[HN Gopher] High air pollution could diminish exercise benefits ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       High air pollution could diminish exercise benefits by half - study
        
       Author : ashishgupta2209
       Score  : 166 points
       Date   : 2025-11-29 10:54 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (scienceclock.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (scienceclock.com)
        
       | bluesky19283746 wrote:
       | It sounds terrible . What will happend in the future?! The
       | research doesn't differentiate between seasons , and every one
       | knows how polluted the air is in the winter when everyone is
       | heating their home and apartament.
        
         | colinb wrote:
         | One more reason to look to an electrically heated future. Where
         | I live the air becomes unpleasant in winter as some neighbours
         | heat their homes by burning what i can only assume are old
         | tires and horse carcasses.
        
           | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
           | I remember as a kid visiting the home of a relative who had
           | an old oven for wood/coal heating, even though the primary
           | heating was now a gas (natural gas not gasoline) heater.
           | 
           | The old oven remained though, and was used as a self-emptying
           | trash can. When it filled up, a fire was lit to empty it. I
           | don't remember what the sorting rules were (I assume "does it
           | burn well and not smell up the apartment _too_ badly when
           | lighting it ") and how common plastic packaging was back
           | then, but I'm sure that the emissions coming out from the
           | chimney were not a concern.
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | Burning clean dry wood in a modern well maintained wood stove
           | is surprisingly efficient and relatively clean (+ renewable)
           | 
           | Of course if you burn trash none of that matters, but it's
           | already illegal in pretty much any advanced societies.
        
             | colinb wrote:
             | oh, it's illegal where I live. But _some_ people pretty
             | clearly ignore that. Enforcement doesn 't seem to be a
             | thing. I think this is one of those laws that falls into
             | the category of things that we just have to rely on
             | people's good will to carry out. Like small-time littering
             | and not cleaning up after your dog, some people just don't
             | seem to care.
             | 
             | FWIW, I think - based on not feeling my throat close up
             | most of the time - that the number of people who do this is
             | small.
        
         | adrianN wrote:
         | In the future electric cars and heat pumps will improve the
         | situation.
        
           | edhelas wrote:
           | And how the electricity will be made? Without any CO2 for
           | sure! (or not... yet)
        
             | rafaelmn wrote:
             | What does CO2 emissions of electric power plants have with
             | air quality in cities ?
        
             | cinntaile wrote:
             | Power plants are usually not placed inside cities. Less
             | gasoline cars inside cities will definitely improve the
             | local situation, not just limited to CO2.
        
             | cowsandmilk wrote:
             | CO2 isn't particulate matter. But more importantly, larger
             | percentages of our electricity is being made without
             | burning things.
        
             | hagbard_c wrote:
             | Nuclear power is a good option, wind and solar are usable
             | for charging batteries - either EV batteries or storage
             | banks which can be used to charge EV batteries. The problem
             | with wind and solar is that there is no long-term storage
             | solution as of yet but single-day storage is already
             | achievable. Once enough nuclear capacity has been built up
             | I foresee wind turbines disappearing from the landscape
             | since they are cumbersome bird-killing eyesores. Solar
             | power is there to stay since buildings need roofing anyway
             | and we'll soon be at a point where the price difference
             | between 'passive' roof cladding and PV 'panels' is close to
             | negligible so it makes sense to install PV roof cladding
             | and get some power for free, especially in places where air
             | conditioning is popular.
        
           | ozim wrote:
           | You still have break pads and tires particles floating
           | around.
        
             | adrianN wrote:
             | I specifically said ,,improve" not ,,eliminate air
             | pollution completely".
        
             | Schiendelman wrote:
             | EVs generate far, far less brake pad dust, most of their
             | braking is regeneration via the motors.
             | 
             | Tires get more efficient every year, dust has reduced as
             | the companies compete to make them last longer, and we're
             | finally seeing the tire industry respond to pressure to
             | reduce toxic runoff. Michelin's been removing phenols, for
             | instance: https://resicare.michelin.com/news/michelin-
             | resicare-resin-1...
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | When everyone on this planet want to live like the average
           | European or American heat pumps and EVs won't save you from
           | pollution
        
             | adrianN wrote:
             | To my knowledge air quality in Europe and the US is better
             | than in many places where people aspire to live like the
             | average European or American.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | Yes, because they're manufacturing all the shit we
               | consume, that's my point.
        
