This article does a couple of things that seem strange. The title’s “first ever” claim is a bit odd since the WHO has been basing their recommendations on global studies for decades. The WHO page already says “WHO data show that almost all of the global population (99%) breathe air that exceeds WHO guideline limits and contains high levels of pollutants, with low- and middle-income countries suffering from the highest exposures.” <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/air-pollution#tab=tab_1" rel="nofollow">https://www.who.int/health-topics/air-pollution#tab=tab_1</a><p>Another strange bit is the quote “the WHO’s recommended safe limit of 15 μg/m³.” The WHO’s 2005 “ideal” recommendation was 10 for average annual exposure, and the recommendation in their 2021 is for 5 μg/m³. I’m not sure where the 15 came from, but the WHO has proposed 4 levels of “interim” targets for cities & counties to aim for, starting at 35 and dropping to 5.<p>For anyone who cares about air quality, I’d totally recommend reading the WHO’s material, there is a shorter executive summary [1], a much longer full report describing methodology [2] and a web site full of resources [3].<p>[1] <a href="https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/345334/9789240034433-eng.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/345334/9789...</a><p>[2] <a href="https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/345329/9789240034228-eng.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/345329/9789...</a><p>[3] <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/air-pollution" rel="nofollow">https://www.who.int/health-topics/air-pollution</a>
> a Monash University study has found that only 0.18% of the global land area and 0.001% of the global population are exposed to levels of PM2.5 - the world’s leading environmental health risk factor – below levels of safety recommended by Word Health Organization (WHO).<p>I can't quite suss out the details, but it seems like they're saying that only 0.18% of global land area had levels of PM2.5 lower than the WHO's recommended levels _every day_.<p>Most of the study seems to be looking at how those levels vary by day, but the big claim doesn't reference % of days at all, which is odd. Their bullet points are a little confusing as well:<p>> Despite a slight decrease in high PM2.5 exposed days globally, by 2019 more than 70% of days still had PM2.5 concentrations higher than 15 μg/m³.<p>Where, though? They measured different geographic areas, but this has no geographic information. That leads me to believe that the claim is that on 70% of days there was at least one geographic location with PM2.5 concentrations higher than 15 μg/m³.<p>> In southern Asia and eastern Asia, more than 90% of days had daily PM2.5 concentrations higher than 15 μg/m³.<p>This is much clearer but suggests that my interpretation of the last bullet was wrong... maybe that one meant a global average?<p>I dunno, maybe I should read this again after some more coffee, but it seems to be written in a confusing way that goes back and forth from global averages to local averages to number of days above a threshold to annual averages.
If you live in the US, the EPA has a website to check outside air quality<p><a href="https://www.airnow.gov/" rel="nofollow">https://www.airnow.gov/</a><p>There was a recent thread[1] about air quality sensors a few months ago. From that thread there were a lot of recommendations. I ended up buying the Airthings ViewPlus[2] because it covered the widest range. If it's too pricey for you, AirGradient[3] sells a DIY "Pre-soldered" kit for cheaper that I strongly considered as well. The article in that thread was about how "Many indoor air quality sensor products are a scam," but like people mentioned in the comments, even if they are not 100% exactly accurate, you can still see that something has changed and you can crack a window, or close one if PM2.5 from outside is too high.<p>1. <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33025995" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33025995</a><p>2. <a href="https://www.airthings.com/view-plus" rel="nofollow">https://www.airthings.com/view-plus</a><p>3. <a href="https://www.airgradient.com/open-airgradient/kits/" rel="nofollow">https://www.airgradient.com/open-airgradient/kits/</a>
My wife has severe astma and when traveling this is something that worries me all the time. At home we have blue air machines and plants to filter the air, but astma attacks still happen (when she didn't use her medicines enough) when she travels from work to home on bad air quality days in Amsterdam. The astma medication is something that comes with a lot of trade-offs/health complications if you use it too much. Hope this will improve in future, but prevention would be even better.<p>I looked up the amount of people in the Netherlands that have health issues connected with air quality and it isn't negligible at all (1+ million on a 17,53 million population), but I don't understand why politically it doesn't get the attention it deserves.<p>Unfortunately I can't create this kind of machine (software eng, no hardware skills), but I think there is a very big market for portable masks with safe air to breath temporary when you are outside. Especially with all the research that has been done on how much air quality impacts your health.
“the lack of pollution monitoring stations globally for air pollution underscores the importance of innovative approaches such as machine learning to estimate global surface-level daily PM2.5 concentrations accurately.”
“The health impacts of exposure to PM2.5 are significant”<p>I think they need to elaborate on this to put the funding in greater context. Statistically significant? Significant in terms of actual impact on one’s life?
For those looking for additional data and more comprehensive coverage on the topic I would point you to Our World In Data's entry on outdoor air pollution.<p><a href="https://ourworldindata.org/outdoor-air-pollution">https://ourworldindata.org/outdoor-air-pollution</a>
"Better air quality is the easiest way not to die"
<a href="https://dynomight.net/air/" rel="nofollow">https://dynomight.net/air/</a>