Unconventional natural gas development and pediatric asthma hospitalizations in Pennsylvania

Willis, Mary D.; Jusko, Todd A.; Halterman, Jill S.; Hill, Elaine

doi:10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.022

Cited by 34 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Associations between unconventional natural gas development in Marcellus shale and asthma exacerbation have been found [80,81]. The link between childhood hematologic cancer, air pollution and residential proximity to oil and gas development has been reported [82].…”

Section: Situating the Science On Air Pollution And Shale Explorationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lagging and Flagging: Air Pollution, Shale Gas Exploration and the Interaction of Policy, Science, Ethics and Environmental Justice in England

Watterson

Dinan

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The science on the effects of global climate change and air pollution on morbidity and mortality is clear and debate now centres around the scale and precise contributions of particular pollutants. Sufficient data existed in recent decades to support the adoption of precautionary public health policies relating to fossil fuels including shale exploration. Yet air quality and related public health impacts linked to ethical and environmental justice elements are often marginalized or missing in planning and associated decision making. Industry and government policies and practices, laws and planning regulations lagged well behind the science in the United Kingdom. This paper explores the reasons for this and what shaped some of those policies. Why did shale gas policies in England fail to fully address public health priorities and neglect ethical and environmental justice concerns. To answer this question, an interdisciplinary analysis is needed informed by a theoretical framework of how air pollution and climate change are largely discounted in the complex realpolitik of policy and regulation for shale gas development in England. Sources, including official government, regulatory and planning documents, as well as industry and scientific publications are examined and benchmarked against the science and ethical and environmental justice criteria. Further, our typology illustrates how the process works drawing on an analysis of official policy documents and statements on planning and regulatory oversight of shale exploration in England, and material from industry and their consultants relating to proposed shale oil and gas development. Currently the oil, gas and chemical industries in England continue to dominate and influence energy and feedstock-related policy making to the detriment of ethical and environmental justice decision making with significant consequences for public health.

show abstract

Section: Situating the Science On Air Pollution And Shale Explorationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lagging and Flagging: Air Pollution, Shale Gas Exploration and the Interaction of Policy, Science, Ethics and Environmental Justice in England

Watterson

Dinan

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even the location of natural gas pipelines is positively associated with social vulnerability, highlighting the link between health hazards and energy infrastructure [180]. Other negative health outcomes of natural gas flaring include increase pediatric asthma exacerbations leading to an increase in emergency department visits [181], and hospitalizations [182]. Food insecurity resulting from disrupted agriculture and food production systems [183,184] and a higher burden of a wide range of diseases attributable to climate disruptions [1] such as infectious diseases and cardiopulmonary diseases such as asthma and COPD disproportionately affect poor individuals in LMICs.…”

Section: Climate Change and Health Inequitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilience and Equity in a Time of Crises: Investing in Public Urban Greenspace Is Now More Essential Than Ever in the US and Beyond

Bikomeye

Namin

Anyanwu

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The intersecting negative effects of structural racism, COVID-19, climate change, and chronic diseases disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities in the US and around the world. Urban populations of color are concentrated in historically redlined, segregated, disinvested, and marginalized neighborhoods with inadequate quality housing and limited access to resources, including quality greenspaces designed to support natural ecosystems and healthy outdoor activities while mitigating urban environmental challenges such as air pollution, heat island effects, combined sewer overflows and poor water quality. Disinvested urban environments thus contribute to health inequity via physical and social environmental exposures, resulting in disparities across numerous health outcomes, including COVID-19 and chronic diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular diseases (CVD). In this paper, we build off an existing conceptual framework and propose another conceptual framework for the role of greenspace in contributing to resilience and health equity in the US and beyond. We argue that strategic investments in public greenspaces in urban neighborhoods impacted by long term economic disinvestment are critically needed to adapt and build resilience in communities of color, with urgency due to immediate health threats of climate change, COVID-19, and endemic disparities in chronic diseases. We suggest that equity-focused investments in public urban greenspaces are needed to reduce social inequalities, expand economic opportunities with diversity in workforce initiatives, build resilient urban ecosystems, and improve health equity. We recommend key strategies and considerations to guide this investment, drawing upon a robust compilation of scientific literature along with decades of community-based work, using strategic partnerships from multiple efforts in Milwaukee Wisconsin as examples of success.