       | clumsysmurf wrote:
       | I look at the PM2.5 data for my city every day, and at this point
       | (Nov) in the winter season, the only acceptable time to exercise
       | is between 2PM-4PM after vertical mixing kicked in. Outside that
       | duration, particulates are elevated after morning rush our, after
       | evening rush hour, or during overnight inversion trapping evening
       | rush hour + wood burning smoke until the next morning rush hour.
       | 
       | This is one the main reasons why I would prefer working remote,
       | it is hard to utilize this time well (for exercise) if you are in
       | the office.
       | 
       | At least with PM you can wear a mask, although I am still
       | searching for the best one that works during intense exercise.
       | 
       | Also wanted to point out "Trump EPA moves to abandon rule that
       | sets tough standards for deadly soot pollution"
       | 
       | https://apnews.com/article/epa-soot-air-pollution-trump-zeld...
        
         | krzat wrote:
         | > I am still searching for the best one that works during
         | intense exercis
         | 
         | Try a professional mask, like 3M 7500 with 2138 filters.
        
           | clumsysmurf wrote:
           | Thanks, that's one of the masks I use! Unlike the GVS SPM587
           | it has a quick release thing so you can get to your hydration
           | for water and microplastics :/
        
       | Theodores wrote:
       | If only you could see it. In the big cities the air quality has
       | improved, however, I am not sure if it really has, or if we are
       | now just burning hydrocarbons more efficiently so that the
       | particle sizes have become invisible.
       | 
       | Put it this way, although cars are allegedly better than they
       | were, fuel consumption hasn't dropped considerably. The cars are
       | more numerous than ever, and, although there are EVs, there are
       | still more ICE cars than there were in the good old days when
       | petrol came with lead in it.
       | 
       | I am not sure that most people in urban areas even know what good
       | air tastes and smells like. I take a canal path through lush
       | countryside, far from any cars for most of the way. This canal
       | has an aqueduct (or is it a viaduct?) over a motorway and the
       | contrast is incredible. You go from basically smelling flowers to
       | air pollution and back to clean air again quite quickly, so the
       | filth is totally noticeable. Note the cars on the motorway are
       | going at speed, so they should be working efficiently (until a
       | few decades ago 56 mph was what engines were optimised for
       | regarding efficiency in the UK).
       | 
       | If just living in a major city then you don't get this instant
       | switch from bad to good air. So you just don't notice it. If you
       | could see the filth, you would prefer a swimming pool that was
       | pissed in, it is that toxic.
       | 
       | If you do have to live in a city, my top tip is to find out if
       | there are any meteorologists in town. If there are, buy a house
       | next to where they are living. Anecdotal, however, I used to work
       | with meteorologists and they would always live to the West of the
       | city centre, to get cleaner air than those living in the east of
       | the city, or further downwind.
       | 
       | Again anecdotal, however, due to the canal and motorway
       | experience described above, in post-industrial countries such as
       | the UK, it is definitely the vehicles rather than any other
       | source. Given the choice of microparticles that just get in your
       | blood or clumps of big particles that you can eventually cough up
       | and spit out, I would much prefer the latter. My hunch is that
       | the legislation to improve vehicle emissions has optimised the
       | exhaust for nanoparticles. Please prove me wrong!
        
         | softwaredoug wrote:
         | For urban areas the risk of air pollution is another reason for
         | cities to have congestion pricing to support public
         | transportation.
        
         | jwr wrote:
         | > I am not sure that most people in urban areas even know what
         | good air tastes and smells like.
         | 
         | I run air filters in my apartment throughout winter months,
         | which tend to be the worst in terms of air quality here.
         | 
         | When I go outside in the morning I can really smell the stuff
         | in the air, for a brief moment, until I get used to it. But you
         | definitely notice the difference!
        
         | ozim wrote:
         | Exhaust fumes were easy to optimize.
         | 
         | Lots of particles cars emit are from tires and break pads. I
         | think someone was measuring that but I don't have sources but
         | most likely I read that somewhere in the comments of HN.
        
