By ERIC NAGOURNEY - The New York Times - May 9, 2006
Children who live near busy roads are more likely to have symptoms of asthma than those who do not, a study of more than 5,000 children in Southern California has found.
The study, which appears in Environmental Health Perspectives, found that children who lived within 250 feet of major roads had a 50 percent higher risk of having had asthma symptoms in the past year.
The findings, researchers say, suggest that major sources of air pollution like highways should not be the only source of concern.
"At this point, there is enough evidence that there may be a problem with local roads that we ought to think about where we do new construction," said the lead author, Dr. Rob McConnell of the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California.
The researchers found that the asthma risk decreased to normal for children living about 600 feet or more away from a busy road.
The findings were based on a study involving 5- to 7-year-old children in 13 communities. Their families were asked to complete surveys about the children's health. The researchers then charted the answers about asthma against the location of the families' homes.
When it came both to having a history of asthma and to having symptoms currently, the closer a busy roadway, the worse the problem, especially for girls.
The greatest risk was found in children who had lived near busy roads since before age 2, suggesting they might have been exposed to pollutants in infancy or while their mothers were pregnant.
While it is unclear what people who live near roads can do to reduce their risk, Dr. McConnell said some communities had begun passing laws intended to keep new schools farther from busy roads. Communities should also think about where they place their playgrounds, he said.
SOURCE: New York Times
Showing posts with label air pollution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label air pollution. Show all posts
Friday, August 24, 2007
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Challenge to Sen. Chris Harris and Highland Village Mayor Costa to support your assertions that there is no health risk for children
August 18, 2007
Dear Mayor Costa and Senator Harris,
I write because I am attempting to educate myself on the issue of air pollution in regard to one’s residence, its proximity to a highway similar to the proposed FM 2499, Section 4, and children’s health. Your letters to the Highland Village Parents Group are evidence that you are attempting to educate yourselves as well.
Along that line, I would greatly appreciate the information and studies cited to you by TXDOT and the physicians you consulted to support their position that I and the community should have, as Senator Harris stated, “no cause for concern.” In researching the issue myself, I found various studies that address the same subject as the USC School of Medicine study. Following are a few I came across.
Distance-weighted traffic density in proximity to a home is a risk factor for leukemia and other childhood cancers. Radian International, LLC, Denver, CO
[Features of traffic near houses and respiratory damage in children: the results of the SIDRIA (Italian Study on Respiratory Problems in Children and the Environment)]. Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, S Giovanni Battista Hospital and Center for Cancer Prevention, Piemonte, Torino, Italy.
Childhood leukemia and road traffic: A population-based case-control study, Lombardy Cancer Registry, National Cancer Institute, Milano, Italy
Traffic-related Air Pollution near Busy Roads. The East Bay Children's Respiratory Health Study. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency, Oakland; and Atmospheric Sciences Department and Indoor Environment Department, Environmental Energy Technologies Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California
Traffic-related air pollution is associated with atopy in children living in urban areas. Medical Institute of Environmental Hygiene at the Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany
Air Pollution from Traffic and the Development of Respiratory Infections and Asthmatic and Allergic Symptoms in Children. School of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Environmental and Occupational Health Group, Utrecht University, Utrecht; RIVM-National Institute of Public Health and Environment, Bilthoven; Department of Pediatrics, Erasmus University, and Sophia Children’s Hospital, Rotterdam; Beatrix Children’s Hospital and Department of Epidemiology, Groningen University, Groningen, The Netherlands; Institute of Epidemiology, GSF National Research Center for Environment and Health, Neuherberg, Germany; Department of Environmental Health, Stockholm County Council; and Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
There are several more studies relating to the subject of traffic-related air pollution and its significant impact on children’s health. I will gladly provide you with the names of these reports.
Very truly yours,
Roxane Thomas
Highland Village
Dear Mayor Costa and Senator Harris,
I write because I am attempting to educate myself on the issue of air pollution in regard to one’s residence, its proximity to a highway similar to the proposed FM 2499, Section 4, and children’s health. Your letters to the Highland Village Parents Group are evidence that you are attempting to educate yourselves as well.
Along that line, I would greatly appreciate the information and studies cited to you by TXDOT and the physicians you consulted to support their position that I and the community should have, as Senator Harris stated, “no cause for concern.” In researching the issue myself, I found various studies that address the same subject as the USC School of Medicine study. Following are a few I came across.
Distance-weighted traffic density in proximity to a home is a risk factor for leukemia and other childhood cancers. Radian International, LLC, Denver, CO
The results are suggestive of an association between proximal high traffic streets with traffic counts > or = 20,000 vehicles per day and childhood cancer, including leukemia.
