleknow that particulate matter is
um. Important risk factor. Andfrom then on, many studies prove
(40:05):
this concept. And then EPArealized this problem. So for
the Clean Air Act, controllingPM, 2.05 is one of the major
task. So I would say that in theUnited States control. PM, 2.5
(40:26):
this effort keep going on formany years. There's lots of
policies at like federal level,state level and country level,
community level, individuallevel to control the pm 2.54
Vennela Damarla (40:44):
it's really awful to know that pm 2.5 is
increasing mortality rate. Andit's also good to know that
there have been a lot ofmeasures and efforts by the
government and then acts andpolicies to control this. So
despite the challenges presentedby the air pollution, what gives
you hope for the future of lunghealth and public policy?
Dr. Meng Wang (41:08):
Yeah, I would say that the current policies are
still effective in reducing em3.5 so now you know that the
standard, the pm 2.5 standard,by EPA, become more rigorous
(41:29):
every 10 years. So every 10years, then EPA will re evaluate
their policy, the standard, pm2.5 standard, whether it's
adequately protected humanhealth. So very recently, I
think this year, EPA updateduscpa updated the pm 2.5
(41:51):
standard, saying that the annualaverage level of pm 2.5 should
be below nine micrograms percubic meter. Previously the
level is 12 microgram per cubicmeter. So this is drop. And
(42:11):
given that the level is alreadylow, and they still want to
reduce this level, so you cansee that it's it's like reduce
the pollution by 25% it's a veryambitious policy, and I think
this policy will making surethat improving Air Quality will
(42:38):
still be beneficial to ourrespiratory health,
cardiovascular health, humanhealth. Well, on the other hand,
I think even though, in additionto the policy, the classic or
traditional policy, liketraditional source of air
(43:00):
pollution, we may think moreabout controlling new source of
pollution. Like I mentioned, howwe can control climate change.
We can slow down the climateglobal warming this step, just
like I said, climate change haveindirect impact on air quality.
(43:22):
So for example, now governmenthas some policies other than
carbon neutralization. It'sbasically to reduce the carbon
consumption, and in that way,the emission of greenhouse
gasses will be controlled andthe temperature, hopefully the
temperature will be flattenedout or go down in the future,
(43:47):
and then in that way, solutionlevel goes down, in the same
case of the greenhouse gasses.
So that's another angle I thinkshould be care about myself, air
pollution control and thebeneficial to respiratory
disease.
Vennela Damarla (44:06):
Thank you, Doctor Wong for providing a
great summary. So what finaladvice would you give to our
listeners about protecting theirfamilies from air pollution?
Dr. Meng Wang (44:17):
Yeah, so for families, I think I would
suggest that everyone shouldknow some basic about air
quality. First, we should knowthat everyone are exposed to air
pollution. So if there are manyresources, actually, the
(44:40):
researchers, government aremaking effort to provide many
resources to communityresidents, helping them to
understand what's the level itis. I can come up some
resources, hopefully can behelpful. So one is that uscp
have website. It showing thelevel of air pollution based on
(45:04):
their air monitoring stationsthere, and when you train
station will join visualize thelevel of pollution. For example,
in New York State, the US,nysdc, they have a website, and
they keep updating the level ofair pollution hourly. So this
could be a resource to look at,okay, whether your residential
(45:26):
location is safe or not. Anotherresource is that, like the US,
CDC and EPA, they develop somemap for the environmental
justice map or socialvulnerability index map. So what
this map is useful is that itgives you every single community
(45:51):
some the information aboutwhat's the leading environmental
risks are in this community,because not all the communities
have the same environmentalproblem. Some community may have
problem of noise. Explore. Someof them may have like air
pollution. Some of them may havelike the waste water, for
(46:13):
example. So this map will givingyou a sense about what's the
problem in your environmentalproblem in your community. This
will help people to understandthis. And another one, I would
suggest, is that if peopleidentify that air pollution is a
problem, or you're concerningabout air pollution problem, the
(46:37):
easiest way is to use airpurifier. It's very effective to
remove air pollution. And also,there's now several community
organizations invest they arehelping residents to solve the
environmental problems. So thereare many approaches hopefully
(46:58):
can help the family to firstknow their risk of air
pollution, Second, take actionsto prevent air pollution. So
Vennela Damarla (47:09):
are there any final concluding thoughts you
would want to share with us? DrWong,
Dr. Meng Wang (47:14):
well, I would say that air pollution is always a
problem, but the problem of airpollution as angle has been
shifting from traditionalindustrial control towards Eco
(47:37):
community problem of airpollution, then not towards
climate change, impact on airpollution and the human health.
So it's like, keep going onstory, and we are making effort
to understand the problem,helping people to solve their
(47:58):
problem and hopefully to improvetheir health.
Vennela Damarla (48:02):
Thank you so much. Dr Wong, it's been really
an insightful session. Staytuned for another episode on
buffalo healthcast. Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!