           | unglaublich wrote:
           | One good thing about electric vehicles is that regenerative
           | breaking effectively eradicates brake pad use and pollution.
           | Only tire dust remains significant.
        
             | ungreased0675 wrote:
             | If we could incentivize small, lightweight electric
             | vehicles over the current trend of large (heavy) luxury
             | vehicles, there would be a lot of benefits. I'd like a
             | trend towards "easy and safe motorcycle" instead of our
             | current "living room that moves itself."
        
         | staminade wrote:
         | Sure thing, here's a report from the Greater London Authority
         | tracking the history of air quality in the city since the
         | "Great Smog" event 1952, which caused an estimated 4000 deaths.
         | 
         | https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-strategies/environment-...
         | 
         | The main takeaway is that yes, urban air quality (including
         | fine particulate matter) has improved massively over time, but
         | most of it had little to do with road traffic, as for decades
         | it wasn't a significant contributor to the overall mix. The
         | important change was the move away from burning solid fuels
         | like coal for household heating and in power stations within
         | cities, to using gas and electricity with larger, out-of-town
         | power stations.
         | 
         | As other sources have declined, road traffic has indeed become
         | the largest contribution to urban air pollution, but even here
         | there has been progress. Fine particulate emissions have
         | continued to decline as car manufacturers have adapted to more
         | stringent regulation (cheating scandals notwithstanding). A
         | bigger problem now is higher non-exhaust emissions caused by
         | larger and heavier vehicles. This is something else that will
         | need to be solved via regulation. Other policies like Low
         | Traffic Neighbourhoods can also help to restrict the worst
         | pollution to major roads and away from where most people live.
         | 
         | Urban air quality is never going to be as good as that in the
         | countryside, but it's not true to believe that no progress has
         | been made, and that it's simply been a switch in the type of
         | pollution.
        
         | hexbin010 wrote:
         | > Anecdotal, however, I used to work with meteorologists and
         | they would always live to the West of the city centre, to get
         | cleaner air than those living in the east of the city, or
         | further downwind.
         | 
         | The industrial-revolution era mill owners were very aware of
         | this too. Posh area of Manchester is to the south (westerly
         | winds;) Leeds to the north (mix of northerly and westerly winds
         | I believe).
         | 
         | Also, anecdotally, smaller towns and villages can have poor air
         | quality too due to log burners. They're an absolute pain. You
         | can tell when an area has become gentrified when shiny new
         | chimneys start popping up or a log burner shop opens up!
        
       | kqr wrote:
       | I want to pull two quotes from the article.
       | 
       | > "Our findings emphasise that exercise remains beneficial even
       | in polluted environments," lead researcher Professor Po-Wen Ku
       | said in a statement. [...] "We don't want to discourage people
       | from exercising outdoors," said Co-author Professor Paola
       | Zaninotto.
       | 
       | The health effects of exercise outdoors are combined from two
       | effects:
       | 
       | - Positive effects due to exercise. These start out strong but
       | level off after a while.
       | 
       | - Negative effects due to pollution. These increase almost
       | linearly with time spent outside.
       | 
       | One might ask, is there an amount of daily exercise at which the
       | negative effects overpower the positive ones? Yes, in a handful
       | of cities around the world, after a few hours of exercise, the
       | pollution makes additional outdoors exercise actually harmful.
       | 
       | But almost everywhere a marginal minute of exercise provides a
       | positive effect on health regardless of time already spent
       | exercising, and there is nowhere in the world where something
       | like an hour of exercise a day is a net negative. Get out there.
       | Pick an active means of commuting (cycling, running, walking,
       | skiing, rollerblading, skateboarding, unicycling) and don't worry
       | so much about pollution unless you live in one of those single-
       | digit cities which I forget where they are, but probably
       | concentrated in Asia.
       | 
       | (I feel bad about typing this out without linking to the source.
       | I'm looking for it in my notes!)
        
         | ta12653421 wrote:
         | I remember an interview with the producthead of Google Earth
         | (the desktop client), she said when photographing all the
         | streets, the cars also checked for air pollution: She mentioned
         | a capital in Europe, where the amount of particles under
         | certain sizes differed by 10x from one crossing to the next.
        
