[Stoves] Ultrafine particles (Re: Xavier

[Crispin Pemberton-Pigott]

‎Dear Xavier

Concerning your last question, we have some strong evidence in small numbers of homes in Kyrgyzstan that COPD is directly related to PM2.5 exposure, and that exposure has been quantified, together with the medical examination. By changing the PM2.5 exposure the lung function changed. There are a few score cases to show.

The effect can be replicated quite easily on an hour by hour basis by putting a person into or out of a room with PM2.5 in the air. The test mechanism is a lung function device. The smoke aggravates the condition.

It is safe to assume it also causes the condition, but that is not a medical diagnosis. ‎That is an assumption informed by opinions.

The effect of CO from stoves is easily shown be exposure measurements and blood analysis.

For interest,   some of the best PM research has been done by NYSERDA. I can connect you to a couple of the top researchers if you want to hear from them directly. They have some classic slides.

Regards
Crispin



From: Xavier Brandao
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 16:46
To: ndesai at alum.mit.edu
Cc: 'Philip Lloyd'; 'Crispin Pemberton-Pigott'; 'Harold Annegarn'; 'Anil Rajvanshi'; 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'; 'Norbert Senf'
Subject: RE: Ultrafine particles (Re: Xavier


Dear Nikhil,

Sorry if I was rude in my last email, I didn’t mean to be offensive.
I was just trying to say that the discussion on air pollution on this List is sometimes confusing from my point of view. I often do not manage to understand what you mean exactly in your posts.

« Considering that practically no data exist on low dosages of ultrafine particles, nor is any causal pathway from such dosage to disease incidence, toxicity claims of the type you have found are useless from policy perspective. »
I said « potentially », but indeed, there is not much data about the nanoparticles toxicity:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4689276/<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpmc%2Farticles%2FPMC4689276%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbd739e9707c54484ecc108d5bf5bde22%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636625323639372527&sdata=KxGYp%2Fh4H26DtvzOG9WDqf3E%2BvrdIJfQG%2F9SOC9GWjU%3D&reserved=0>
And, posterious to the above, the INSERM has found metal oxide nanoparticles in lung tissue sections of welders lungs. The welders had lung alterations. The researchers tried to confirm if the metal oxide nanoparticles could have an effect on health. So they tested it on rats. They concluded there is a potential risk for respiratory health:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17435390.2016.1242797?src=recsys&journalCode=inan20<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tandfonline.com%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1080%2F17435390.2016.1242797%3Fsrc%3Drecsys%26journalCode%3Dinan20&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbd739e9707c54484ecc108d5bf5bde22%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636625323639372527&sdata=TO0tsXky%2BxvlJh4FXnZoY3qdmKHPFL24I3N86ntsZ%2FU%3D&reserved=0>

So, indeed, there isn’t much evidence of nanoparticles toxicity, and more research is needed.

« Whether any premature death was from hunger or HAP exposure or contaminated alcohol, nobody would ever know. »
Leaving aside nanoparticles, we have no way, at all, not the slightest hint, that, maybe, cookstoves emissions are harmful to human health?

Best,

Xavier


De : Nikhil Desai [mailto:pienergy2008 at gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 21 mai 2018 04:22
À : Xavier Brandao
Cc : Philip Lloyd; Crispin Pemberton-Pigott; Harold Annegarn; Anil Rajvanshi; Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Norbert Senf
Objet : Ultrafine particles (Re: Xavier

Xavier:

Rich theories make some people rich.

As with stove design and promotion, context is everything.

Considering that practically no data exist on low dosages of ultrafine particles, nor is any causal pathway from such dosage to disease incidence, toxicity claims of the type you have found are useless from policy perspective.

Maniacal chatter is not science.

Preventing exposures to ultrafine particles may or may not prevent premature deaths. Even Kirk Smith and Ajay Pilarisetti accept as much, considering their methodologies for aDALY computations.

Say, Ebola is spread by just one virus and preventing the emergence or the spread of the virus would prevent premature death. There is no similar potential with ultrafine particles generally. Too many sources, varying compositions, confounding factors.

Ultrafine particle emissions are a new fad in cookstove business. Fads kill people by omission. Whether any premature death was from hunger or HAP exposure or contaminated alcohol, nobody would ever know.

I propose the ISO process be subjected to premature death.


Nikhil
Skype: nikhildesai888

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20180522/e4cbcfd9/attachment.html>