Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (3)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (3)
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (3) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- environmental health (3) (entfernen)
Air pollution is associated with morbidity and mortality worldwide. We investigated the impact of improved air quality during the economic lockdown during the SARS-Cov2 pandemic on emergency room (ER) admissions in Germany. Weekly aggregated clinical data from 33 hospitals were collected in 2019 and 2020. Hourly concentrations of nitrogen and sulfur dioxide (NO2, SO2), carbon and nitrogen monoxide (CO, NO), ozone (O3) and particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5) measured by ground stations and meteorological data (ERA5) were selected from a 30 km radius around the corresponding ED. Mobility was assessed using aggregated cell phone data. A linear stepwise multiple regression model was used to predict ER admissions. The average weekly emergency numbers vary from 200 to over 1600 cases (total n = 2,216,217). The mean maximum decrease in caseload was 5 standard deviations. With the enforcement of the shutdown in March, the mobility index dropped by almost 40%. Of all air pollutants, NO2 has the strongest correlation with ER visits when averaged across all departments. Using a linear stepwise multiple regression model, 63% of the variation in ER visits is explained by the mobility index, but still 6% of the variation is explained by air quality and climate change.
Since the addition of fluoride to drinking water in the 1940s, there have been frequent and sometimes heated discussions regarding its benefits and risks. In a recently published review, we addressed the question if current exposure levels in Europe represent a risk to human health. This review was discussed in an editorial asking why we did not calculate benchmark doses (BMD) of fluoride neurotoxicity for humans. Here, we address the question, why it is problematic to calculate BMDs based on the currently available data. Briefly, the conclusions of the available studies are not homogeneous, reporting negative as well as positive results; moreover, the positive studies lack control of confounding factors such as the influence of well-known neurotoxicants. We also discuss the limitations of several further epidemiological studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria of our review. Finally, it is important to not only focus on epidemiological studies. Rather, risk analysis should consider all available data, including epidemiological, animal, as well as in vitro studies. Despite remaining uncertainties, the totality of evidence does not support the notion that fluoride should be considered a human developmental neurotoxicant at current exposure levels in European countries.
The EU chemicals strategy for sustainability (CSS) asserts that both human health and the environment are presently threatened and that further regulation is necessary. In a recent Guest Editorial, members of the German competent authority for risk assessment, the BfR, raised concerns about the scientific justification for this strategy. The complexity and interdependence of the networks of regulation of chemical substances have ensured that public health and wellbeing in the EU have continuously improved. A continuous process of improvement in consumer protection is clearly desirable but any initiative directed towards this objective must be based on scientific knowledge. It must not confound risk with other factors in determining policy. This conclusion is fully supported in the present Commentary including the request to improve both, data collection and the time-consuming and bureaucratic procedures that delay the publication of regulations.