           | potato3732842 wrote:
           | The measurement may very well be accurate but statements like
           | that should set off massive red flags and not be taken at
           | face value. A factor of ten difference for something that
           | just kinda diffuses through the air doesn't "just exist". You
           | don't get gradients like that "naturally" for the most part.
           | It's the result of something. Maybe there's a source
           | something is upwind of and something else is downwind of.
           | Maybe there's conditions causing it to concentrate. Or it
           | varies 10x day to day, but on an average basis it equals out.
           | Etc. Etc.
        
             | djtango wrote:
             | Doesn't it really depend? Like I recall Oxford Street in
             | London at one point was notoriously bad because it was a
             | bottleneck for a lot of slow moving traffic so that one
             | length of road was especially bad. 10x bad I don't know...
             | But it's not hard to imagine some of the quieter roads
             | filtering off like Berwick St or Dean St would be
             | considerably better
        
               | labcomputer wrote:
               | Slow moving traffic at one intersection and free flowing
               | traffic at another could easily account for a 10x ratio
               | of particulate pollution, especially in European capitals
               | where diesels are prevalent.
               | 
               | But a 10x ratio _on the same road_ is also plausible if
               | the Google car is following a large truck on one pass and
               | then driving by itself on the second.
        
             | ffsm8 wrote:
             | Especially the small particles in large cities are mostly
             | caused by Biodiesel fuels - at least from my anecdotal
             | experience.
             | 
             | I have a Phillips air purifier which includes a sensor for
             | particles - whenever Diesel cars drove by the particles
             | spiked and it went full throttle for a while if I had my
             | window open.
        
           | meindnoch wrote:
           | Surely it wasn't because the Google car was driving behind an
           | ancient diesel with a blown catalytic converter...
        
         | dahart wrote:
         | Like I totally agree with encouraging exercise most places, but
         | let's be careful to not understate the risks of pollution. The
         | paper states that above 35mg/m^3 of PM2.5 pollution, the
         | protective benefits of exercise were "non-significant" against
         | the increased risk of cancer, and they stopped measuring at
         | 50mg/m^3. It's reasonable to assume that above 50, it's a net
         | negative to exercise outdoors.
         | 
         | There are lots of places in the world that exceed 35mg/m^3
         | PM2.5, and quite a few that exceed 50mg/m^3 PM2.5 regularly -
         | the entire SF Bay Area is over 35 right now. Los Angeles and
         | San Diego are both above 50 right now, as are huge swaths of
         | Eastern Europe, Africa, and Asia... it's a bit more than just a
         | few handful of cities. Exercising near wildfires can be quite
         | unhealthy too. There are places in the world where exercising
         | outdoors is harmful to your health, but most of that is self-
         | regulating.
         | 
         | The other thing to note from the paper is that even the range
         | of 0 to 10 mg/m^3 of PM2.5 causes a 30% decrease in the
         | benefits of exercise. That's a pretty big reduction of benefits
         | from exercise for the EPA's "Good" category of air. It's still
         | a net positive, so you should still exercise, but just a little
         | pollution has pretty big measurable negative effects.
         | 
         | Active commuting is great, you get exercise, and help reduce
         | pollution at the same time. Even if exercise in polluted areas
         | is beneficial, we also definitely need to keep raising
         | awareness and improving air quality, for the time spent not
         | exercising, for people with athsma and heart disease, for the
         | people who can't and/or don't exercise. We should worry about
         | it a little, while we exercise. ;)
        
       | softwaredoug wrote:
       | Before people freak out about their morning run, I'm very hard
       | pressed to find 25 PM2.5 on this map of the US. (Note these
       | numbers are AQI, you have to zoom into the bad AQI numbers and
       | look at their PM2.5). Albeit it's a Saturday morning, not rush
       | hour.
       | 
       | China and India look rough though.
       | 
       | https://www.iqair.com/us/air-quality-map
        