[Features of traffic near houses and respiratory damage in children: the results of the SIDRIA (Italian Study on Respiratory Problems in Children and the Environment)]. Unit of Cancer Epidemiology, S Giovanni Battista Hospital and Center for Cancer Prevention, Piemonte, Torino, Italy.
For children living in metropolitan areas, a clear association was found between high flow of heavy vehicles near their residence and several respiratory conditions.
Childhood leukemia and road traffic: A population-based case-control study, Lombardy Cancer Registry, National Cancer Institute, Milano, Italy
Evidence suggests that children living in homes that are heavily exposed living
Traffic-related Air Pollution near Busy Roads. The East Bay Children's Respiratory Health Study. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency, Oakland; and Atmospheric Sciences Department and Indoor Environment Department, Environmental Energy Technologies Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California
“We found spatial variability in traffic pollutants and associated differences in respiratory symptoms in a region with good air quality. Our findings support the hypothesis that traffic-related pollution is associated with respiratory symptoms in children.”
Air pollution from truck traffic and lung function in children living near motorways.Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Wageningen, The Netherlands
The results indicate that exposure to traffic-related air pollution, in particular diesel exhaust particles, may lead to reduced lung function in children living near major motorways.
Traffic-related air pollution is associated with atopy in children living in urban areas. Medical Institute of Environmental Hygiene at the Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany
The results indicate that traffic-related air pollution leads to increased prevalence of atopic sensitizations, allergic symptoms, and diseases.
Air Pollution from Traffic and the Development of Respiratory Infections and Asthmatic and Allergic Symptoms in Children. School of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Environmental and Occupational Health Group, Utrecht University, Utrecht; RIVM-National Institute of Public Health and Environment, Bilthoven; Department of Pediatrics, Erasmus University, and Sophia Children’s Hospital, Rotterdam; Beatrix Children’s Hospital and Department of Epidemiology, Groningen University, Groningen, The Netherlands; Institute of Epidemiology, GSF National Research Center for Environment and Health, Neuherberg, Germany; Department of Environmental Health, Stockholm County Council; and Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
This study has suggested an association between self-reported prevalence of respiratory illness, specifically wheezing, ear/nose/ throat infections, and reporting of physician-diagnosed asthma and flu or serious cold, and traffic-related air pollution.
There are several more studies relating to the subject of traffic-related air pollution and its significant impact on children’s health. I will gladly provide you with the names of these reports.
Very truly yours,
Roxane Thomas
Highland Village
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Flattened by freight carriers, fleeced by slick operators and dumbfounded by the audacity of the Rail Roads
By Faith Chatham - Texas Rail - June 9, 2007
The railroads and regional and Arlington city officials have been meeting, discussing plans and seeking funding to relocate the Union Pacific tracks which run through the heart of Arlington and Grand Praire. Toxic chemicals carried on those tracks pose risk to large populations, but that does not seem to be the major consideration for relocation of the tracks. There is now much community support for commuter rail. Arlington, one of the three cities in this 16 county NCTCOG region, with a population which places it in the top 50 most populous cities in the nation, combined with neighboring Grand Prairie, are the largest cities in Texas not to have mass transit. Hundreds of thousands of citizens have no transportation alternative except private automobilies which contribute to air pollution.
Failure of the region to meet EPA clean air standards by the year 2010 may lead to Federal funding sanctions. Increased gas drilling has also skewed previous air pollution forecasts even further into the negative column. Cities of Arlington and Fort Worth rushed to permit gas drilling without accounting for increased carbon dioxide emmissions from generators on gas drilling units. This is cited by the EPA as reasons for rejecting the regions Clean Air Plan.
The dialogue about relocating the Union Pacific tracks irritates me. For decades cries of concerned citizens over shipment of dangerous chemicals on freight trains through major population centers have been ignored. Now, as the freight lines want to improve their bottom lines and reap the profits from shipment of tonnage from China through Texas to Kansas City and Canada, there is a big push to get the taxpayers to underwrite relocation of rail lines. Despite how the rail roads, regional planners and groups like NASCO attempt to sell it, I doubt that protection of civilian population groups or promotion of passenger rail is prompting these inititives. The rail carriers want the tax payers to pay to upgrade rail infrastructure owned and controlled by private rail corporations.