show abstract

“…One study [45] was rated "probably high" for blinding because children and parents were recruited based on existence of airway respiratory symptoms and parents were responsible for deploying and retrieving in-home environmental samples and media as well as recording outcomes in diaries, thus making it unlikely that the reporting of outcomes was competed by someone without knowledge of exposure status. Two studies [42,46] were rated as "probably high" for outcome assessment due to lack of physician confirmation or in-person interviews by study investigators to confirm asthma symptoms. One study [45] appeared to have a financial conflict of interest, with research grants provided from several private foundations from the pharmaceutical field (i.e., AstraZeneca).…”

Section: Group 2: Childhood Asthma Exacerbation and Symptomsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure to formaldehyde and asthma outcomes: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and economic assessment

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Every major federal regulation in the United States requires an economic analysis estimating its benefits and costs. Benefit-cost analyses related to regulations on formaldehyde exposure have not included asthma in part due to lack of clarity in the strength of the evidence. Objectives 1) To conduct a systematic review of evidence regarding human exposure to formaldehyde and diagnosis, signs, symptoms, exacerbations, or other measures of asthma in humans; and 2) quantify the annual economic benefit for decreases in formaldehyde exposure. Methods We developed and registered a protocol in PROSPERO (Record ID #38766, CRD 42016038766). We conducted a comprehensive search of articles published up to April 1, 2020. We evaluated potential risk of bias for included studies, identified a subset of studies to combine in a meta-analysis, and rated the overall quality and strength of the evidence. We quantified economics benefit to children from a decrease in formaldehyde exposure using assumptions consistent with EPA’s proposed formaldehyde rule. Results We screened 4,821 total references and identified 150 human studies that met inclusion criteria; of these, we focused on 90 studies reporting asthma status of all participants with quantified measures of formaldehyde directly relevant to our study question. Ten studies were combinable in a meta-analysis for childhood asthma diagnosis and five combinable for exacerbation of childhood asthma (wheezing and shortness of breath). Studies had low to probably-low risk of bias across most domains. A 10-μg/m3 increase in formaldehyde exposure was associated with increased childhood asthma diagnosis (OR = 1.20, 95% CI: [1.02, 1.41]). We also found a positive association with exacerbation of childhood asthma (OR = 1.08, 95% CI: [0.92, 1.28]). The overall quality and strength of the evidence was rated as “moderate” quality and “sufficient” for asthma diagnosis and asthma symptom exacerbation in both children and adults. We estimated that EPA’s proposed rule on pressed wood products would result in 2,805 fewer asthma cases and total economic benefit of $210 million annually. Conclusion We concluded there was “sufficient evidence of toxicity” for associations between exposure to formaldehyde and asthma diagnosis and asthma symptoms in both children and adults. Our research documented that when exposures are ubiquitous, excluding health outcomes from benefit-cost analysis can underestimate the true benefits to health from environmental regulations.

show abstract

Unconventional natural gas development and pediatric asthma hospitalizations in Pennsylvania

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

Lagging and Flagging: Air Pollution, Shale Gas Exploration and the Interaction of Policy, Science, Ethics and Environmental Justice in England

Lagging and Flagging: Air Pollution, Shale Gas Exploration and the Interaction of Policy, Science, Ethics and Environmental Justice in England

Resilience and Equity in a Time of Crises: Investing in Public Urban Greenspace Is Now More Essential Than Ever in the US and Beyond

Exposure to formaldehyde and asthma outcomes: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and economic assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About