         | thearrow wrote:
         | Please note that air quality in an area varies dramatically
         | over time. You are looking at a current snapshot with maps like
         | that. The map linked below has his more historical data and I
         | can see several _weeks_ this past year in my area (which
         | currently has very good air quality) where the PM 2.5 weekly
         | average exceeded 25ug/m^3.
         | 
         | https://map.purpleair.com/air-quality-raw-pm25
         | 
         | Localized phenomena like a neighbor starting a fire, up to the
         | activity of nearby factories and power plants, up to national
         | and global phenomena like wildfires and weather patterns, all
         | have dramatic effects. Looking at an air quality map once and
         | determining that you don't have to think about air quality
         | because you're in the US is a mistake.
         | 
         | Exercise outdoors is a wonderful thing, obviously, but there
         | are some days, even in the US, where you might think twice or
         | even consider shifting your exercise to a different (less-
         | polluted) time of the day.
        
           | metadope wrote:
           | > Localized phenomena like a neighbor starting a fire,
           | 
           | Summer evenings at home in my small Ohio village are often a
           | health hazard, a polluted nightmare driven by the perverse
           | compulsive ignition of so-called 'recreational' yard fires by
           | pyromaniac neighbors.
           | 
           | If it is an Ozone Action day and/or a Heat Advisory day, it
           | is near certain that one or more of the Don't Tread On Me
           | jamokes who live nearby will come out of their houses at
           | sunset, pile a bunch of garbage into a 55-gallon drum or a
           | circle of rocks, sprinkle with accelerant, toss a match and
           | back away. Eyes glazed, they'll watch for a minute, then go
           | back inside, sometimes coming back out every ten minutes or
           | so to refuel the fire, other times letting it blaze until the
           | original pile is down to embers. In any case, there is a new
           | plume of local smoke to add to the day's irritants.
           | 
           | It is a startling phenom to observe, let alone endure. The
           | behavior is made all the more crazy, imho, by the presence of
           | children. These are parents, asserting their rights to burn,
           | and teaching their children to Live Free Or Die. It seems to
           | me to be driven by a rebelliousness, part of the anti-woke
           | wave, country-fried counter-culture, as in "I got your global
           | warming right here, pard".
           | 
           | It's like, listening to country music stations and realizing
           | how many (most!) contemporary and historical Country songs
           | are themed around alcohol-worship.
           | 
           | But I digress.
           | 
           | I apologise. I was triggered by the mention of 'localized
           | phenomena' and the horrified realization that so many of my
           | fellow citizens are self-destructive cray-cray.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | I'm not familiar with Ohio village, but I grew up in
             | unincorporated county land in the Texas boonies. My dad had
             | a burn barrel, and would dump oil into the ground "putting
             | it back from where it came". Even as a kid, nothing about
             | it _felt_ right. Just that experience alone gives no doubt
             | to service members working the burn pits qualifying for
             | disability
        
       | qprofyeh wrote:
       | If you have ever been to a city that has banned fossil fuels then
       | you can absolutely tell the difference, to most of the
       | overpopulated European cities that I have visited. It's
       | astonishing how peaceful and comfortable it is to run or even
       | stroll when every breath is just 100% refreshing; you feel 10
       | pounds lighter. Meanwhile the blackened filter of our home HVAC
       | needs replacement again... and allergies.
        
         | unglaublich wrote:
         | Sadly, fossil fuel (pollution) has been marketed as a masculine
         | culture thing now. In the free (=individualistic) West, I
         | expect it to stick around for at least another 50 years.
        
           | labcomputer wrote:
           | I expect less than 10. Once you drive an EV, every big noisy
           | diesel feels impotent and gutless. Kind of like a small yappy
           | dog that's all bark and no bite. There's just nothing like
           | the zero-lag gut-punching acceleration of an EV.
        
             | array_key_first wrote:
             | Unfortunately it's not really up to us plebs, it's up to
             | the rich and powerful, who have every incentive in the
             | world to continue fossil fuel use.
             | 
             | Trump has outright said he's pro fossil fuels and his
             | policy choice shows it. If there was a proposal to ban or
             | limit EVs in the US, I would not at all be surprised. These
             | people do not care about you or me or all, just their
             | pocket linings.
        
             | yosito wrote:
             | Like many other "masculine culture" things, the propaganda
             | sold to men about what's masculine doesn't necessarily have
             | a connection to reality.
        