Gee... does this seem familar? Private rail promoters acquire massive segments of American real estate to build railroads and provide passenger and freight services to the American people. Rail road promoters get rich, decided that oil and gas is more lucrative than running rail roads and hauling freight is less bothersome than providing passenger service. Passenger rail is discontinued by most carriers. Eventually public transit authorities develop passenger rail and the US government leases use of the tracks from private rail roads to provide AMTRAK passenger rail service to American citizens. Oil and gas makes land developers rich. Citizens sit for hours while freight trains have priority to the tracks over passenger trains. The energy sector gets richer and richer and citizens pay higher and higher electric, residential gas and automobile gasoline rates.
Somehow it is insulting to think that the public is being expected to pay for upgrading rail road infrastructure for freight shipments! Then comes the push to get the public sector to pay for relocating the UNION PACIFIC tracks which run between UTA and the new Cowboy Stadium in Arlington!
It makes absolutely no sense to me to relocate the Union and Pacific tracks that run through the heart of Arlington. What better location could there be for PASSENGER rail tracks? They run a few blocks north of the University of Texas at Arlington and a few block south of the new Cowboys Stadium.
Why is it that lawmakers and RTC members rush to convert highway transporation project to PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP while ignoring rail which has been a private partnership from its inception?
Why are public dollars tapped for improving privately owned and rail road controlled rail lines? One of the biggest obstacles to effective passenger rail in Texas (AMTRAK) has been the control of privately owned tracks. Freight carriers grant right of way to freight trains while AMTRAK passengers sit for hours, unable to estimate reasonable arrival or departure times.
BSNF, KCS (de Mexico), and Union Pacific want the benefits but do not intend to fork out the cash to maintain and improve their infrastructure. Most train derailments in the US have been attributed to the railroads refusal to properly maintain their tracks. It's time that the rail industry and elected officials (such as County Judge Glen Whitley and the RTC) face some realities. Ownership comes with responsibility. If the railroads refuse to maintain the tracks and pay for desired infrastructure upgrades, they should GIVE the tracks to the government and allow them to be coverted to passenger lines. If they want straighter routes from Mexico to Oklahoma to ship freight at better profit margins for their companies, they should pay for the right of way and construct their own straighter routes. They should not expect the citizens of Texas to underwrite their schemes to improve their bottom lines through prioritization of the TTC over more critical transportation projects designed to solve Texas's most critical transportation bottlenecks. Moving freight is a commercial enterprize. Freight haulers should pay for upgrades to commercial infrastructure.
Moving people is the governments responsiblity. If private public partnerships are called for, there is an excellent opportunity running right straight through the center of Grand Prairie and Arlington. The Union Pacific track passes within walking distance of Grand Prairie's downtown business district, Arlington's downtown business district, the University of Texas at Arlington, the Cowboy's Stadium and Glory Park. There is not enough money left in the sales tax cap (after citizens underwrote the Cowboy Stadium) for Arlington to underwrite rail as a city initiative. However, there is a great opportunity for a private partner to step up to the plate, negotiate a deal for use of existing Union Pacific tracks and provide passenger rail service to citizens of Grand Prairie and Arlington.
The rail roads should devote the effort they've expended on lobbying to change the Texas Transportation Code and changing the eminent domain law to favor exercise of eminent domain for private gain in their push for the construciton of the Trans Texas Corridor into pursuing existing opportunities to provide transportation solutions in passenger rail.
The rail roads (and regional transportation planner) have focused on getting the laws changed so that the public underwrites improvements to privately owned rail infrastructure. It is time Union Pacific, KCS, BSNF and other rail conglomerates step up to the plate and carry more of the civic repsonsiblity. Hey, maybe Mr. Jones might underwrite some of the expense. After all, passenger rail in Arlington located near his stadium would be a definite plus for transporting fams to all games -- not just a one time trip to the Super Bowl.
The railroads and regional and Arlington city officials have been meeting, discussing plans and seeking funding to relocate the Union Pacific tracks which run through the heart of Arlington and Grand Praire. Toxic chemicals carried on those tracks pose risk to large populations, but that does not seem to be the major consideration for relocation of the tracks. There is now much community support for commuter rail. Arlington, one of the three cities in this 16 county NCTCOG region, with a population which places it in the top 50 most populous cities in the nation, combined with neighboring Grand Prairie, are the largest cities in Texas not to have mass transit. Hundreds of thousands of citizens have no transportation alternative except private automobilies which contribute to air pollution.
Failure of the region to meet EPA clean air standards by the year 2010 may lead to Federal funding sanctions. Increased gas drilling has also skewed previous air pollution forecasts even further into the negative column. Cities of Arlington and Fort Worth rushed to permit gas drilling without accounting for increased carbon dioxide emmissions from generators on gas drilling units. This is cited by the EPA as reasons for rejecting the regions Clean Air Plan.