             | Timon3 wrote:
             | The industry is trying their best to fight against it. The
             | EU is currently planning to ban new ICE cars from 2035, but
             | the conservative German government & car lobbyists are
             | trying to get them to drop those plans... That, combined
             | with high tariffs for cheap asian EVs will probably
             | artificially keep us on ICEs for a while longer.
        
         | staminade wrote:
         | Which cities are you referring to? Some cities have policies
         | that discourage gas and diesel cars, and plans to outlaw them
         | by 2030, but I'm not aware of any that have banned them
         | outright yet.
        
           | anonymars wrote:
           | Zermatt (Switzerland) is one
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermatt#Transport
           | 
           | This is a more fun / less clinical read:
           | https://www.motortrend.com/news/swiss-town-went-straight-
           | hor...
        
         | gedy wrote:
         | Maybe you mean this, but does "fossil fuel" really mean Diesel
         | engines? Those were very awful to breathe around and were
         | widespread in European cities as we all know.
        
       | unglaublich wrote:
       | And all the while, nothing is done to get old 2-stroke mopeds of
       | the road in Europe. It's such a low hanging fruit to get those
       | hyper polluters out of cities but in an individualistic society,
       | personal cult status seems more important than common health.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | These seemed like the obvious EV conversion target to me before
         | cars for Europe. Why have these not been converted to EV?
        
           | unglaublich wrote:
           | They have, but individuals value nostalgia more than
           | practicality.
        
       | potato3732842 wrote:
       | Cities have mostly only gotten cleaner with time. This is way,
       | way, way down the list of things that I'm worried about killing
       | me.
        
       | metalman wrote:
       | air pollution, light pollution, noise pollution, toxins and
       | poisons, random falsehoods in your mind
       | 
       | facts that read as curse to be found on an amuelet dug up in some
       | near(ish) future iteration of whatever the,, it is,, that we are
       | doing right now
        
       | merryocha wrote:
       | I wish more people paid attention to air quality. I'm a delivery
       | driver and air quality has a noticeable effect on my energy
       | levels throughout the day and also my mood. Slightly rainy days
       | are probably my favorite days to work because no one is outside
       | digging up roads and kicking up tire dust with leaf blowers and
       | the rain seems to clean the air a bit.
        
         | xeromal wrote:
         | As a motorcycle rider, it's always very noticeable. The stale
         | air from the helmet coupled with the shit shit air from outside
         | makes me very sleepy and you can develop a sore throat in a few
         | hours
        
       | PaulKeeble wrote:
       | Almost all of the problem is PM2.5 but its not the only pollution
       | problem. For PM2.5 a simple N95/FFP2 mask will drop the particles
       | you breath in to basically zero and remove the health
       | consequences of them and as we saw in 2020-2021 you can happily
       | run in them they don't restrict breathing much at all. You do not
       | have to put up with the damage from polluted air alongside the
       | exercise.
        
         | homebrewer wrote:
         | Respirators can't do anything about volatile components that
         | have low boiling points: sulfur and nitrogen oxides, hundreds
         | of often carcinogenic aromatic hydrocarbons released by burning
         | any organic matter. If you wear a good FFP3 respirator in
         | heavily polluted air, it's very noticeable that it doesn't
         | filter out _everything_ -- the smell gets through. And it 's a
         | specific smell, reminds me of walking through charred ruins of
         | a building that has burned down 5-10 years ago and never
         | rebuilt.
        
           | gbear605 wrote:
           | I had a notable experience at a church sometime during COVID,
           | where I was wearing an N95 mask. The church's incense could
           | be smelt partially through the mask, and the scent that made
           | it through was much worse than the combined scent that you
           | normally smell.
        
       | ck2 wrote:
       | I am hoping by the end of the decade smartphones start having
       | pm2.5 and co2 sensors built-in
       | 
       | and then next decade smartwatches
       | 
       | Once EVERYONE starts seeing air-quality on their phones every
       | hour of the day everywhere they are, they will start to care and
       | then eventually, maybe do something about the politics to improve
       | air-quality
       | 
       | Imagine the game-changer if air-quality was in the next iPhone
       | 
       | They already make sensors that can go on a keyring so inside a
       | phone is not implausible within a few years
        
         | homebrewer wrote:
         | I doubt it, maybe in rich countries where the air is already
         | pretty good. There are enough places out there (mine included)
         | where you can see and feel air pollution without using any
         | sensors: limited visibility on the order of a few dozen meters,
         | smell of burning coal and rubber tires in the air, windows
         | blackened by soot. Everybody knows how terrible the air is,
         | talks about it daily, and can't actually do anything about it.
         | 
         | I've been advocating for closed windows and increased use of
         | air purifiers and FFP3/N99 respirators, and had some limited
         | success among people I know. People are often easily convinced
         | once they see the state of their filter or respirator after a
         | few days of use.
        
         | dahart wrote:
         | Yeah it'd be cool if the phones had sensors. Everyone can see
         | local AQI already though; weather app has AQI, and you can tap
         | on it for a local region map, as well as a table of pollutant
         | details.
        
           | ck2 wrote:
           | the "local AQI" is usually from a single government sensor
           | for 100 mile radius which is useless as pollution is highly
           | localized (think neighbor idiots burning leaves all day)
           | 
           | also doesn't tell you indoor air quality which where you
           | sleep REALLY matters if the co2 is sky high
           | 
           | best third party AQI network is PurpleAIR but even with them
           | certain cities have few or none
           | 
           | https://map.purpleair.com/air-quality-standards-us-epa-aqi
           | 
           | airgradient barely has any in some US states
           | 
           | https://www.airgradient.com/map/
           | 
           | US doesn't even have mandatory air-quality sensors at
           | airports, which it should because that's where most of the
           | other weather measurements are coming from on most apps, even
           | if you are 30-50 miles away
        
             | dahart wrote:
             | > the "local AQI" is usually from a single government
             | sensor for 100 mile radius
             | 
             | What's your source on this? IPhone's AQI report says it's
             | from Breezometer, which links to Google's Enterprise AQI
             | offerings, which claim 500m resolution and multiple sources
             | ("over 70 local indexes"). I don't know but would speculate
             | that Purple Air might be one of the licensed sources.
             | 
             | https://mapsplatform.google.com/maps-products/air-quality/
        
             | jerlam wrote:
             | Even if measurement was perfect, people would have
             | incentive to ignore it. Who wants to be told they can't do
             | something, based on some claim that it might be bad for
             | them in the very long term? People still smoke cigarettes
             | and drink alcohol despite those being known to be bad for
             | decades.
             | 
             | Air pollution, like numerous other things like water
             | quality and medical care, is too big to be made into a
             | individual decision.
        
         | deadbabe wrote:
         | There's no need really, you can already download air quality
         | data from dedicated sensor towers.
        
       | kakacik wrote:
       | Hiking in the hills / mountains is one of the healthiest sports
       | there is, unless you already have messed up legs. Or other
       | mountain sports, but at least those I do have additional risks of
       | injury or death that most folks would find unacceptable.
       | 
       | Not everybody has easy access to mountains, but then we all forge
       | our paths through life and at least at certain points of life we
       | have some wiggle room to choose where to spend the rest of it.
       | Polluted big cities may (or may not) bring more wealth but there
       | is a cost.
       | 
       | I look from my balcony on a large forest which is natural
       | reserve, begins right in front of us. On the other side of the
       | village there is a 15km band of vineyards on steep hills. I go up
       | and end up in wild hills fully covered in pine forests and
       | actually OK for winter sports (planning to do skitour there
       | tomorrow morning). I go the other side and its 100km wide lake
       | with crystal clear water, highly swimmable in summer. Highway is
       | few km away, 100m lower.
       | 
       | Coming to city makes me realize the various not OK smells I
       | didn't sense when I was living there. Not regretting the move
       | (but sure as hell hoping some part of work will remain WFH so its
       | not just kids reaping benefits of living on a more healthy and
       | overall better place)
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Aside: OP are these stories just re-rigged versions of other
       | source articles out there?
       | 
       | https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/nov/air-pollution-may-reduce...
       | (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46084057)
       | 
       | https://www.euronews.com/health/2025/11/28/air-pollution-may...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-29 23:01 UTC)