The dialogue about relocating the Union Pacific tracks irritates me. For decades cries of concerned citizens over shipment of dangerous chemicals on freight trains through major population centers have been ignored. Now, as the freight lines want to improve their bottom lines and reap the profits from shipment of tonnage from China through Texas to Kansas City and Canada, there is a big push to get the taxpayers to underwrite relocation of rail lines. Despite how the rail roads, regional planners and groups like NASCO attempt to sell it, I doubt that protection of civilian population groups or promotion of passenger rail is prompting these inititives. The rail carriers want the tax payers to pay to upgrade rail infrastructure owned and controlled by private rail corporations.
Gee... does this seem familar? Private rail promoters acquire massive segments of American real estate to build railroads and provide passenger and freight services to the American people. Rail road promoters get rich, decided that oil and gas is more lucrative than running rail roads and hauling freight is less bothersome than providing passenger service. Passenger rail is discontinued by most carriers. Eventually public transit authorities develop passenger rail and the US government leases use of the tracks from private rail roads to provide AMTRAK passenger rail service to American citizens. Oil and gas makes land developers rich. Citizens sit for hours while freight trains have priority to the tracks over passenger trains. The energy sector gets richer and richer and citizens pay higher and higher electric, residential gas and automobile gasoline rates.
Somehow it is insulting to think that the public is being expected to pay for upgrading rail road infrastructure for freight shipments! Then comes the push to get the public sector to pay for relocating the UNION PACIFIC tracks which run between UTA and the new Cowboy Stadium in Arlington!
It makes absolutely no sense to me to relocate the Union and Pacific tracks that run through the heart of Arlington. What better location could there be for PASSENGER rail tracks? They run a few blocks north of the University of Texas at Arlington and a few block south of the new Cowboys Stadium.
Why is it that lawmakers and RTC members rush to convert highway transporation project to PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP while ignoring rail which has been a private partnership from its inception?
Why are public dollars tapped for improving privately owned and rail road controlled rail lines? One of the biggest obstacles to effective passenger rail in Texas (AMTRAK) has been the control of privately owned tracks. Freight carriers grant right of way to freight trains while AMTRAK passengers sit for hours, unable to estimate reasonable arrival or departure times.
BSNF, KCS (de Mexico), and Union Pacific want the benefits but do not intend to fork out the cash to maintain and improve their infrastructure. Most train derailments in the US have been attributed to the railroads refusal to properly maintain their tracks. It's time that the rail industry and elected officials (such as County Judge Glen Whitley and the RTC) face some realities. Ownership comes with responsibility. If the railroads refuse to maintain the tracks and pay for desired infrastructure upgrades, they should GIVE the tracks to the government and allow them to be coverted to passenger lines. If they want straighter routes from Mexico to Oklahoma to ship freight at better profit margins for their companies, they should pay for the right of way and construct their own straighter routes. They should not expect the citizens of Texas to underwrite their schemes to improve their bottom lines through prioritization of the TTC over more critical transportation projects designed to solve Texas's most critical transportation bottlenecks. Moving freight is a commercial enterprize. Freight haulers should pay for upgrades to commercial infrastructure.
Moving people is the governments responsiblity. If private public partnerships are called for, there is an excellent opportunity running right straight through the center of Grand Prairie and Arlington. The Union Pacific track passes within walking distance of Grand Prairie's downtown business district, Arlington's downtown business district, the University of Texas at Arlington, the Cowboy's Stadium and Glory Park. There is not enough money left in the sales tax cap (after citizens underwrote the Cowboy Stadium) for Arlington to underwrite rail as a city initiative. However, there is a great opportunity for a private partner to step up to the plate, negotiate a deal for use of existing Union Pacific tracks and provide passenger rail service to citizens of Grand Prairie and Arlington.
The rail roads should devote the effort they've expended on lobbying to change the Texas Transportation Code and changing the eminent domain law to favor exercise of eminent domain for private gain in their push for the construciton of the Trans Texas Corridor into pursuing existing opportunities to provide transportation solutions in passenger rail.
The rail roads (and regional transportation planner) have focused on getting the laws changed so that the public underwrites improvements to privately owned rail infrastructure. It is time Union Pacific, KCS, BSNF and other rail conglomerates step up to the plate and carry more of the civic repsonsiblity. Hey, maybe Mr. Jones might underwrite some of the expense. After all, passenger rail in Arlington located near his stadium would be a definite plus for transporting fams to all games -- not just a one time trip to the Super Bowl.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
